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 Real Significance of the New iPad

At MobileOpportunity, Michael Mace offers his usual insightful analysis of why the new iPad matters.

The reactions to the New iPad announcement this week were all over the map.

Some places said it was basically a yawner (link), while others bought into the “end of the PC” rhetoric (link) . Some people even warned all developers to stop programming for the keyboard and mouse, even for complex applications like computer-assisted design (link).

My take: I think the announcement was both more and less important than people are saying. Here’s why:

Read the whole column here

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.

We Are Entering the True Era of Personal Computing

Remember that old HP campaign “The computer is personal again?”  I remember seeing that campaign and thinking to myself, when did the computer become un-personal? I’ve been cogitating on this term “personal computer” and in light of the recent debate of whether the iPad is a PC, I have come to some personal conclusions on this topic.

I would also like to preface this by saying that I agree with how Tim Cook illustrated what Post PC meant. He explained how Post PC means the PC is no longer the center. That is true. However, we are using this term “post pc” only because a desktop or notebook form factor is what has been associated with “PC.” We should not forget that the term PC literally means personal computer. So my overarching point is that we are actually in what is truly the PC (personal computing) era. My logic is as follows.

First lets look at some computing history.   To do that I am going to look at the evolution of personal computing by calling out specific “eras” of computing.   The first era was the birth of computing. During this era computing was in its infancy. Things like the transistor, then the microprocessor were invented which paved the way for computing.   During the first stage of computing, computers were quite large and normally filled a room mostly and in the form of mainframes then eventually minis.   Many visionaries dreamed of making these devices smaller so people could bring them into their homes and own their own computer.   This vision paved the way for desktop computing. 

Desktop Computing

This is the second era of computing.  What most during this time would consider the personal computer I will call a desktop computer.   The term personal came from the idea that each “person” would have one.  When computers were largely mainframes or minis they were too big for each person to own.   Bill Gates famously said “some day there will be computer on every desk.”   This was the result of the next evolution of computing as computers become smaller and were able to now fit on desks as well as become more affordable.  Of course these devices could become personal in the sense that a person owned them and could personalize them to a degree.  But more personal computers were still ahead. 

Portable Computing

The next era was the era of portable computing.   This was the era of notebooks.   Some call this mobile computing but my argument is that notebooks were really more portable computers than they were mobile.   Meaning you could move them more easily than a desktop but you still sat down and were stationary using the device at arms length (generally) to type.  My point is you weren’t actually doing computing while being mobile–you were still stationary.    

Notebooks certainly took us one step closer to personal computing because they added an element of portability. They tended to travel with a select person who largely customized the notebook thus making it more personal to that individual.   I would argue that the notebook is actually the first truly personal computer and birthed personal computing.   

Now enter smart phones and tablets.   The Merriam-Webster definition of a computer is:

“a programmable usually electronic device that can store, retrieve, and process data.”

Another definition I found in the dictionary says:

“An electronic device for storing and processing data, typically in binary form, according to instructions given to it in a variable program.” 

So my first question is how is a tablet and smart phone not considered a computer?  I also highly customize my smart phone and tablet for my own tastes and likings via software, personal data storage, access to media, and take them with me everywhere I go.   So how exactly how are they not also personal?  Thus one would have to logically conclude that smart phones and tablets are in fact personal computers on which computing tasks take place.  

What we need to realize in this evolution of personal computing is that devices like smart phones and tablets represent a form factor evolution of computing similarly to the way the desktop form factor evolved to the notebook form factor.   This evolution led to portable personal computing and it made computing possible in places that were before impossible with a desktop–like at Starbucks.  The evolution of the personal computer form factor from notebook to tablet and smart phone represents the evolution to truly mobile personal computing.   Again bringing computing to places not before possible or were before inconvenient–like the couch, bed, walking down the street, etc.  

The Era of Mobile Personal Computers

My point earlier was that notebooks were more portable than they were mobile due to the form factor of a notebook still requiring its user to be stationary, with the device resting on a surface being used at arms length.   Devices like tablets and smart phones change this computing paradigm.  We can hold these devices in our hands and use them, we can move around while using them, we can use them in a range of places and situations where a desktop or notebook could never be used.   Places like point of sale retail, by waiters, or car salesman, while running through the woods, while hunting, while boating, at the park, at the beach, etc.   

The tablet and smart phone form factor represent what I believe are the best form factors for truly mobile personal computing.   Thus they are simply form factor evolutions in personal computing not something other than a personal computer.  

Can they replace other form factors?

 
The answer is no; tablets in particular are not replacing PCs, at least not in the foreseeable future.   Rather what is happening is tasks or jobs are being replaced.  Things that once were done primarily on the notebook or desktop form factor are now being done largely on devices like tablets and other form factors. In essence the best way to think about this is that time is shifting from notebooks or desktops to tablets and smart phones

Prior to tablets, for example, the notebook owned the bulk of a consumers time when it came to computing tasks like searching the web, consuming media, checking email, etc.  Now with tablets, time has been shifted to the tablet or smart phone where the form factor is more convenient for tasks like browsing the web, checking email, etc, in many situations.   

Each form factor has a role to play.  Based on the list of computing tasks consumers perform, the form factors play a role in making those jobs easier to accomplish.    In this environment what happens is that consumers spread their time across a number of form factors to accomplish computing holistically.  

Before one “personal computer” monopolized consumers time.  Now time is shared between computing devices in the ecosystem in order to accomplish a wider range of computing tasks.  Things that were not possible, or were harder to accomplish with previous form factors become possible with new computing form factor evolutions that stick in the market.

Rather than look at tablets and smart phones as separate from PCs it would be more helpful to look at them within the larger personal computing ecosystem.  If we did this then we would not be arguing about whether the “death of the PC” is imminent or the degree at which PC sales are slowing.   Instead we would be talking about the growth of the PC industry as well as the expansion of personal computing into new form factors, use cases, tasks, etc.

What we need to let go of is not the idea that these devices are not personal computers. What we need to let go of is an archaic and out of date definition, assumption, and stereotype of the term PC.
  
We are not really in the post PC era.  We are in the post notebook form factor era. We are in the post traditional definition of a PC era.    We are actually just entering the era of truly personal computing.    If Bill Gates vision of long ago was that every desk would have a computer then I offer up this: in this new era, every pocket will have a personal computer.

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.

The New iPad: Leaving the Competition Behind

It would be extremely difficult to make the case that any competitive tablet in 2012 and perhaps even 2013 can hold a candle to the new iPad. Not only do I not believe that Apple competitors fully understand the tablet market but they have also not been investing in the kind of technologies needed to compete in this market.

For many the tablet has simply been a me too strategy. Something that historically has either not worked or only worked for a short time thus not being sustainable. What you are forced to walk away with after evaluating the new iPad is that Apple is more serious about this new category of computing than anyone. I would also argue that they are also the best oriented to not only continue to define this new category of computing but to also dictate it as well.

Dictating the Hi-Resolution Race
Every Android smartphone owner who goes gaga over their somewhat high resolution screen should thank Apple. The Retina display kicked off the trend of higher resolution phone displays. Once consumers saw, and are still captivated by that screen, it became very hard for a device to be successful at the mid to high end without a high resolution screen.

The same will now be true of tablets. There will now be a resolution race to catch up with Apple’s Retina display on the new iPad. Which you absolutely have to see to believe. There has never been such a high resolution display on a mobile device and seeing such clarity and image quality on a bigger screen changes the experience with the device in a way I never imagined.

Because of that there is nearly zero chance that consumers walk into retail, as many do, and check out the new iPad and even consider any competitive tablet that is on the market or will hit the market this year. I know that sounds harsh but as I stated the competition does not understand this new category of computing and they are not doing all they can to compete in it. Therefore, for the time being, the competition will not stack up to the new iPad.

This hi-resolution race may also come in interesting ways to notebooks. As I observed, once you see the retina display on the new iPad it is hard to look at other screens comparatively. This may be one of those things that becomes necessary to bring to every computing device. Its sort of like HDTV, once you went HD you would never go back.

Apple is dictating the hi-resolution race and it is a great thing for the industry–as soon as the competition can catch up.

Tablet Software
If any area makes it more glaringly clear that other tablet vendors don’t understand the category it is software. My experience, and many others, line up with Tim Cook’s assessment of a lack of pure tablet apps on the Android platform. Several times a week I go browsing searching for tablet apps on my Android tablets and always walk away disappointed. There are a handful of great tablet apps on Android but when you compare that to app shopping / browsing on iPad it is night and day.

Interestingly, I don’t think Apple gets enough credit at large for basically rejuvenating the entire software industry. Think about how passionate not only developers but also consumers are about software. When all that existed was notebook and desktop PCs I don’t recall such excitement over software. This has always been the case with the Mac community but that is a column for another time.

If you think about it there is no reason glaring barrier to entry for great tablet software to be made for competing platforms. There may be economic, lack of desire, lack of understanding, etc, but nothing by way of technology inhibitors standing in the way.

Apple on the other hand, has what I now consider an insurmountable lead with iPad apps and it will be at least two years, if not longer for other ecosystems to even get close. Even if they did Apple won’t stand still and two years from now their software ecosystem will be even bigger and stronger.

The iPhoto demo alone on the iPad was one of the best software demonstrations I have seen in some time and perhaps the best example of the value of touch computing to date. And by the way its $4.99. If nothing else Apple proved that with software the possibilities are endless with this new category of computing. And hopefully now it is clear to the masses that the iPad is a personal computer and not just for consumption. (Teaser: more on that in my column tomorrow )

So how do others compete? Honestly, at this point in time I am not sure. Apple’s vertically oriented strategy gives them such an advantage that makes competing with them, especially in tablets, extremely difficult.

It appears that many Wall St. Analysts feel the same way. Many of the notes to clients I have seen so far make the bold claim that Apple is dramatically in front of competitors and are reiterating a strong buy for Apple.

I am not saying that competitors should give up. Apple is challenging them to innovate and fully grasp this new category of computing. This is one of the most exciting categories of computing that I have ever encountered.

The New iPad Display and the End of Paper

In 1985, Apple invented computer printing as we know it. Until the introduction of the LaserWriter, the first personal laser printer, computer output emulated either typewriters or mainframe line printers. The $7,000 LaserWriter didn’t sell well and was soon overtaken by cheaper models from Hewlett-Packard, but not before enabling what came to be known as desktop publishing.

iPad screen imageWith the introduction of the new iPad, Apple has again redefined the mechanics of publishing, this time in a way that could finally bring on the demise of paper. Since tablets arrived a couple years ago, they have seemed the natural replacement for the printed page, whether it represented a computer document, a book or a magazine. A tablet could be held like a book or magazine and its software often presented text as pages rather than streams of scrolling text. Their long battery life let  you use them without thinking much about the need to recharge.

The one thing wrong with this otherwise perfect reading machine was the display. Compared with a well-printed book or magazine, or even quality laser printing, text was a bit fuzzy and hard to read in small font sizes. Photos looked OK, but not great. Although the iPad’s 9.7” diagonal display was bigger than most books and had a bit more than half the area of an 8 1/2×11 sheet of paper, the amount of useful content it could hold was reduced by the need to use relatively large fonts for readability.

The new iPad, whose display has to be seen to be appreciated, marks a dramatic change. For the first time, type looks as good on a screen as it does on paper. Photos pop in a way they never have before on a tablet, matching high quality printing on good paper.

Combined with the enormous increase in typographical control offered by HTML 5, the new iPad offers art directors and designers a challenge and an opportunity. Typography in tablet apps often looks like an afterthought and most ebooks look awful. The iPad screams at them to do better. Among other things, they still have a lot of work to do in choosing fonts optimized for backlit LCD displays; not matter how high the resolution, inherent differences between the reflective lighting of paper and transmissive lighting of the display has a big effect on optimal font design for each.

Though the iPad’s screen is somewhat smaller than the trim size of most magazines, the new display should enable complex magazine-style page layouts that look far better than what we have seen on tablets to date. Advertisers should love it since the appearance of their ads can match Condé Nast-style printing.

For a while now, I have found myself “printing” documents—typically Word and PDF files to my old iPad for reading. But the experience has not been entirely satisfactory. Getting documents onto the iPad and managing them once there remains a messy, inconsistent process that the new iPad doesn’t fix. A page designed to fit on 8 1/2×11 page has to be either shrunk to illegibility or scrolled to be read on an iPad. As a result, I find myself resorting to paper more often than I like.

I suspect the new iPad will begin to change this. Pages with 12-point type will probably remain legible even when shrunk to fit the display, which is roughly 6×8. Over time, I think the 6×8 page could become the new normal (or the new normal.dot) as the tablet with a high-resolution display with a diagonal of about 10” becomes the default way of reading. (Other tablet makers will eventually catch up with Apple’s display resolution, though it will probably take at least a year but because of limited availability 2048×1536 pixel displays and, perhaps more important, the lack of processors that can drive them.)

The super high-resolution introduced on the iPhone 4 looked spectacular, but had limited impact because the 3.5” display, and even the 5” high-res screens turning up on some Android phones, are too small for serious reading. Bringing similar resolution to a screen the size of the iPad will change things in much more fundamental ways. The days of printing on paper may finally be numbered.

The New iPad: Setting the Stage for Innovation

This morning Apple introduced a new iPad and with it has raised the bar for anyone creating a competitive tablet. The iPad, with its new Retina display that delivers 2048 X 1536 resolution, is clearly the highest definition tablet on the market. More importantly, as Apple pointed out, the work to create this type of HD quality experience on a tablet took many years of effort and tight integration with their new chip, which will make it very hard for competitors to match anytime soon.

Apple has punched up the power of the new iPad with a custom version of their ARM processor called the A5x, which is a quadcore chip designed specifically to boost any image or video displayed on their new Retina screen. One only has to view the new iPad against an older iPad 1 or 2 to see the major differences between the products. And it is even more pronounced when you view it next to an Amazon Kindle Fire or any of the other tablets on the market with standard definition displays.

With the new iPad display, there is no pixilation whatsoever on pictures and video and text in books is sharper then ones in any real book outside of those designed with high res text and images. And saturation of images and video are 44% greater then on the older model iPads.

Apple also adds a new 5-megapixel camera that takes video in HD, has a much larger sensor then in past iPads and has a 5-element lens with backside illumination and an IR filter that gives amazing color and white balance. And a new dictation feature is now added to the keyboard making it easy to dictate words into a document quite accurately and easily.

As expected, the new iPad also has an LTE option. It includes radios that cover EVDO (Verizon) HSPA GSM, HSPA+, DC-HSPA and LTE, which make’s it a world capable communications tool out of the box. And it will have the same battery life as iPads in the past. 10 hours for continuous use without LTE radio and 9 hours with.

Prices are the same as on the older models, although Apple will now offer a 16-gig version of the iPad 2 for $399, a new price point for iPads and one that will make it available to a broader audience. And the design is about the same so it will work with most cases and peripherals without any changes.

They are also introducing new apps from iPhoto to an updated iLife and an updated version of iMovie that allows for much finer creation tools to new ways to edit and distribute your movies via iCloud. And while all apps work with the new Retina display well, software developers can enhance their apps for even greater resolution to make them optimized for this new display. Software is clearly the key differentiator. The iPhoto demonstration alone will wow consumers and highlights the power of touch computing.

All of this new technology integrated into the new iPad will have a major impact on the market for tablets. From now on, this iPad will be the standard all other tablets will be compared to. And with it should come an even greater opportunity for Apple to pad their lead in tablets.

Of course, we expect that other tablet vendors will try and match Apple with higher resolution displays later this year. But if what Apple says is correct, their integration of both this custom display optimized for this new processor could make it hard for the competition to directly catch up anytime soon.

I view Apple’s new iPad as a major advancement in tablet design and one that will have a major impact on the market for tablets. In business, the need for higher resolution tablets has always been strong, especially in vertical markets like medical, engineering, and even ones where handling a lot of data for viewing is important. At the very least, the new iPad should have even greater interest in the enterprise where Apple is already making major inroads. And consumers who watch movies and view their pictures on tablets will really be drawn to this HD experience, as the quality of their content will be the best on a new iPad.

Although there will always be a market for lower cost tablets, with the new iPad Apple has introduced a new measurement to the decision process for users at any level. And this will cause some challenges for buyers this holiday season as I doubt that any competitor can even come close to having something competitive by then.

That should give Apple a significant edge going into this holiday, as the iPad will clearly be the best tablet available bar none.

One more thing:

Apple also introduced a new version of Apple TV. While many had hoped that Apple would introduce an actual TV, that was not in the cards. What Apple did release is a new version of Apple TV with a new UI and more importantly, support for 1080P HD content. This is a big advance and one that current Apple TV users have been asking for. The price stays the same at $99 and the new software includes the Genius function and a completely new UI making it much easier to find content and display it. This should also be a hot product going into the holidays as more and more people are opting for products like Apple TV and the Roku box to handle their on demand TV experiences and movie viewing and the new Apple TV should be a big hit for Apple.

Related Columns:

The New iPad: Leaving the Competition Behind
The New iPad Display and the End of Paper

 

Windows 8 and Mountain Lion: Same Problem, Different Answers

Yesterday, Pat Moorhead took a look at Microsoft’s Windows 8 Consumer Preview on tablets.Today, I consider it from the point of view of a laptop/desktop user.

Faced with the challenge of unifying the tablet and desktop user experience, Microsoft and Apple made radically different choices. The results, Windows 8 and OS X Mountain Lion, are now out in preview form. And based on what we can tell from the preview editions, it looks like Mac users are going to be a lot happier than their Windows counterparts.

Apple, which traditionally has been much bolder than Microsoft in breaking with the past, this time opted for the conservative approach. In Mountain Lion, it is bring some iPad/iPhone features, such as notifications and messenger, from iOS to OS X. But it is leaving the user interface of previous OS X versions mostly unchanged.

Microsoft has chosen to make the radically new, tablet-oriented Metro user interface standard on desktops (a term I am using to cover all conventional PCs, whether actual desktops or notebooks.) In part, this is a consequence of Microsoft’s decision to use a version of its desktop OS on the new Windows tablets, while Apple chose to base the iPad’s software on the iPhone, leaving the more powerful, flexible, and complex OS X to conventional PCs.

Metro looks like a very promising tablet interface. It is attractive, well thought-out, and offers features lacking in both iOS and Android. We won’t really be able to judge it until hardware makes come up with tablets optimized for it later this year and Microsoft comes out with a version of Windows for ;ess power-hungry ARM processors. But it is off to a promising start.

On a desktop, however, and particularly on one lacking a touch screen,  Metro is a disaster in the making. I’m trying to give it the benefit of the doubt. Maybe its just unfamiliarity it will feel better with more extended use. But I doubt it. To me, Metro on a desktop feels as wrong as Windows 7 did on a tablet.

Part of this is an issue of size. Metro speaks Microsoft’s new UI design language and Metro is basically a scaled up version of of Windows Phone 7 (as the iPad version of iOS is a scaled up version of the iPhone.) As with other tablet OSes, all Metro apps run full screen, or nearly so–you can open a second app in a vertical strip that takes up about a quarter of the display. This is fine on a tablet, but is much less acceptable on the bigger displays of a desktop. The Mail app looks a little silly on a 13″ display, sillier on a 15″, and downright ridiculous on a 27″. And Mail is one of the least egregious offenders; the Weather apps covers over half of the screen with a point picture or, well, weather.

Lurking behind Metro is Desktop, which, with some critical exceptions such as the lack of the Start button, resembles the Windows 7 UI. I’d be happier if Microsoft would just let me boot Windows 8 into Desktop. But for now, at least, this is prohibited, except perhaps for some enterprises running server-managed PCs. If you are doing anything PCish on your PC, you’ll be spending a lot of time in Desktop. The new version of Office, for example, will be made up of Desktop apps, albeit with a Metro flavor.

But even if you live in Desktop, you’ll be visiting Metro a lot. For example, unless you have pinned an application’s icon to the task bar or copied it to the desktop, you will have to go to Metro’s “all applications” list to launch it. And it is jarring and annoying to keep jumping back and forth between two radically different UIs.

Windows 8 is still a beta and Microsoft has ample opportunity to fix the worst problems of using it on a PC. The simplest would be to let users who choose to boot directly into Desktop. It’s not necessary to bring back the Start button in all its complexity, nut a straightforward way to launch any Desktop application from Desktop is essential. Im not sure the Metrofication of desktop Windows is ever going to be a very happy thing, but Microsoft could do a few things that would make it a great deal less disconcerting. For now, two UIs on one desktop is one UI too many.

 

Google Play: What Game is Google Playing?

With the news today that Google is re-branding the Android Market as Google Play, I am forced to wonder what that says about their strategy. Is playing all Google is really focused on? I also wonder if this branding is not more confusing to consumers than the clearer Android Market brand.

I don’t disagree that what they are doing to unify their store per-se is a bad idea. I am only questioning the branding behind it and what having something loosely called “Play” says about Google’s strategy. If nothing else I think it makes it clear that Google with Android is 100% focused on consumers. Something that I somewhat disagree with especially given the BYOD trend within corporate IT. If Google devices, or at least a large percentage of them, are not even options for IT to support than it will preclude consumers who need IT support from buying them. Granted that is not everyone but it is certainly a healthy fraction.

As I stated, unifying the different elements of their store is a good idea. I am just not sold on the branding and whether or not it is more or less confusing to consumers. I thought Android Market made a lot of sense and was clearly differentiated from other stores or services on other platforms.

This also takes Google one step closer to browser based computing paradigms we have been watching. Now that the Google Play is becoming increasingly more browser based as a part of the experience, it opens the door to more hardware agnostic experiences. I can already access my Google music through any browser regardless of my hardware and now books and perhaps in the future apps build for Android may be accessed and perhaps even used in this strategy.

I have often said that in the future we won’t install software or services we will simply access them. Perhaps Google’s strategy with Play is in line with my vision.

Windows 8 CP Tablet Experience: Distinctive yet Risky for Holiday 2012

A little less than a week ago, Microsoft launched to the public the Windows 8 Consumer Preview (CP). This is a follow-on to the Developer Preview (DP) that I’ve been using on a tablet and all-in-one desktop since it was introduced last September at the Microsoft BUILD partner conference. After 6 months and reportedly 100,000 code changes, is Windows 8 ready for prime time? Based on over 20 years of working with Windows development code and launching real products, I believe that Windows 8 is very distinctive but is risky for a Holiday 2012 release.

If you haven’t actually used Windows 8, I urge you to download it here. Truly using beta software is the only way to truly get the “feeling” of preview software and devices. What I will do is take you through the areas where I believe Windows 8 shines, needs work, and finally, areas where there’s not enough data to make a recommendation one way or another. I want to stress that my assessment is based on “preview” or “beta” code, not the finished product. Finished code is called RTM, or “Release To Manufacturing”. One very important hurdle for preview or beta is that it must be feature complete, which in some areas Windows 8 is and others, not.

Tablet Experiential Plusses

  • Fast response: My tablet booted very quickly and most times, woke up very quickly from “sleep.” Like DP, Metro was very fluid and fast as well, a first for a PC platform. Even installing apps was fast.
  • Content mashups:  Unlike Apple iOS or OSX, Microsoft has attempted to deliver what people really want who have multiple on-line services; a focus on the content and interaction, not the service. For example, those who have LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, multiple address books, etc., Win8 makes it simple. Instead of having to go to multiple services or apps, consumers go to apps like “People” (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google), “Pictures” (Local, SkyDrive, Facebook, Flickr), and “Messenger” (Facebook, Microsoft, etc.) All of this saves time and places focus on the content.
  • Metro apps visually stunning: Microsoft pulled the “essence” of the app experience from Windows Phone, Zune and theXBOX 360. This results in beautiful looking apps like Music, USA Today, Weather, Bewise Cookbook, and iCookbook. When playing music, cover art and band photos are “silhouetted” on the display giving the feeling of a premium experience. Photos are huge and there is always a lot of white space. App beauty matters; just ask Apple.
  • Live tiles: Microsoft took what Android started in mobility, perfected the notification system with Windows Phone and extended it to the tablet. Without even opening up an app or swiping, consumers can see latest emails, next calendar item, most important stock prices, weather, and social media updates.
  • Dual use experience: I have been a proponent of modularity for years as it ultimately where the future of computing is going. With Win8 mid-term, Microsoft has the unique ability to capitalize on this with tablets, unlike Apple or Google. It’s simple; when users want to use the tablet on the couch or in bed, they use Metro. When I want the full desktop,they dock it with a full sized mouse, keyboard, 32” display and am doing real work. Microsoft ultimately needs to enable a way for a Metro and Desktop app to share the same local data files, but cloud-sync is an acceptable start particularly for the tech-aware audience.
  • XBOX integration: Like Windows Phone, Windows 8 CP integrates XBOX functionality quite well but is just a start. Using the XBOX Companion app on my tablet, I could find movies, TV shows, and music and even launch games to be watched or played on the XBOX. It is like an XBOX remote on steroids. I am still waiting for the enhanced “play to” functionality to share local content like photos and web pages to the TV via the XBOX. This functionality was discussed in-depth at the BUILD conference.
  • Search: Unlike the iPad, users can do full document and app content search. This what consumers expect and this is what Windows 8 CP delivers.

Too Early to Tell

  • ARM experience: Microsoft and its partners have been very selective on showing the Windows on ARM experience. It has been shown on stage and behind closed doors, but unlike the X86 versions, the public cannot touch the devices. Even at January’s CES show, the public was not allowed to touch the devices. If it were working great, there wouldn’t be a restriction and as I pointed out here, there are many challenges with Windows on ARM.
  • Updates: Every operating system and apps have updates and for good reasons, namely security and bug fixes. What is unknown with Windows 8 is the size and frequency of updates. We all know that the current pace and method of Microsoft updates is unacceptable in the modern world, and if it continues at its current pace, will detract from the tablet experience. The first day after I installed Windows 8 CP and got my system ready for desktop use, I received 34 updates; 4 for Windows 8 and 32 for Office. It took over an hour and that’s unacceptable in a modern, tablet world.
  • Tablet Games: I was very impressed with Pinball FX, but one game make not a trend. Given games are the most popular iOS and Android app category, I would have expected more by now.
  • Metro SkyDrive: I have used SkyDrive and Live Mesh for many years but primarily use Dropbox and SugarSync. There are two main issues I have found. First, I can see no more than 14 icons on an 11″ tablet display and there isn’t search capability. Sorry, consumers don’t like to create file folders nor do they manage them tightly. I am expecting Microsoft to change this or it renders SkyDrive useless.
  • Number of relevant apps: Certainly this will grow given Microsoft’s big bet and investment into developers but I was expecting more apps 6 months after Visual Studio was shown at the BUILD conference. 15 games and 3 social media apps 6 months after the developer preview isn’t the progress I expected.
  • Tablet OS footprint: The size of the final tablet installation is unknown, but if it’s more than a few GB, this will be a cost issue for tablets. Hard drives are “free” on desktops, but on SSD-based tablets, it’s a premium. The current download size for Win8 CP is between 2.5GB and 3.3GB, but those then get “unpacked” and increase in size. Microsoft is recommending 16GB free space for 32-bit and 20GB for 64-bit so the reality is the build will be between the download and the recommendations. Keep your eye on this one….
  • Tablet battery life: Microsoft and its partners have made a tremendous effort to improve battery life. Early indications show that by re-architecting the ways drivers work and BIOS work, using Metro as the front-end user experience, and by leveraging the lowest power ARM and X86, battery life will be competitive. I expect battery life to be competitive, but less than iOS or Android devices; but then again, it does more and I believe that it won’t become a consumer issue.

Experiential Improvements Needed

  • Too many bugs: Yes this is preview, but I was surprised to see this far into the development process the amount of application “hangs” with Metro apps like Mail, SkyDrive, and Photos. I experienced many situations where the screen just sat there in one color as if it were waiting for something. I used Microsoft’s recommended hardware tablet platform so that cannot be the issue.
  • Universal email inbox: The Metro Mail application doesn’t support a universal inbox. This is just basic and is surprising a feature complete preview launched without one.
  • MS Office file format viewers: Unlike iOS, OSX, and Android, the Win8 CP doesn’t include local viewers for MS Office documents. But it does support viewing PDF files.. huh? Click on a Word doc and you get sent to online SkyDrive where you can view and even edit a document. I see why Microsoft would want this as it “motivates” you to buy Office, but with all of the competition providing this, it really messes up the experience. The Windows 8 on ARM systems do contain Office but it isn’t clear what will ship on X86 systems. For the user’s sake, we can only hope that OEMs install at least viewers or Office Student Edition.
  • Metro Windows Explorer: Sorry, the newly designed Explorer doesn’t cut it in a touch environment. Even on an 11” display, it’s just too easy to click on the wrong icon or accidentally delete or move a file.
  • Metro Internet Explorer bookmark folders: Even Apple fought against but finally learned on iOS that for a browser to be usable, it needs an easy way to file bookmarks. And that means folders. 50 bookmarks strewn all over the place is just a mess and will repel users.

Conclusions

Windows 8 Consumer Preview builds upon the Developer Preview by adding application previews and cloud connectivity.  Windows 8 for consumer tablets is very distinctive in that it can effectively be used as a tablet device for “lean-back” usage models and for “lean-forward” usages when docked in desktop mode. Like Android, Windows 8 takes a content-first approach, albeit with much more beauty and style, and simplifies user’s interactions between different local and cloud-based services.

Unlike iOS, Windows 8 is “alive” and vibrant with its live tiles, white space, and over-sized imagery. When launched it will pose a serious threat to high-end Android tablets and will help thwart competitive threats on the desktop by Android, iOS (in convertible form), and even OSX. The biggest challenge I see is Microsoft’s and its partner’s ability to hit the 2012 holiday selling season with a stable operating system for tablets to compete with the iPad. That risk is being mitigated with special image loads for specific devices, but given the state of the Windows 8 CP experience, hitting holiday 2012 with the experience Microsoft envisions and must deliver will be a tremendous challenge.  I believe it is a bridge too far and the experience will suffer at the need to hit the holiday selling season.

Digital Reincarnation at it’s Best: Live From Daryl’s House

Today’s world is fickle, and one of my favorite examples of digital avenues bringing new audiences to the best performers of our time is definitely Live From Daryl’s House, started by Daryl Hall in late 2007.  This is music discovery at its best, with Hall taking a simple idea and turning it into web gold. Hall recently said of the show, “I had this idea of playing with my friends and putting it up on the Internet.”  What could be easier, right? Certainly the response has been huge.

The show has become almost iconic, with applause coming in from a long list of leading names in the industry, including Rolling Stone, SPIN, Daily Variety, CNN, BBC, Yahoo! Music and influential (and hyper-critical) blogger Bob Lefsetz.  This is exactly what veteran artists need to be creating in order to reinvent in the digital age and gain new audiences (and influence) through vibrant collaborations with both established leaders in music and new performers.

Daryl Hall has had a rich and varied career, working with virtually all of the great musicians of modern popular music, as well as entering into new relationships with the best of the latest generation of artists. So far, episodes have featured superstars like Smokey Robinson, Rob Thomas (of Matchbox 20), Robby Krieger and Ray Manzarek (The Doors’), Train, Nick Lowe, K.T. Tunstall, Gym Class Heroes’ Travis McCoy, Fall Out Boy’s Patrick Stump, and soul legends The Blind Boys of Alabama – as well as with newcomers such as Nikki Jean, Grace Potter & the Nocturnals, Canadian techno-rockers Chromeo, Bay Area singer/songwriter Matt Nathanson, and highly touted tunesmith Diane Birch.

He’s also featured my own close personal friend, Todd Rundgren, several times, most recently at Rundgren’s home in Kauai, Hawaii, where they performed a rousing 7-song set, including an amazing cover of the Delfonics’ 1970 hit, “Didn’t I Blow Your Mind This Time.”

Daryl Hall and Todd Rundgren have known one another since their early days inPhiladelphia, and the gig inHawaiiincluded an old-fashioned traditional Luau Show, burying a pig in the dirt, serving up some poi, hula dancers and a special performance with local musicians of “Bang on the Drum.” Said Rundgren, “It’s always great when friends come all the way out here to visit, but it’s even better when they come to play.”

Hall’s latest collaboration has been with up-and-coming artist Allen Stone, a virtual look-alike for Daryl himself (in both image and musical philosophy).  In fact, that collaboration went so well that Stone is now touring and working with Hall and Oates.

Hall has had an illustrious career, with six #1 singles with collaborator John Oates, including “Rich Girl” (also #1 R&B), “Kiss on My List,” “Private Eyes,” “I Can’t Go For That (No Can Do) (also #1 R&B), “Maneater” and “Out of Touch” from their six consecutive multi-platinum albums—’76’s Bigger Than Both of Us, ’80’sVoices, ’81’s Private Eyes, ‘82’s H2O, ‘83’s Rock N Soul, Part I and ‘84’s Big Bam Boom. The era would also produce an additional 5 Top 10 singles, “Sara Smile,” “One on One,” “You Make My Dreams,” “Say It Isn’t So” and “Method of Modern Love.”

Live from Daryl’s House is being shown weekly in over 80% of U.S. homes in the nation’s top 200 media markets, as well as all of the top 10, including New York, L.A., Chicago, Dallas and Houston. The show also recently won the 2010 WEBBY Award in the Variety Category.

You can sign up for his Newsletter at http://www.livefromdarylshouse.com/emupdates.html

 

HTC One X: A Big Win for Nvidia’s Tegra 3

At this years Mobile World Congress HTC made an announcement that I found interesting. They announced that their latest and greatest smart phone the One X will run Nvidia’s latest processor named Tegra 3. Granted, Tegra has been making news winning a number of handset and tablet OEMs but the news that HTC has chosen Tegra 3 is of particular interest. The reason is because HTC has largely been extremely loyal to Qualcomm. HTC has been one of Qualcomm’s most loyal customers, launching all their flagship top tier devices with Qualcomm silicon. Taylor Wimberly at AndroidAndMe asks a similar question in his post called “Is Qualcomm losing their strongman grip on HTC.

HTC choosing Nvidia’s latest Tegra chip is a testament to the quality of the Tegra 3 architecture. As I pointed out in my my column, The Arm Wrestling Match, both Qualcomm and Nvidia have different approaches with their multi-core strategies. Both companies have viable strategies when it comes to their approach to multi-core and both are gaining design wins all over the industry. However, for Nvidia and Tegra, winning an HTC design was the first in many key strategic steps for Nvidia to get their silicon into a wider portfolio of OEMs.

For Nvidia, and Tegra in particular, winning the HTC One X is a big win. It is a testament to the Tegra 3 multi-core architecture and something that I believe signals the breadth and depth of not only Nvidia chips in 2012 but that quad-core is the new dual-core in smart phones and tablets in 2012.

Nvidia still has work to do however, they are working to build LTE support into Tegra 3, which we expect to be finalized in devices in the second half of 2012. LTE support into Qualcomm’s S4 is still an advantage for Qualcomm since modem technology is core to Qualcomm’s heritage. This is why it will be very interesting to see how Nvidia integrates their Icera acquisition into the Tegra roadmap.

For Nvidia Tegra has always had the advantage as a solution for tablets in terms of performance and won many tablet design wins. I have been waiting to see how Tegra and in particular now Tegra 3 generates broader support with smart phones. It looks as though the win of the HTC One X may signal the upwards trend for Tegra 3 in smart phones.

However we slice the fascinating competition between Nvidia’s Tegra and Qualcomm’s SnapDragon chipsets the main point remains clear–Quad core chipsets will invade devices of all shapes and sizes in 2012 and beyond.

The Verge’s Vlad Savov recently interviews Nvidia’s Tegra GM Mike Rayfield on Tegra 3. I encourage you to read that interview here. Also Fierce Wireless had a great interview with HTC lead product designer on the decision to use Tegra 3 in the One X, you can read that here.

Why the TV Industry is Vulnerable To Apple

In 1992, while I was overseeing the largest multimedia computing show in NYC for a large publishing group, I was asked to meet with Sr. Executives of one of the major TV networks. In my opening comments at this show, I had mentioned that I thought that one of the major benefits of things like delivering expanded media content on a CD Disc would be to eventually launch an era of content on demand. And one of the examples I gave was that I could see someday when people would be able to call up a TV show on demand and view it at will.

Now, remember that this was before the Internet and few were even thinking about new forms of media distribution. In fact, everything we were discussing at the show was very PC centric. But one of my jobs is to look at technology and visualize its impact over a period of time and try and figure out how it could eventually impact consumers.

It turned out that since this event was in NYC, a lot of TV executives attended this show and consequently I was invited to meet with some execs at one of the major networks to explain my thinking about content on demand. As I spoke to these executives, it became clear to me that while they were interested in the future, they did not want to embrace anything that would disrupt their current business model. The idea of giving customers more of what they wanted through an “on-demand” format was taboo and if it did not increase the quarterly bottom line, they wanted no part of it.

However, to their credit, they saw that what I shared was worth thinking about and they soon created an executive position that was called something like VP of Digital Content. It was so long ago I can’t remember that exact title of the job description but this person was chartered to find out about the digital world and recommend how this company could or should deal with its potential impact on their business. So for the next three months I got quite an introduction to the TV business and its business models and more importantly, how risk averse they were and how much they feared change.

Looking back over the last 20 years, and thinking about that assignment in 1992 and how different the world of TV is today, I am actually amazed at how much progress the television industry has made. But to get where they are today in which each of the networks use the Internet to deliver some of their top shows, they had to understand that the Internet is just a medium for delivering their content. And that consumer’s will continue to want these shows on demand, anytime and anywhere they happen to be.

But to be clear, while they are starting to embrace the Internet as a vehicle for distribution, they are doing so reluctantly. If they had their way, they would keep total control of this distribution for themselves and drive their viewers only to their dedicated sites for viewing their shows. But the Internet has forced them to open up a bit and little by little they are doling out their top shows to dedicated partners who they trust to help them keep some semblance of control so that they can maximize their earning potential and if possible try to keep their customers within their network family as much as they can.

However, in this world of digital content, they are now realizing that while they ruled the roost in the world of broadcast television, they are just another channel among thousands of channels that consumers can choose from for viewing video content. But what they don’t seem to get is that in this world of digital, they will need new distribution partners and that they will not have as much control over them as in the past. And I also don’t think they really understand the idea that people want to have access to that content anytime, anywhere and on any device they own.

Enter Apple

Now enter Apple, who if the rumors are to believed, has been calling on the executives of all the networks and trying to cut deals with them for Apple’s new TV initiatives. And I am hearing that they are resisting Apple’s partnership offers as Apple wants to pay them next to nothing to carry this content and they fear that Apple will do to them what they did to the music industry in which Apple pays a minimal fee to the artists compared to what the artist might have gotten with their labels in the past.

Now, I don’t know what type of deal Apple is offering the networks, if any at all. But I do know one thing. Apple could become one of the most powerful video network distribution companies in the future and to not embrace what Apple is doing could be very painful for them. The reason is simple economics. While we don’t know exactly what Apple is doing in this area of video distribution yet, we have their history to look at for some clues. For example, when they initially introduced the iPod and the iTunes store, they opened the door for music artists to have millions of potential customers. But over a ten year period, Apple made it possible for that music to be played on iPods, iPhones, and iPads and to date, have sold over 350 million iOS devices in which music artists can sell to just through Apples own music distribution vehicle. Add a base of 40 million Mac users and in total there are over 140 million Apple devices tied to the iTunes distribution medium.

Now enter Apple TV. While many people think of this idea of being a physical TV, they miss the real point of what I believe Apple is doing. At the core, I believe they are moving towards becoming a powerful distribution network for video. And while I do think they will have a cool TV someday in their product mix, the reality is that every iOS device and every Mac will become an “Apple TV.” That means that for these networks, and any other of their video channel partners, Apple will deliver to them well over 140 million potential customers immediately once their TV distribution network gets turned on. And given Apple’s history you can expect that the Apple TV experience, whatever form it takes, will be elegant, easy to use and perhaps even revolutionary in the way people use their services across devices.

The mistake the networks could make is to not see Apple as this massive vehicle for distributing their content and instead see them as having to be their partner for making money and relying on Apple for high margin revenue. That is the business model of the past. The new business model that I believe will emerge is to find ways to get eyeballs to view the content and then get creative in the way they make money on that property. Of course, they could tie some advertising to it, but they could also offer games tied to the content, sell merchandise tied to the content, and give special prizes tied to the content, etc. Instead of resisting Apple, or perhaps Google or Amazon who I believe will create similar video distribution networks, they need to embrace them as vehicles to get their content in front of these eyeballs and find creative ways to keep their customers coming back and mining new ways to get revenue from their digital customers.

Apple is going to become one of the most powerful video distribution networks by nature of their existing customer base and one that is added to continually. They have sold 50 million iPads so far and will sell at least another 50 million this year, turning every one of them into an “Apple TV.” I know the networks would like to keep control of their distribution, but in the world of digital, those days are gone. The sooner the networks understand this and see things like Apple’s new distribution vehicle as a critical way to get their content to the masses quickly, the sooner they can adapt to and fine tune a new business models to take advantage of this new era of on demand, anytime, anywhere and on any device video content world.

Tech Writers: Stow Your Snark, Do Your Homework

It’s all too common in tech writing these days for online journalists to post a story without taking the time for even minimal efforts to check the facts. Under the headline “USAF Command Signs Big iPad 2 Deal, Fails to Check eBay First,” All Things D’s John Paczkowski chides the U.S. Air Force for buying 18,000 iPad 2s “just days ahead of the expected announcement of the iPad 3.”

Journalists love stories about idiotic federal purchasing and the government does more than its share of dumb things. But this narrative, like the $16 muffin and the $500 toilet seat, falls apart the minute you do the tiniest amount of research.

Paczkowski appears to base his story on reports from Bloomberg and Air Force Times, both of which he links to. And he does note, as do the two other stories, that the  Air Force has only ordered only 63 iPads with the right to buy the rest as funding and needs permit. But only All Things D, a site I admire, added the implication that the blundering government would go on scarfing up iPad 2s after the new model ships.

It took me about 15 seconds with Google to find the Air Force’s Electronic Flight Bag solicitation on the General Services Administration FedBizOpps.gov web site. And the request for proposals asks for “a minimum of 63 and a maximum of 18,000, iPad 2, Brand Name or Equal devices.” That language means that as the iPad 3 (or whatever it is called) replaces the current model, the Air Force will likely move to it (or will renegotiate a lower price if Apple maintains availability of the iPad 2.)

Executive Technology Inc., one of 24 bidders, won the contract to supply the 32 GB iPads for $520 each, about a 13% discount from the list price.

 

Why Microsoft Should Make an XBOX Mobile Gaming Console

Yesterday I shared a column on why casual gaming, or even more immersive gaming on smart phones is not going to threaten dedicated mobile gaming consoles any time soon. To come to this conclusion I had been using the Sony PS Vita for a few weeks. Using that device also led me to the conclusion that Microsoft needs a device like the PS Vita for their gaming ecosystem. There are a number of good reasons for this.

Strategy for Windows and Windows Phone
Microsoft includes on their Windows Phone platform an XBOX Live hub. This is simply an application that lets you interact with your XBOX Live friends and view your own profile information and achievments. Given the success of the XBOX 360 it makes sense for Microsoft to branch the service out to mobile devices. They even have an iOS app for XBOX Live as well.

What would be interesting for Microsoft strategically would be if they built this device and had some of the main dashboard UI be much closer to the Metro UI they are orienting around. The new XBOX Live dashboard is getting closer but is not the fully Metro UI yet.

I would expect a device like this from Microsft to be quite successful given the passion of the XBOX 360 audience and the number of live users gaming online. If that were true then a large number of consumers who purchased the XBOX mobile device would get immersed in the Metro UI and become familiar with it. Thus making them partial, perhaps, to Windows 8 and Windows Phone products in the future. One could make a strong case a dedicated XBOX Live mobile gaming console could be more successful than Windows Phone in the short term.

Gaming as a Service
Another key element of strategic interest in this thinking is the role of the XBOX Live service as a part of such a device. I can imagine that if Microsoft demonstrated with such a device how groups could play Modern Warfare with their friends online from both the XBOX 360 and the mobile console, that it would generate quite a bit of excitement. The PS Vita and new software that will be rolling out will support this feature as well. However, XBOX Live is such a good gaming service for hard core gamers that a mobile device tied to XBOX Live gaming could be a big hit.

This would further the revenue model for XBOX and perhaps even generate more XBOX Live Gold customres. Gold is the package where you pay $50 a year for special online features. Perhaps using XBOX Live on the mobile platform could even cost slightly more as a package. Either way it makes for an interesting extension of a core servce Microsoft is invested in.

Game Software Developers
Lastly a move like this would attract game developers for the Windows Platform much more rapidly than I believe is currently happening. Games are a rapidly growing category on mobile devices and even casual games on notebook and desktop PCs are gaining steam.

Microsoft could include in many of the same development toolkits the ability to easily also make games for the mobile XBOX console on top of their other Windows products. The byproduct would be more key apps, and in this case games, for the Windows ecosystem. Something they desparately need.

Microsoft could make it easy to buy these games for the mobile device through their own digital store, similar on Windows phone and Windows 8, which in turn would bring more consumers to their stores doorstep.

There is actually quite a bit strategically I like about this idea for Microsoft. I know the push back on this concept is around how big the market would be for a device like this. Especially since a piece of hardware like this has a longer product cycle life of more than 2 years conservatively. But I will again default to this market being similar to the console market at large. A market where the value has never been in hardware but is always in software and services. Although the hardware may have a long life the annual revenue opportunities come from soft are and services.

The thought of being able to play a game like Modern Warfare, Battlefield, or Gears of War from a mobile console while I travel and my friends are playing as well from their consoles is just exciting.

The key in all of this thinking is the hardware touch points that Microsoft can use to get consumers into their ecosystem. XBOX has been one of those key peices of hardware. So naturally with the world going mobile and Microsoft wanting a peice of that pie, my opinion is that a dedicted XBOX mobile gaming console is a good business strategy for Microsoft. It is also a product I think they would sell very well.