Month: July 2012

Microsoft Office 2013’s Biggest Risk Could be its Visual Design

Microsoft Office has been the staple of productivity for years, particularly for businesses. Therefore, whenever big changes happen to the product, it’s a big deal. Literally millions of IT departments and users shoulder the burden to learn every new version in hopes of squeaking out every ounce of corporate productivity. Microsoft’s latest version is in preview, out for testing millions of current and some potential users, too. There has been a lot written about the risks on potential pricing and its cloud-first method, but I believe the biggest risk is in its visual design, which looks more like a free Google product than a rich app buyers pay $399 for.

clip_image002Whether the industry accepts it or not, Apple is leading the latest design wave as measured by what looks premium. Physically, Apple design is all about minimalism with brushed aluminum, blacks, whites and sweeping angles with as few connectors and buttons as possible. The software design language is connected to the hardware language as that same brushed aluminum and minimalism is brought to OSX and apps like Mail and Calendar. Some apps take on a style of real world objects like Contacts, Notes, Pages, Find Friends, Newsstand and Photo Booth with elements of paper, leather, wood and even fabric. I cannot say I am a huge fan of the real-life designs, but it hasn’t stopped me or millions from buying Apple products. Microsoft’s Metro is distinctly different.

Metro design is a sharp departure from Windows 7 and also very different from Apple. Being different is a good thing as long as it attracts who you are targeting. Metro is direct touch, air gesture and speech control first, mouse and keyboard second. It focuses on the content by adding a ton of white space, 90 degree angles, and multiple, bright colors. There are no ties to real-life metaphors in color, shape, or texture. Like many, I like Metro for phones, tablets and even the XBOX. Now Office, in Office  2013 adopts the Metro design, a sharp departure from Office 2010. After using Office 2013 for a week, this is unfortunately where my Metro design admiration stops. The interesting part is that I thought it looked fine in screen shots, but as I used it on my 23” display for a week, it felt lifeless and drab. It was hard to even sit in front of and use for a few hours and I believe many other users will have this challenge as well.

I must point out that the industry has lived through many Office design changes, and there has always been a lot of uproar.  This is nothing new.  Remember when the ribbon first came out?  Many said that would be the thing that drove people to the alternatives which didn’t happen.  I think this case could very well be different as many alternatives exist, primarily Apple and Google and with such a drastic design departure, users will need to relearn or become comfortable with something new.  At no time has Apple’s and Google’s office tools been such a viable alternative.  I do not bring bias into this conversation as I have been a committed Office user since its existence.  In fact, I bend over backwards to use it in that I pay a monthly fee to Google just so I can sync my Google contacts and calendar to Outlook.  Based on the design changes and the alternatives, I am considering the switch and am looking at Apple and Google right now.  While mine and other’s purchase criteria incorporate more than just design, I think it is vital as it’s what you will be staring at eight hours a day.

The Google Apps for Business design language is more similar to Office 2013 than to Office 2010. It is minimal and very blocky with few shadows and lines.  In some ways, it’s more minimal than even Office 2013 that still sports the full ribbon.

Apple’s Mail and Calendar are more like Office 2013, with depth and shadows but with a very minimal ribbon or header and has seamless connections to Google Mail and Calendar without a monthly fee.

    image

So what does this mean to the success of Office 2013?  I believe Microsoft’s risk in enterprise is primarily with Google Apps for Business, but until Google can develop more robust spreadsheet scripting, increase presentation design  sophistication, and implement a more robust offline capabilities, it won’t make too big a dent in white collar professionals.  Employees who just need mail and calendar, Google is a big risk.  At $499-349 retail price, why would IT even think of doing this? And look at the Google design…. looks so similar now with Office 2013.  For small businesses, I believe Apple is the big risk to Microsoft Office 2013.  Included with every Mac, a user gets a full-fledged and robust email and calendar program and can users buy decent spreadsheet, presentation and word processors for  $19.99 a piece.  add to that they’re already  synced with iCloud and have optimized apps for the iPhone and iPad. Like me, users with Apple can also eliminate the monthly fee I pay for the Google Connector for Outlook.

It is a good time for consumers and businesses as even more choices are available than ever.  Now that the design has changed so much, now is the time to explore your options.

The PC is Not Dead

I chose this title because so many still associate the term PC with a notebook or desktop computing form factor. Let me first start by re-affirming my conviction that tablets as well as smartphones are in fact personal computers. The reality is that consumers are using a multitude of devices to accomplish what we have always considered computing.

It is no secret that I am bullish on tablets growth potential. With all the data I am seeing around consumer adoption of tablets world wide, it is hard not to be. But my perspective on the tablet form factor has always been that the tablet, and even to some degree the smartphone, does not replace a computer with a larger screen like a desktop or notebook. Rather these other devices simply take time and even some tasks away from the classic PC.

I still believe consumers will own computing devices with larger screens, more processing power, more storage, etc. However, the big struggle many in the industry are facing is the reality that the classic PC is no longer the only device in consumers lives. When the category for notebooks was a huge growth segment, it was being driven by two things. First, the fact that the category was maturing and prices were coming down. Second, because notebooks were the only mobile personal computers in consumers lives. All of this has been turned on its head with tablets and with smartphones to a degree.

The perspective that needs to be emphasized on this topic is that although the classic PC is not going away, its role is changing.

There is No Longer a Dominant Screen

The classic PC for many years was what we liked to call the “hub of the digital lifestyle.” It was the primary screen used for computing tasks in consumers lives. Other devices like iPods and early smartphones for example, had a level of dependence on the notebook or desktop. Even when the iPad first came out this philosophy was employed and was dependent on the PC to an extent. The desktop or notebook was the center and other devices revolved around them in this role. This is no longer the case for many and will soon no longer be the case for the masses. As more consumers fragment their computing tasks to be done on a number of screens, each screen will find a role as a part of a holistic computing solution.

The Cloud Becomes the Center

Although no single screen becomes the center of a consumers computing lifestyle, another solution takes the place. And that is the cloud. Personal clouds will be the glue that tie all our devices together. This is clearly evident with Apple’s latest OS release OS X Mountain Lion. This is the first classic PC OS which embraces the paradigm I just described, where no single computing device is the dominant screen. Many of the same apps, the same data, the same media, all available on every Apple screen.

Whatever screen is the most convenient for a consumer to use to look at an email, answer an email, browse the web, watch a movie, listen to music, check Facebook etc., at the exact time they want to do it, is the right screen for the job. The important word here to understand is convenience. Our research shows that people grab the screen that is closest or easiest to access to do a task the second they want to do it.

If I am in line at Disneyland and I want to do the above tasks, then my smartphones becomes the right screen for the job. If I am on the couch with my tablet near me, then it becomes the right screen for the job. If I am sitting at my desk with my notebook or desktop then it becomes the right screen for the job.

The beautiful thing about OS X Mountain Lion is that it enables and even encourages this computing philosophy I just described. Which is:

– let the consumer choose the right screen for the job
– make sure they have access to any and all programs, documents, and media
– anytime, anywhere, on any Apple device
– so that no matter which of their Apple screens they have or choose to use, IT becomes the right screen for the job.

This is the beauty of the cloud and the clouds role as the center of our personal computing infrastructure.

The classic PC used to be the center to which other screens depended on. But now that role as shifted to the cloud. This reality, not just tablets, is what is disrupting the classic PC.

The market is embracing this concept of screens (whether they know it or not) and will soon be conditioned to depend on the cloud rather than any one screen. It is for this reason, that in Apple’s case, iCloud is just as important of a platform as iOS and OS X. Other platform and hardware providers need to confront this reality and find their place in it.

The Classic PC Still Plays a Role

This is why I am emphasizing that the classic PC still plays a role. It does not go away but its role does change and, perhaps more importantly for hardware companies, the classic PC lifecycle has changed. Some hardware manufacturers may emphasize its role more than others. Some software platforms may embrace its role more than others.

Consumers will not abandon the classic PC. Because of this role change in classic PC usages, I believe some classic PC manufacturers will be confronted with some very challenging pricing economics in the very near future. (More on this in a later column)

My conclusion, however, is that anyone who does not have a clear focus on the cloud as the center and has a weak strategy for the rapidly changing role of hardware is headed for some very rough waters.

The New Mac Ads: If Tech Companies Were Cruise Lines

There has been a real kerfuffle caused by the new Mac Ads.

Some people dislike them. Others hate, hate, hate them.

On the other hand, some people like them…or, at least, they tolerate them.

MAC OWNERS AND MAC HATERS ARE NOT THE TARGET AUDIENCE

I agree with those, those and those who point out that these ads are not addressed to current Mac owners. They’re addressed to POTENTIAL Mac owners.

And the message being sent is so simple that it’s simply being misunderstood.

THE RETAIL STORE’S REASON FOR BEING

Here is Ron Johnson, former head of Apple’s Retail Stores, On Lessons Learned From Apple About Gaining An Edge As A Retail Brand:

“For example,” Johnson explained, “Apple has always offered the most easy out-of-the-box user experience, but we noticed there was a gap between buying and using. People were intimidated by even the easiest product set-up. So we said, if we can set up a product for them in the ten minutes before they left the store and they started using it and falling in love with it, it would be transformational. It was an insight that made the Apple store relevant.”

“(T)here was a gap between buying and using. People were intimidated…if we can set up a product for them…it would be transformational.”

Words for every business to live by. Words that Apple DOES live by.

IF TECH COMPANIES WERE CRUISE LINES

If tech companies ran Cruise Lines, most would invite you to ride on their world class cruise liners, help you pack your bags, give you a free limo ride to the docks, provide you with a lovely and delightful cruise…

…and then make you row ashore when you arrived at your destination.

Apple seems to get it. Instead of giving you a dinghy, a paddle and a hale and hearty farewell, they build a bridge between their products and their customer’s destinations. And as you’re crossing that bridge, Apple has their “geniuses” at the ready – there to encourage you, lend a helping hand, and cheer you on.

And that’s a good thing. A very good thing indeed.

Microsoft’s confusing tablet message

When Microsoft first announced its Surface tablet, the company seemed to be focused on taking back some of the ground it lost to longtime rival Apple since the release of the iPad. However, I find the company’s inconsistent message since the unveiling to be a tad confusing.

While I may disagree with Microsoft’s overall strategy for the Surface, I do give them credit for not blindly following Apple’s lead in the tablet market. I also agree that if its partners aren’t portraying the vision of Windows correctly, then Microsoft should step up and make sure their vision reaches the public. That vision should be consistent though.

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates went so far as to call the Surface introduction “a seminal event,” and even speculated that there was “a strong possibility” that Apple may have to create a Surface-like device in the future.

Strong words from a company that took on Apple’s iPod with the Zune and suffered a crushing defeat.

And then there’s this comment from Gates:

“You don’t have to make a compromise. You can have everything you like about a tablet and everything you like about a PC all in one device. And so that should change the way people look at things.”

That actually sounds like a good thing. Here is the confusing part.

When Microsoft announced Office 2013 it’s not optimized for touch-enabled devices. Microsoft is telling its customers that the Surface tablet is important to them, but yet it’s most important application won’t work properly with the device.

That either screams poor planning between the hardware and software teams or Microsoft jumped on the idea of making the Surface rather quickly and couldn’t change the path of Office development.

In fact, Office is so bad for touch-enabled devices that Ars Techinca’s Peter Bright wrote an article titled “Why bother? The sad state of Office 2013 touch support.”

In that article he said:

These are not touch applications, and you will not want to use them on touch systems. They’re designed for mice and they’re designed for keyboards, and making the buttons on the ribbon larger does nothing to change that fundamental fact.

Those are damning comments, but they’re also true. You can’t expect your customers to purchase a touch-enabled device and then to use desktop software. That is not a winning strategy.

It’s easy to say that Microsoft can fix it in a future release, but new versions of Office aren’t released every year. To make matters worse, they are taking on a strong player in Apple — one that everyone else has tried to take on and failed so far.

Microsoft should do what Apple did before it with iWork. Create touch enabled Office apps that share data with its desktop equivalent in the cloud. Let’s face it, Microsoft is already three years behind Apple in tablets, so it’s not like the need to create touch-enabled apps should come as a huge surprise for them. If it does, Microsoft has bigger problems than touch-enabled apps.

Of course, the Surface comes with a stylus, but I agree with Steve Jobs on this one. If your product has a stylus, you’ve done something wrong. The Surface is supposed to be touch-enabled, not stylus-enabled.

In order for Microsoft to take any significant share of the tablet market, it needs to come out of the gate strong. Sending mixed, confusing messages to its customers about what’s important is not the way to do that.

The Opinion Cast: The Future of Smart Watches

In this opinion cast, Bill Geiser the CEO of MetaWatch and I have a candid conversation about the future of smart watches. Bill is a smart guy and has quite a history in the connected watch business and he shares some great perspectives about the space.

In this discussion we talk about why the wrist is prime for a connected screen, the role of the smart watch, and what it may take to get smart watches onto the wrists of mainstream consumers.

MetaWatch launched a new project on KickStarter today. So be sure to check out the MetaWatch STRATA smart watch launch on KickStarter which went live today.

You can also subscribe to our opinion cast in iTunes here.

The Swedish Surface and the Pathetic State of Online Journalism

ZDnet screen shotYesterday, an obscure–outside Sweden, at least–web retailer, webhallen.com, published a page that purported to give the still unannounced pricing for Microsoft’s Surface tablets. The surface was quoted at a ranged from $1,000 for a minimal ARM version to $2,100 for a loaded x86 model.

Wpcentral.com was apparently the first to come across this report and run with it. But it was quickly followed by many others, including some of the biggest names in online tech news: ZDnet, InformationWeek, Mashable, Cnet, and many others. Many of the reports, while expressing some doubt about the authenticity of the information, were quick to speculate about a monumental screwup by Microsoft. For example, Cult of Mac went with the headline: “Don’t Worry, Apple! Microsoft Will Kill Its Own Surface Tablet With $1,000 Price Tag.”

Of course, when someone finally got around to talking to Webhallen, the great scoop turned out to be nothing but a dummy page. When Paul Paliath of Techie Buzz reached a Webhallen spokesperson, the company admitted that it had no idea how the Surface would be priced or even whether it would be carrying the product.

In the grand scheme of things, this was all a tempest in a teapot. Still, it demonstrates important weaknesses in how news is being reported and disseminated these days. There are several factors that should have given any reporter or editor pause before taking the prices seriously:

  • Online catalog pages are a notoriously unreliable source of information on the availability or pricing of new products. Dummy product pages have an unfortunate way of escaping from staging servers, where they should stay hidden, onto the public web.
  • The information didn’t pass a simple sanity test. Microsoft is not going through all the effort and cost to bring the Surface to market only to price it so high that failure is guaranteed. The reported prices made no sense.
  • It seems unlikely that Webhallen would be first in line to get Surfaces to sell. Microsoft has said that  initial sales would be through its own stores.

But the pursuit of news on an otherwise slow summer day seems to have overwhelmed many writers’ and editors’ common sense. And this sort of hting, of which this is only a particularly egregious example, undermines the credibility of all online news.

The much maligned traditional media always had rules about sourcing and verification of information. I started my career at the Associated Press and even though there was tremendous pressure to be first–as great as that on any web site–there was even more pressure to be right. Being late could produce a slap on the wrist; being wrong could end your career. It’s time we on the web worried a bit less about being fast and a lot more about being right.

The Opinion Cast: The Significance of Mountain Lion

I thought it would be fun to capture Tim and my conversation at the office today around Mountain Lion and our thoughts on what it means for Apple, computing, and even some comparison’s with Apple’s philosophy and that of Windows 8. Often he and I have these chats to get caught up and synchronize our thoughts and I thought I would share this one with our readers.

I hope you enjoy and any and all feedback and / or dialogue is of course welcome.

You can also subscribe to our opinion cast in iTunes here.

OS X Mountain Lion: My Favorite New Features

Tim wrote earlier this week about his conviction that when it comes to post PC platforms Apple will keep OS X and iOS separate rather than merge the two as many expect. What Apple has done with OS X Mountain Lion proves that a desktop class OS can live in harmony with a pure mobile OS and provide a seamless experience across them all.

After using OS X Mountain Lion for a little while now, I have to say that the full experience of seamless integration between all my Macs and iOS devices is quite profound. The funny thing is upon hearing of OS X Mountain Lion’s new features I fully expected it would be, however, it was even more pleasant when I finally got to integrate it into my personal computing ecosystem.

Apple took advantage of their iCloud infrastructure, and tightly integrated it into this new OS release. Apple has continually emphasized a works better together philosophy with their products and iCloud has been a key puzzle piece in this philosophy. Apple executives have referred to iCloud as a strategy for the next decade, but it is most likely the strategy for much longer. iCloud is the glue that ties all of your Apple products together and never is that more clear than with OS X Mountain Lion.

In this analysts opinion, OS X Mountain Lion brings Apple customers one step closer to a seamless and more importantly continuous personal computing experience. Apple has been heading in this direction for a while with things like Photo Stream, iBooks, and others that let you instantly keep experiences in sync. But OS X Mountain Lion takes us even further with things like documents in the cloud, iCloud Tabs, Game Center, and more.

Continuous computing will be a key driver for Apple’s ecosystem going forward. As consumers realize that not only does all you key data, documents, personal settings and more stay synced in real time across all your Apple products but that you can switch from one device to another and feel like you can always pick up where you left off.

Let me know share my experience with a few features that I found particularly useful.

Safari and iCloud Tabs

The updated Safari for OS X Mountain Lion is easily one of my favorites. Primarily because I use Safari as a large part of my daily computing time. The new sharing feature is particularly handy and I used this quite a bit more than I thought. I like to share quite a bit of what I find on the Internet to Facebook and Twitter and being able to share right from Safari without having to jump to a different application or website was extremely useful.

But the biggest new feature that I truly appreciate is iCloud Tabs. I have a Mac and an iPad and I use them both in different ways. Within my personal work style I use them both in conjunction together as a solution rather than as separate products. Because of that I can’t tell you how many times a day I come across a website on the Mac and then want to read that website on my iPad or vice versa. A common use case where this happens is when I am using my Mac and looking up recipes. Once I find the recipe I want I used to have to email it to myself so I can then pick it up on my iPad, which is the tool I use in the kitchen quite often. Now with iCloud Tabs any open tabs in Safari, whether that is on the iPad, iPhone, or Mac is accessible to me. It seems small, but for me it is extremely useful and appreciated.

Notifications

To be honest I have wanted notifications on my Mac for quite a while longer than I wanted notifications for iOS. What is really nice is that you can customize which applications notify you and which ones don’t. For me the most important notifications are email and this one feature has served me greatly.

In my day to day I get well over 100 emails and somedays twice that much. I could literally sit all day and just answer email and it would keep me busy. Obviously because of that I have to prioritize. Pre Notifications in iOS, when I heard an email come in I would click on mail and see who its from then determine if I needed to respond immediately or later. This routine can be quite disrupting to ones work flow. Enter Notifications for email and now as I am working I quickly see who an email is from and without ever having to change applications and quickly read said e-mail, I can choose to respond or keep doing what I was doing.

Since I also text message with work colleagues, friends, and family, quite often having iMessage notify me of a new message was equally pleasant. This kept me from having to disrupt my work flow to check iMessage or my iPhone to see who it was from. Notifications is just one more way that Apple is extending features we know and love on iOS and bringing them to the desktop in a relevant way.

Air Play Mirroring

Air Play support on iOS and even in iTunes on the Mac has been one of those features that I use way more than I expected to. So it was no surprise to me that when Apple brought it to the OS X Mountain Lion that it was on the features I found most valuable. This is key for reasons in my professional life and my personal life.

In my professional life I give a lot of presentations and work collaboratively with teams of executives and product groups. More often than not in these meetings most of the content we are working off resides on my Mac. With Air Play Mirroring we don’t need to huddle around my computer or fiddle with chords and cables and projector issues with inputs or resolution scaling. Now we can simply broadcast the whole of OS X and all the content on it to the large screen or projector. Because of this one features I expect many more Apple TVs in conference rooms.

In my personal life, this is the feature I have been waiting for. Primarily because I watch a lot of video on my Mac. This happens to be because currently many sites I frequent still use Adobe’s flash player– especially the network TV sites. I stream a lot of TV shows from network sites or the web directly and many of them are still on Flash. Unfortunately many of these sites still hold prime TV content from their apps or Hulu + so it is hard to get access to all their content from the apps they release on iOS. Often times I would literally connect my Mac to my TV just so I could watch some shows on my TV. That is why this was one area where Air Play mirroring in OS X Mountain Lion came in for me big time.

I can honestly say that thanks to Apple TV and Air Play Mirroring my living room will never be the same.

Lastly I want to touch briefly on Game Center. This is a feature that I believe may be incredibly disruptive. Now that Game Center games and experiences are unified across all of Apple’s products, the Apple ecosystem has become a fully cross platform gaming environment. I was able to play games with my kids from my Mac while they were on their iPod touches or other iOS devices. Apple is a sleeper in the gaming category and I believe they will soon be a major player from a gaming platform standpoint. And add what I pointed out about Air Play and all of a sudden Apple has a game platform for the big screen as well.

The overall key takeaway for me is what I said a while back in a column about Apple’s promise to their customers. Which is that when you invest in the Apple ecosystem, Apple promises to keep making your experiences better.

And they did just that with their latest release of OS X Mountain Lion.

It’s Not Just the Internet: How Government Built the Computer Industry

This week, the Wall Street Journal‘s L. Gordon Crovitz wrote a strange column decrying the claim that the U.S. government created the internet as an “urban myth.” Crovitz was quickly debunked by myself and many others. The truth is even deeper. The U.S. high-technology industry, and the computer industry in particular, owe their existence to the government.

Photo of Eniac
A technician changes an ENIAC tube. (U.S. Army)

The computer was a war baby.  The U.S. Army and Navy, needing fast ways to solve the differential equations they needed to aim long-range guns, funded major research projects. The Army effort, at the University of Pennsylvania, yielded ENIAC. The top engineers on the project, J. Presper Eckert and John Mauchly started their own company (soon sold to Sperry Rand) which built the first “private” commercial computer, UNIVAC.

In addition to being based on ENIAC, UNIVAC incorporated important advances from John von Neumann’s group at the Institute for Advanced Studies as well as work from Maurice Wilkes’ group at the University of Cambridge and Alan Turing’s cryptographic computing efforts at Bletchly Park. All of these efforts were funded by the U.S. and British governments. And the buyer of the first UNIVAC system: The U.S. Census Bureau.

IBM’s work with the Navy was less groundbreaking, but the company moved into electronic computers in a big way after the war. A declassified history of computing at the National Security Agency shows just how deeply the NSA was involved in the design and development of IBM’s 700-series computers. NSA also paid for development of the first supercomputer, the IBM 7030 Stretch, in the late 1950s and its successor, HARVEST. It really wasn’t until the 1960s that commercial demand for computers eclipsed government purchases and the design of those business systems, such as the IBM 1401, 7090, and System/360, was heavily influenced by the work that had been done on government contracts.

Government influence was pervasive elsewhere. Jay Forrester’s Whirlwind, the first real-time, distributed system, was originally a Navy project but evolved into the Air Force’s SAGE strategic defense control system. COBOL, the most widely used business programming language for decades, was developed in a private-public partnership led by the Commerce Dept.

It is doubtful that modern supercomputers would exist  had government not financed their development down to the present. IBM now sells Blue Gene systems commercially, but the initial units were built for the Department of Energy’s national labs. The 10 most powerful supercomputers in the world are all at government-owned or government-sponsored labs; No. 1 is an IBM Blue Gene/Q system at the Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (And those are just the ones we know about; the NSA does not release any information on its advanced systems.)

None of this is to say that private companies and private investment didn’t play a huge role in the development of the industry. While the government continues to play an important part in funding some of the most advanced developments, its contribution is many orders of magnitude smaller than in the early days. But the ideologically-driven insistance that the government’s role in the creation of the industry was small or non-existent is simply denying a n important and well documented history.

How Android Raises the Experience Bar with Nexus 7

As a technology insider who has actually planned, developed, and launched products, I have always believed it was important to spend inordinate amount of time living with new and emerging technology products.  Only this way, can you get the “feel” of a product; where it is and where the category is headed.  With regards to Android tablets, I have lived with every version of operating system since inception on 10” and 7” tablets. For every Android tablet version, I added every single personal and business account and used it as I would expect general and advanced users to use it.  While I had experienced some very positive things about each Android tablet version, whenever I held it to the iPad, it just didn’t compare.  Either my preferred apps weren’t available, the content I wanted was missing, or it just didn’t “feel” right.  After using the Google Nexus 7 for a few days, I can say the experience is solid and a lot of fun, something I have never before said about an Android tablet.

Why Non-iPads didn’t Sell Well

We must first understand Google’s previous missteps with Android tablets to fully appreciate how far they have come with the Nexus 7.  While I penned this post a year ago outlining why Android tablets weren’t selling well, let me net it out for you.  Non-iPads haven’t sold well over the last year because:

  • tablets were sold with incomplete collections or no available movies, music, TV, books, and games
  • tablets were sold with minimal applications optimized for the platform
  • tablets were released with unusable features like LTE, SD cards, and USB ports
  • tablets didn’t “feel’ good as there were stutters and sputters
  • with all the issues above, most 10” tablets were sold at the same price as the iPad

Think about the horrible stories consumers who paid full price for an HP Touchpad, Motorola Xoom, or BlackBerry PlayBook tell their friends and colleagues today.  Given tablets are a new category and still a “considered” purchase, everything other than the iPad was considered risky, particularly for the non-techie consumer.

So why will the outcome for the Nexus 7 be any different? Well, it’s all about its integrated and holistic experience.

Nexus 7 is a Big Phone with Access to 600,000 Phone Apps

No one doubts that Google’s Android has been successful in smartphones.  They’ve been so good, in fact, that Android even eclipses iOS in market share.  This is why it’s so important to understand the implications of Google choosing the phone metaphor for the Nexus 7 as its it’s all about apps.  Even today, Android tablets apps are counted in the hundreds and iPad tablet apps are in the hundreds of thousands.  Apps and content are to tablets as roads are to a car, and consumers have access to at least 600,000 of these Android apps.  It’s not only about leveraging the phone app ecosystem as the HTC Flyer were phone-based 7” tablets and didn’t exactly set the world on fire in sales.

Nexus 7 Uses State of the Art Hardware and Software

I liked my Kindle Fire when I first got it, but in reality, I was most impressed with the price versus the iPad than the experience. Over time, my Kindle just sat in my drawer at home and I used my iPad 2 then the iPad 3.  I stopped using my Kindle because the web and mail experience were just so pathetically slow, and quite frankly I got tired of staring at pixels as I am very near-sighted.  I attribute this to the cheaper hardware, a much older Android 2.3, a slow browser for complex sites, and a lower resolution display.  I must reinforce, though, it was at less than half the price of the iPad 2 when it shipped and millions looked the other way as they were just happy to have a tablet.

The Nexus 7 uses state of the art hardware and software and at least for 6 months, buyers won’t have too many levels of remorse. The two main drivers of the experience are Android Jelly Bean and the NVIDIA’s Tegra 3. Jelly Bean, the latest Android OS, adds a tremendous amount of new features but, in short, enable:

  • Project Butter which doubles the UI speed to 60fps so Android finally feels responsive
  • fully customizable widgets at any size the user chooses
  • voice search and dictation that actually works, as Google moved much of the logic and dictionary back to the client and off of the cloud
  • fully customizable notifications, to see just what you want to see and very little of what you don’t want to see
  • Google Now, their first intelligent agent

The NVIDIA Tegra 3 SOC is just as impressive as it has:

  • quad core processor clocked at 1.3Ghz which speeds up tabbed browsing, background tasks, widgets, task switching, multitasking, installing apps, etc.
  • 5th battery saver core which operates in idle mode, which saves battery life
  • GeForce graphics with 12 cores clocked at 416MHz to play the highest-end Android games and HD video

When you add these features to the 7”, 1280×800 (216 PPI) display, you get a very solid experience that just “feels” good.

It’s All About the Experience

As the rest of the phone and tablet industry has painfully learned from Apple, it is about the delivering the holistic and integrated experience between software and hardware, not the ingredients that make it up.  The Nexus does deliver a good, holistic experience, and not just at a certain price point.  While what defines as “good experiences” are very personal, here are many of the experience points I believe will be universally appreciated:

  • light enough to comfortably hold in one hand and small enough to put in a coat, cargo pant pocket or purse
  • the UI “feels” fluid and very fast
  • cannot see any pixels which can distract from the visual experience, particularly when using in bed or with near-sighted users who hold the tablet near their face
  • the tabbed browsing is very fast, focuses well on desktop-sized sites, and bookmarks sync with desktop Chrome
  • the apps and content users want will be available, at least in most countries
  • email is full-featured and very fast, with no lag to delete, create, or linking to web sites
  • notifications are subtle, non-invasive, and speedy to resolve
  • live tiles are fully customizable and save time to see content, even eliminating the need in many cases to open an app like email or calendar
  • with multiple apps running in the background with data feeds updating, it still feels smooth

The holistic experience is greater than just the sum of its piece parts, a first for Android tablets.

Nexus 7 Significantly Raises the Android Tablet Experience

As Ben Bajarin pointed out here, usage models will differ between 7” and 10” tablets. One thing I must add is that like the Fire, the Nexus 7 will pull some potential sales away from the iPad if Apple does nothing.  This is an element that many fail to recognize.  The analogy I will use to show this is between sedans and minivans.  If minivans had never been introduced, sedans would have sold more.  In parallel, without a Nexus 7, Apple would sell more iPads, even if they aren’t the same exact usage models or price points.

Will Apple roll over and let Google and Android slow down its march toward digital dominance?  Probably not, as I do expect Apple to introduce a 7” tablet for many reasons and also as Apple laid out at WWDC, iOS 6 is very compelling, especially when connected with other Apple devices.  Today, the broad tech ecosystem and investors see Apple as invincible, understandable as they have plowed over many of the largest companies in tech.  If Google and Android start to gain credibility in the tablet space, what message will that send about invincibility?  Apple needs to stop Google in their tracks and remove all of the oxygen during the holidays to maintain its dominant status.

One thing for certain is that the Nexus 7 and Jelly Bean significantly raise the bar for the Android tablet experience, something that has been absent for 18 months.

WSJ’s Internet History Is Way Off

The Wall Street Journal‘s editorial page seems to have dedicated itself to showing that every single thing uttered

Photo of Bob Kahnd
Robert E. Kahn (Wikipedia)

by President Obama is at best a misstatement. Today, Gordon Crovitz takes on the President’s statement that the government helped business by creating the internet. Unfortunately, in the process he mangles facts and history.

Lets look at some of the claims:

“The Arpanet was not an Internet. An Internet is a connection between two or more computer networks.” This statement is attributred to Robert Taylor, who was present at the creation and certainly should know, but lacks any context. ARPAnet was created specifically to connect disparate research networks working on DARPA projects, mainly at universities.

“If the government didn’t invent  the Internet who did? Vinton Cerf developed the TCP/IP protocol, the Internet’s backbone, and Tim Berners-Lee gets credit for hyperlinks.”  Vint Cerf developed TCP/IP jointly with Robert E. Kahn. At the time, both were employed by DARPA. Tim Berners-Lee may have invented the World Wide Web, but the idea of  hyperlinks goes back to Vanevar Bush and Ted Nelson and was extensively implemented in HyperCard well before Berners-Lee’s work.

” It was at the Xerox PARC labs in Silicon Valley in the 1970s that the Ethernet was developed to link different computer networks.” This one is a howler. Ethernet was indeed invented by Robert Metcalfe at Xerox PARC. It it was, and remains, a local networking standard. It was tremendously importnat in the development of the internet,  but was never used to link networks together.

The history of the internet is not particularly in dispute and we have the great good fortune that most of the pioneers who made it happen are still with us and able to share their stories. (For example, my video interviews with Cerf and Kahn.) In a nutshell, the internet began as a Defense Dept. research project designed to create a way to facilitate communication among research networks. It was almost entirely the work of government employees and contractors. It was split into military and civilian pieces, the latter run by the National Science Foundation. By the early 1990s, businesses were starting to see commercial possibilities and the private sector began building networks that connected with NSFnet. After initially resisting commercialization, NSF gave in and withdrew from the internet business in 1995, fully privatizing the network.

To paraphrase Yogi Berra, you can look it up in a book–or a web site.

 

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

Why Apple Won’t Merge OS X and iOS in the Near Future

One of the interesting rumors floating around the Valley these days is that Apple is on track to merge OS X and iOS and move Mac users over to their ARM based processors and leave Intel. If you follow Apple and know their history, you understand that they are more then capable of doing this. Over the Mac’s existence, Apple has actually moved the Mac OS to three different chips sets and has migrated their core OS from one processor core to the other quite seamlessly.

The reasoning goes that Apple could bring the two operating systems together to run on their own chip sets and save them having to pay Intel for their chips and instead use their own ARM processors to run a single merged OS and UI environment. Although this is a plausible idea and could possibly happen some day, the soon-to-be released updated OS X Mountain Lion suggests that this will not happen any time soon. This new OS, which brings a lot of the greatest features of iOS and many of its apps to Mac OS X actually makes the two operating systems even more alike then they have been. But each OS still serves a purpose and these enhanced cross OS functions makes it possible for both operating systems to co-exist and compliment each other for some time.

In fact, I think we are seeing more of a pattern in which OS X will continue to harness the robust power of Intel’s Core architecture for some time yet. And Intel’s 3D chip architecture that is in the works could continue to advance Moore’s law in ways that it would still make sense for the Mac OS to mine the Intel X86 based chipset for many more years. I have a good handle on Intel’s roadmap and I don’t see anything coming from ARM that could match what Intel will have two or three years from now. It is much more likely that Apple will continue to use Intel for many years to come and thus will need two distinct operating systems to meet the needs of both sets of customers.

Keep in mind that the Mac is still optimized for what I call heavy lifting computing. While simple word processing, email and even a bit more advanced applications can be done with iOS apps, the more power hungry apps still require the advanced power of OS X and advanced processors. This is especially true for those using it for graphics design, electronic publishing, video editing, advanced photo editing and many engineering applications where the Mac is used for managing IT functions, especially in education environments.

Yet, many who use the Mac for these apps also use an iPad and iPhone and have enjoyed many of the features in iOS and want the same ones on Mac OS X. This is where Mountain Lion really shines. Although it adds more then just iOS features, a lot of its value is in bringing over these features to the Mac. And there are a couple of really good examples of this.

One thing many iOS apps excel at is the ability to share info from an App or Safari via a drop down menu that lets you post directly to twitter, an email account, iMessage, and more. Now, that little arrow that signifies info sharing in iOS is in the tool bar in Safari on OS X. But more importantly, Apple is publishing the API for this feature so that developers can also include this sharing feature into apps for Mac OS X. If you use this feature on an iOS device you know who handy it is in iOS apps. Now the Mac gets the same functionality.

iMessages: Now any iMessage that comes up on your iOS devices is also displayed on the Mac in the Messages app. Again, cross OS functionality at its best.

Reminders: Many times I jot a reminder on the reminder app on my iPad, but to access it while working on the Mac, I have to literally pick up the iPad to see it. Now the reminders that I enter on an iOS device will also show up in my reminder app on the Mac.

Notes: I use this constantly to make lists, record meeting notes etc but they are isolated to iOS devices. But with Mountain Lion, all of the notes I have created on my iPad or iPhone will now be readily available for me on my Mac as well via iCloud sync.

Notification Center: This is one of the great features of iOS. Users can set alerts and notifications, which can then be accessed by a drop down scroll page that can be seen when the iPhone or iPad is still locked. This is a handy feature and with Mountain Lion it too comes to the Mac when this OS update ships this summer.

Airplay Mirroring: Here is another feature that is used a lot with iOS devices. Consumers use this to “push” their pictures and video to their Apple TV and now this type of mirroring comes to the Mac. This is really cool if a conference room uses a TV for presentations and has an Apple TV connected to it. That means that your Mac can use Airplay Mirroring over Apple TV and there is no need for messy wired connections at all.

These are just a few of the iOS features that come over to the Mac and make the Mac even more functional and in ways, an extension of your other iOS devices. But at the same time the Mac keeps its own powerful OS structure and supports the thousands of apps built for use on this platform as-is.

This is important to understand if you look at the future of the Mac. As I stated above, Apple could migrate Mac OS X so that it can use their ARM processors and it could happen. But given the ARM roadmap, it probably will never compete with Intel’s continued exploitation of Moore’s law.

But Mountain Lion really does bridge the gap and gives people who love these features in iOS many of the same functions now on a Mac. And it makes sure that at the same time all apps written for the Mac continues to work out of the box.

Also, if you look at the advanced tools Apple has for creating apps for the Mac and the new Mac App store that in many ways mirrors the app store for iOS devices, you see that both operating systems could co-exist together for some time and keep users of both quite happy. But the Mac OS, with its greater horsepower will continue to be valuable to power users and those who need the Mac for heavy lifting tasks. I see Mountain Lion giving Apple more time to focus on other innovations in the short term. This would take the pressure out of trying to even do an OS X port to their own ARM chips, especially if ARM can’t keep up with Intel’s offerings.

As Tim Cook has pointed out, the real growth and profit center for Apple has shifted from Macs to iOS devices and it is here that I think they will put most of their resources. Although the Mac is still important to them and continues to grow, innovation with iOS software and iOS driven devices seems the priority for them now. I see Mt Lion filling a big gap and allowing Apple to continue to have cross device functions but still give their power users and their consumer audience everything they want and need from Apple.

Why Apple Stands Apart From the Competition

I have been covering Apple now for 31 years and have a pretty good feel for how Apple works. Of course, how they worked changed over the years depending on who was CEO at the time, but there have been a few guiding principles that has driven the company from the intro of the Mac in 1984.

I was sitting in the third row of the De Anza Flint center when Steve Jobs unveiled the Mac. My first reaction upon seeing it was “that does not look like any computer I have ever seen.” But as he got the Mac to say hello to us and started showing us how it worked, I began to realize that Apple did not think like the PC vendors I knew at the time.

In 1984, all computers were square boxes and most of them were painted battleship grey. And when it came to ergonomics, it was clear to me that not much thought was given to its design. Although Compaq’s first PC, which looked like a Singer sewing machine, did break the mold of past PCs, it was not long before they started making PCs in square box designs and basically copying what IBM and others were doing with their PC designs.

But the Mac broke all conventional wisdom of what a PC would and should look like and in my notes of the event, I wrote that Apple clearly thinks differently then the other PC vendors at the time. Little did I know that this term, or the grammatically incorrect “Think Different” theme would eventually become a major marketing campaign for Apple as it strove to set itself apart from the rest of the PC vendors schlepping PCs that all looked the same.

Think Different, Be Different
The first way Apple sets itself apart from the crowd is to “think different” and not let what others do impact the products or services that they themselves create and bring to market. This has to be a very freeing feeling for Apple execs as they continue to put themselves in the drivers seat and create new products and even new categories of products that have driven innovation desktops, MP3 players, smartphones, tablets, and laptops over the years.

Team Players
There is another important way that Apple sets themselves apart from their competitors and that is in the way they run and control their own company. I have worked with a multitude of companies over the years and so much of their decision making process is done by committees and having to get approvals and partnerships from one of their “silo businesses” before they can move ahead. This is why many companies have so many problems keeping up with Apple and the market. Their individual businesses seldom talked to each other and getting approvals on any device or project took serious coordination between these silo businesses to get anything done.

But Apple has one central executive committee that works together seamlessly to design products and make decisions on how the company moves forward. Also, they own their own hardware, software OS, software apps, and services, as well as their new Cloud architecture so they can tie everything together neatly. There are no silos inside Apple and all decisions are made by this single executive committee. That is why all they do works together so seamlessly. This difference of the way Apple runs their company compared to competitors can’t be emphasized enough. And it gives them a big edge over the competition because of that.

But the third reason Apple is set apart from their competitors is design.

At the Fortune Tech conference in Aspen this week, former Apple executive Tony Fadell summed it up pretty well. He told this stellar audience that “great design principles are pervasive in the Apple DNA.”

In Steve Job’s Stanford commencement speech, he spoke about his love for calligraphy and how this influenced his thinking about design and how this drove him to be a perfectionist. And you can see this design DNA in everything Apple brings to market. Although Steve Jobs is not with us any more, Jonathan Ive is now tasked to embed this design DNA in all of their products and teach it to new Apple employees as the company grows.

Over the last few years I have been often asked how to compete with Apple. At the moment, if you look at pretty much all of the smartphones and even new laptops like the Ultrabook as well as competing tablets, they all are mostly copying Apple’s smartphones, tablet and thin Macbook Air designs. So when I am asked that question, I tell these folks that if they really want to compete with Apple, they need to start innovating on their own and stop simply trying to copy Apple. These folks often shrug when I tell them this and point out that Apple’s products sell and they just follow Apple’s lead. But what they are really saying is that they have companies that are run very differently then Apple, that they have little design skills and that they must lean on others to drive any innovation.

The good news is that at least a few ODM’s are getting their own internal design teams and I am starting to see some really new and interesting products, especially coming out of Taiwan and Beijing. But even with that, the OEM’s are slow to react and continue to let Apple lead while they follow.

The bottom line, unless these competitors start innovating on their own, is that Apple will continue to have at least a two year lead on them and thanks to their ways of “thinking different,” management style and design DNA, will keep their competitors following them instead of truly leading the market forward themselves

The PC is the Titanic and the Tablet is the Iceberg. Any Questions?

Most tech pundits are confused about the Tablet computer. They compare the abilities of the PC (traditional notebook and desktop computers) to those of the Tablet and find the Tablet wanting. They can’t understand how the Tablet can be so dog gone popular when it makes for such a terrible PC.

What they don’t understand is that the tablet isn’t trying to be a PC (unless it’s the Microsoft Surface). Tablet sales are exploding because the Tablet is competing against…nothing. The Tablet is going where the PC is weak and where the PC is absent. There’s virtually nothing standing in the tablet’s way.

Comparing the PC to the tablet is like comparing the Titanic to the iceberg that sank it. It wasn’t the one-ninth of the iceberg protruding above the waterline that sank the Titanic. It was the eight-ninths of the iceberg that lurked beneath the surface of the waters. Similarly, it isn’t the few overlapping tasks that the PC and the Tablet can both do well that matters most. It is the tasks that the Tablet excels at – and which the PC does poorly or not at all – that will ultimately reduce the PC to niche status and turn the Tablet into the preeminent computing device of our time.

ABOVE THE WATERLINE
The PC and the Tablet – like the Titanic and the tip of that fateful iceberg – do compete on rare occasions. Companies like SAP and IBM have ordered tens of thousands of Tablets and some of those Tablets have replaced traditional PCs, especially in those instance where the PC was overkill for the task it was originally assigned to do.

But let’s be real. The PC is a better PC than the tablet is, or ever will be. The number of Tablets that will directly replace PCs will never amount to great numbers. Accordingly, we should no more fear the Tablet replacing the PC than the lookouts on the Titantic should have feared the the damage that could have been caused by protruding tip of the Iceberg. They knew, and we should know, that that’s not where the real danger lies.

AT THE WATERLINE
There are millions upon millions of Tablets that are supplementing, rather than replacing, the PC. These Tablets are being used by Lawyers and Financiers, by CEOs and Presenters, by Presidents and Prime Ministers, by Queens and by Parliaments. The Tablet frees the owner from the constraints of their PCs. They can use the PC when they are at their desks and use the tablet to take their data with them wherever they may go.

These tablets will not sink the PC because they complement the PC. However, they may well extend the life of the PC, thus slowing the PC’s upgrade – and sales – cycles.

BELOW THE WATERLINE
The bulk of the iceberg that destroyed the Titanic lay beneath the surface of the waters, beneath the vision of the lookouts, beneath the ship’s waterline. Similarly, the bulk of the tasks that the Tablet excels at, lies beneath the PC’s level of awareness, beneath the PC’s contemptuous gaze, beneath the PC’s areas of expertise and far, far below it’s area of competence. The PC will not lose in a fair fight, anymore than the Titanic lost in a fair fight. Instead, the Tablet will hit the PC where the PC is weakest – below it’s metaphorical “waterline”.

  • STANDING:

Tablets excel at working while you are standing. Tasks done by matre d’s, inventory takers, tour guides, concierges, face-to-face service providers and order takers of every kind, benefit from the use of the tablet.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as a stand-while-you-work device? No, it cannot.

  • ROOM TO ROOM, DOOR TO DOOR AND REMOTE LOCATIONS:

Tablets excel at working when one has to move and stop and move yet again. Car Dealerships, like Mercedes Benz, are giving tablets to their salespeople. European doctors are rapidly taking to the tablet. Service Technicians at Siemens Energy are using tablets while servicing power installations. Scientists are using tablets during field research. Nurses, Realtors, Journalists, Park Rangers, Medical Technicians…the list of users and uses is nearly endless.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as a work-and-move, and work-and-move-aagin, device? No, it cannot.

  • SALES:

If you’re in Sales, you’re into Tablets. Whether you’re traveling or standing or presenting or taking an order and acquiring a signature – Tablets are a salesperson’s best friend.

Salesforce purchased 1,300 tablets and Boston Scientific purchased 4,500 tablet for their respective sales forces. And just this week, NBA Star, Deron Williams, signed a $98 million dollar contract…on a tablet.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as a sales computing assistant? No, it cannot.

  • KIOSKS:

While the PC makes for a terrible Kiosk, the tablet is almost ideally suited to the task. Tablets as Kiosks are making their presence known in places as diverse as malls, taxi cabs, hospitals, the Louisiana Department of Motor Vehicles, and the FastPass lanes at Disney World.

In the coming years there will be millions of Kiosks converted to Tablets and millions more in new Kiosks created from Tablets.

Can the PC adequately compete with the Tablet as a Kiosk? No, it cannot.

  • POINT OF SALE:

Today there are millions upon millions of antiquated PCs being used as some form of cash register or point of sale device. Let me put this as diplomatically as I can – they suck.

They’re going to be replaced by Tablets, almost overnight. And tens of millions of new Tablets are going to be used as cash registers and point of sale devices in all sorts of new and unexpected places.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as a Cash Register? No it cannot.

  • PAPER REPLACERS:

I’ve been hearing about the “paperless office” since the 1970’s. Yet every year, the PC generates ever more, not less, paper. But that was yesterday. Today the Tablet may finally be able to fulfill the promise that the PC so carelessly made – and broke – those many years ago.

Airlines such as United and Alaska are replacing their in-flight maps with Tablets. The United States Air Force is replacing their manuals with Tablets.

Construction companies are replacing their on-site blueprints with Tablets.

Governmental bodies of every shape and size are reducing paperwork through the use of Tablets. City councils and municipalities have jumped on the bandwagon. The Polish Parliament and the Dutch Senate have substituted Tablets for paper printouts of the documents read by their members. The British Parliament just replaced 650 of their computers with Tablets. And the President of the United States and the Queen and Prime Minister of England have all used Tablets in their briefings.

Twelve NFL teams, including the Denver Broncos, Miami Dolphins and Baltimore Ravens have replaced their paper playbooks with tablets. In Major League Baseball, the Cincinatti Reds have done the same. And at Ohio State, all the athletic programs are replacing their playbooks with tablets. Can there be any doubt that this trend will extend ever outward and ever downward to every professional team, every college team, every high school team and even, eventually, perhaps to amateur sports teams?

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as a paper replacement? No it cannot.

  • LOANERS:

Tablets are starting to show up as “loaners” that are lent out as entertainment devices. They’re being purchased by libraries. Airplanes run by Singapore Airlines and Qantas use them as in-flight entertainment devices. Airports like New York’s LaGuardia, Minneapolis-St. Paul International and Toronto Pearson International, lend them out to waiting passengers. The Tablet is ideally suited for the task. It is light, it is portable, it is versatile, it displays content beautifully and it is sublimely easy to use.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as a Loaner? No, it cannot.

  • EDUCATION:

PCs in schools are mostly relegated to teachers and computer labs. Tablets live in the classroom and they reside in the hands of the students. No one wants to learn HOW to use computers anymore. Students simply want to use computers to help them learn.

The Tablet is starting to take educational institutions by storm. It acts as an electronic blackboard, as a digital textbook and as an interactive textbook.

It’s at the K-12 level (the San Diego School district just ordered 26,000) and at the Universities (Adams Center for Teaching and Learning at Abilene Christian University, George Fox University, North Carolina State University in Raleigh). Tablets are even finding their way into the top-tier high schools in China.

Some schools have even reported a 10% improvement in the exam scores of students who use Tablets in lieu or paper books.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet in education? No, it cannot.

  • NEW USERS:

The tablet excels at creating new computer users. This might seem a bit controversial, but it shouldn’t be. Just think of anyone who says that they hate computers – they’re a candidate for a Tablet. Just think of anyone who is too young or too old or too infirm or too disabled to use a PC – someone like a 3 year old or a 93 year old or a recovering cancer patient or an autistic child or someone with learning disabilities. They’re all perfect candidates for the Tablet. The tablet will create a whole new class of computer users – people who have never used a computer before.

Can the PC adequately compete with the tablet as no-fuss, no-muss computing device? No it cannot.

  • NEW USES:

What makes the Tablet so very exciting is that we haven’t even begun to touch on it’s full potential yet. With desktops, we were desk bound. With notebooks, we were surface bound. The Tablet allows us to do new tasks in new places and in new ways.

And it’s virtually impossible to say what these tasks will be. We’re limited by our experience and the scope of our imaginations. Tablets are going to be used in ways that we haven’t even begun to think of yet.

SUMMING UP

Can the PC compete with the Tablet while standing, while moving, in sales, as Kiosks, as Point of Sale devices, as paper replacers, as loaners, in education, with wholly new users in wholly new uses? No, it cannot.

It is in these areas – the areas that are below the PC’s level of competence, below the PC’s level of contempt – that the Tablet will establish its empire. And there is simply nothing that the PC can do to stop it.

Like Captain Edward Smith of the Titanic, the Captains of Dell, HP, Google, Microsoft and many other computing companies, have failed to adequately grasp the true significance of the danger they are facing. They looked at the Tablet and thought: “What the hey, I can avoid that dinky little tablet floating there on top of the waters. It’s no bigger than an ice cube! It’s no threat to me and my business at all!” But what they forgot, is that most of the tablet’s strength lies hidden beneath the optimal level of the PC, i.e., beneath the PC’s “water line”. THAT is where the real danger to the PC lies.

LESSONS LEARNED AND LESSONS YET TO BE LEARNED

So, what should all of this be telling us?

Is the PC really the Titanic?

Sure, why not. The PC may sink beneath the waves like the Titanic did…but it will leave hundreds of very large “life boats” in it wake. Anywhere that the PC is weak and the Tablet is strong, the PC will cease to exist. And that’s a LOT of places. But the PC will continue to exist – just in a much diminished state.

It is not so much that the PC market will grow smaller (which it will) that matters. It’s much more a matter of the Tablet market growing larger. Much, much larger. Soon the ships that are the PC will be floating atop a sea of Tablets. And what was once a “Titanic” PC industry, will merely be just one component of a much larger, and much more diversified, personal computing industry.

Is the Tablet Really an Iceberg?

Sure, let’s go with that. The important thing to note is that the portion of the Tablet market that everyone is focused on – the portion directly challenging the PC – that portion is, by far, the smallest and the least dangerous portion of the Tablet market.

Tablets will not so much reduce the number of PCs we use as they will simply outgrow the total number of PCs in use. Tablets are additive. They will replace a few PCs but mostly they will replace millions upon millions of tasks that never before were done with the assistance of computers. While everyone is bemoaning the fact that PC sales are flat or diminishing, the reality is that the actual sales of personal computers are currently exploding. True, the PC market is shrinking. But mostly, the Tablet market is growing, and it is growing so fast that it will soon overtake the PC market.

Like the iceberg, it is the rest of the Tablet market – the part that has not yet been fully discovered – that will overwhelm the PC. There will be far more Tablets than PCs simply because there are far more tasks that the Tablet can do, and do well, than tasks that the PC can do, and do well.

This is a novel concept for most. We tend to think of computing only in terms of the tasks that the PC is capable of doing today. We define those tasks that computers are currently doing as the only tasks that could possibly require a computer.

But the number of tasks being done WITHOUT the assistance of a computer dwarfs those that are currently being done WITH the assistance of a computer. And while the PC has pretty much maxed out the number of tasks that it can do, the limits to the number of tasks that the Tablet can do are undefined – and nearly endless.

Will Windows RT Include Outlook? Microsoft Won’t Say

Office 13 logo
Folks who plan to use Outlook on ARM-powered tablets, such as the Windows RT version of the Surface, may be in for a disappointment. The materials Microsoft released this week along with the Consumer Preview of Office 2013 were frustratingly vague about the RT version, saying only that Windows RT tablets would come bundled with a version of Office that included Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote.

In in response to a direct question on whether Outlook would be available for RT, a Microsoft spokesperson said “we are not sharing more specifics about ARM plans today.”

A lack of Outlook on RT tablets has important implications. Many enterprises rely heavily on Outlook, especially as the front end to Exchange mail and collaboration systems. and the lack of Outlook would eliminate a major competitive advantage for Windows tablets vs. the iPad and other tablets. Users would be stuck with the mail, contacts, and calendar programs built into, and the mail program, at least as it exists in the windows 8 Consumer Preview, is particularly weak. It’s Exchange support is limited and  it does not support standard internet mail (IMAP or POP3) accounts at all.

However, as I point out in a post earlier today, Outlook 2013 shares the space and resource hungry architecture of earlier versions and implementing it on an ARM device would be highly problematic. In particular, Outlook’s storage requirements will prove very troublesome on tablets where storage is limited to a few gigabytes.
 

 

 

Office 2013: Can Complexity and Touch Get Along? [UPDATED]

The new versionOffice 13 logo of Microsoft Office, unveiled this week in a consumer preview, has an awful lot riding on it. The strongest claim Microsoft can make for Windows 8 tablets, including the Microsoft-branded Surface, is that they will deliver the full Office experience. This probably won’t mean much to consumers, most of whom can do perfectly well with with the Office alternatives available today for the iPad. But it is a very big deal in the enterprise, where Office still rules and advanced features are routinely used.

To an extent that technology writers on the web often ignore, enterprises live and die in Office and its back office companions, especially Exchange and SharePoint. Support for these technologies in both iOS and Android is limited by the lack of support for full-featured Office applications. Windows 8 delivers that, at least in part, but there are major questions about the usability of the apps without a keyboard and mouse. Based on preliminary experience with the new Office, it looks like the software could give Microsoft a competitive edge, but it is very far from being decisive.

Outlook on RT? There’s a lot we still don’t know about Office, especially the version that will run on Windows RT (ARM-based) systems. For example, we do not know for certain whether Outlook, a critical enterprise application, will exist for Windows RT. The version of Office that will be bundled on Surface and other Windows RT tablets will not include Outlook. If Outlook is not available separately–and Microsoft has not yet responded to inquiries on this point–enterprise users with Exchange accounts would have to make do with the much more limited Windows 8 mail, calendar, and contact programs. UPDATE: A Microsoft spokesperson says the company has no further information on its Office for Windows RT plans at this time.

Microsoft developers faced an impossible task with Office 2013. The essence of Office is the richness of its applications. But feature-rich applications require complicated interfaces, and complicated interfaces are very difficult to implement for a touch-only tablet environment. Consider the iPhoto application for the iPad. It’s a very rich app by iPad standards, though it contains only a small fraction of the features of Photoshop. Yet it has a user interface that, again by iPad standards, is unusually complex and fussy.

Microsoft decided to make only evolutionary changes to the Office UI. A lot of touch features have been added, especially gestural controls, but access the the myriad features still requires negotiating Office’s maze of ribbons and menus. Unless you have Steve Jobs’s famous sandpapered fingers, you’re going to need a stylus or some other sort of pointing device to do that with any efficiency. Ars Technica summed it up well in a downbeat analysis of touch features in Office with the subhead: “Office 2013 makes concessions to tablet users, but they’re far too few.”

How big a problem this is depends on how an individual wants to use Office on a tablet. Having the full apps lets you view files, make minor changes, and save or send them without the fear you may have that a third-party tablet app would make a mess of complex formatting. But any attempt to do serious work on complex documents will prove extremely frustrating without a keyboard and a pointing device. You have all the features, but they are just not highly usable in touch mode. (I found that highly formatted documents did not do at all well in Word’s new Reading view. Pages with multiple elements broke up in ways that made it difficult to understand the relationship between them.)

The mail challenge. Outlook is a special case. Outlook 15 does not appear to have tamed the application’s hunger for resources, both CPU cycles and storage. This will be problematic on tablets, with their very limited storage. I installed the new Outlook on a laptop running the Windows 8 Consumer Preview and set up two mail accounts: The IMAP service I use as my primary mail account and a lightly used corporate Exchange account. The local database (OST file) for the Exchange account, which was limited to the last six months of messages, weighed in at 211 MB. The file for the much more active IMAP account took up 1.9 GB (the option to time-limit the messages stored locally is available only for Exchange accounts.) Unlike the mail programs designed for tablets, Outlook clearly does not have the economical use of local storage as a priority–and this is why I think it may not be an option on Windows RT devices, which are likely to have more modest specs than their Intel-based brethren.

Microsoft made a decision to deliver the full Windows experience on tablets. The difficulty is that it isn’t a very good tablet experience for the same reasons that Windows 7 was not a satisfactory touch experience. The richness and complexity of Office may appeal to IT departments looking to support uniform software across different types of devices, but I think users will be frustrated.

 

Human-Computer Interface Transitions will Continue to Drive Market Changes

As a former executive and product manager for end consumer products and technologies, I have planned and conducted extensive primary research on Human-Computer Interfaces (HCI) or Human Machine Interface (HMI). A lot of this research was for the industrial design of consumer products and their mice, keyboards, and even buttons. I conducted other research for software and web properties, too. Research was one input that was mixed with gut instinct and experience which led to final decisions, and in those times and companies for which I worked, were #1 in their markets. Only recently have innovations in HCI come to the forefront of the discussion as the iPhone, iPad and XBOX Kinect have led in HCI and in market leadership. I believe there is a connection between HCI and market leadership which needs more exploration.

For years, the keyboard and mouse dominated in HCI. For the previous deskbound compute paradigm, the keyboard was the best way to input text and perform certain shortcuts. The mouse was the best way to open programs, files and also move objects around the desktop. This metaphor even impacted phones. Early texting was done on 12 keys where users either forced it with one, two, or three strikes of a key to represent a different letter which was then improved with T9 text prediction. Thankfully, Blackberry popularized the QWERTY phone keyboard for much improved texting and of course, mobile email. Nokia smartphones then popularized the “joystick”, which served as a mini omni-directional pointer, once the industry shifted to an iconic, smartphone metaphor.

Then Apple changed everything with the iPhone. They both scrapped the physical keyboard and the physical pointer and replaced it with the finger. We can debate all day long if it were the capacitive touch screen, the app ecosystem, or something else that drove Apple to its successful heights, but we can all agree that Apple needed both to make a winner. Just use on of those $99 tablets with a resistive touch screen and you will know what I’m talking about.

The touchpad has gone through many noticeable changes as well. Remember when every notebook had a touchpad and two, sometimes three buttons? Now look at Dell’s XPS 13, the MacBook Air and the MacBook Pro. We are now looking at a world with giant trackpads that can recognize the multitudes of gestures with minimal effort.

Then Microsoft changed the game with the XBOX Kinect. Interestingly enough, like Apple, Microsoft eliminated physical peripherals and replaced with a body part or multiple body parts. Nintendo reinvented gaming with the Wii and its bevvy of physical controllers, and then Microsoft removed them and replaced them with major limbs of the body. In the future, Microsoft could remove the gaming headset microphone, too, once Kinect can differentiate between and separate different player’s voices.

Voice is of course one of the most recent battlegrounds. Microsoft has shipped voice command, control and dictation standard with Windows PC for nearly a decade but has never become mainstream. They do provide a very good “small dictionary” experience on the XBOX Kinect, though. Apple has Siri, of course, and Google has Voice. Microsoft may look like the laggard here based upon what they’ve produced on PCs and phones, but I am not counting them out. They have mountains of IP on voice and I wouldn’t doubt it if the industry ends up paying them a toll for many voice controlled system in a similar way OEMs are paying Microsoft every time they ship Android. This is just one reason Apple licenses Nuance for the front-end of Siri.

We are far from done with physical touch innovations. Just look at Windows 8 notebooks. Windows 8 notebooks are experiencing a dramatic shift, too, with their multiple gestures using multiple fingers. Just look at all the innovations Synaptics is driving for Windows 8. Their Gesture Suite for Windows 8 “modern touchpads” adds supports for the eight core gesture interactions introduced with Windows 8 touch, specifically supporting the new edge swipes to navigate the fundamentals of Windows 8 Metro experience. Interestingly, with the addition of all of the Windows 8 gestures on the trackpad, for certain usage models, the external mouse actually starts to get in the way of the experience. I can see as touch displays and advanced touchpads become commonplace, this could eliminate the need for a mouse. This would be interesting as in previous HCI shifts, it resulted in the elimination of a physical device to improve the experience.

The long-term future holds many, many innovations, too. I attended this year’s annual SIGCHI Conference in Austin, TX, which I like to describe as the “SIGGRAPH for HCI” and it is truly amazing what our future holds. Multiple companies and universities are working on virtual keyboards, near field air touch using stereopsis (2+ cameras), improved audio beam forming for better far-field and a bevy of other HCI techniques that you have to see to believe.

What can we take away from all of this? One very important takeaway here is to realize that those companies I cited who led with major HCI changes ended up leading in their associated market spaces. This was true for Blackberry and Nokia during their haydays, and now it is Apple, Microsoft and maybe Google’s turn. It doesn’t always stand true, though in commercial markets, but in many cases, stands true for consumer companies. Just look at SAP. In the future, it is important to keep your eyes on companies investing heavily in HCI technologies; companies like Microsoft, Google, Apple, and innovators and enablers like Synaptics who I believe will continue to surprise us with advanced HCI techniques which will lead to market shifts.

Very Quick Office Reaction: Getting the Cloud Wrong

Office 13 logoI’ve just spent about half an hour playing with the new Office 2013 preview, so obviously this is a very preliminary reaction. There will be a lot more to say in coming weeks and months. But I do think that in its understandable enthusiasm to bring Office applications to the cloud, Microsoft has made a fundamental mistake.

I very much like the idea of syncing copies of documents to the cloud. But I want first and foremost to retain a local copy, especially when working on a laptop rather than a tablet. Here’s how I do it now:  My Office apps are set to save files by default to the Documents folder  on both Windows and Mac. The Documents folders, along with its many subfolders, is set up to sync automatically with SugarSync and the non-tablet systems that I use regularly are set up for full two-way sync; when I upload a new or updated document from system A, that same document is silently, but quickly, downloaded to system B. This gives me up-to-date local and cloud copies. (You can do something similar with other sync services such as Dropbox, but I have been using SugarSync since it was in beta.)

The new Office apps save by default only to CloudDrive, meaning that no permanent local copy of the file is created (a temporary file is created to save any changes made while not connected to the network.) This makes sense on Windows tablets, though not as much sense as it does on a iPad, which lacks a real user-accessible file system. It makes no sense whatever on a laptop. You can easily override the default setting to store files locally, but then you have to manually create a cloud copy. Based on lots of experience, for reasons of both security and availability, I want that local copy.

What a really want from CloudDrive integration is something that works like SugarSync and automatically saves locally and syncs to the cloud. In fact, it could usefully go a step further and check before opening a local copy to see if there is a newer version on CloudDrive and give you the choice of which one you wanted to edit. This wouldn’t be hard to implement and would provide a much better experience.

 

Why I am Convinced Tablets are the Future

During the course of many conversations I have been having lately with industry insiders there is still a drastic underestimation of the importance of tablets. There are some I talk to who get it but I still feel that largely the sentiment around tablets and the iPad in particular is that it is a toy and not a personal computer. So in this column I am hoping to articulate my view on this subject.

More Consumption and Light Production Than Heavy Lifting

I know thinking objectively from other peoples vantage points is a challenge for many people. I am close friends with many of these people. However considering many different views and specifically trying to get inside peoples heads and see things from their perspective is something I greatly enjoy. That probably explains why I love anthropology and ethnographic research. The key point is that just because one consumer can not replace their laptop with a tablet does not mean that another consumer can not. Consumer preferences and usage models are not universal.

My conviction, which stems from my observational research with consumers, which we conducted at Creative Strategies, is that a large amount of consumers do not do complex things with their computers. I recall some research we did four years ago trying to gauge the importance and perceived demand of increased CPU performance by mass market consumers. In this research consumers shared with us how they use their PCs. What we observed was that the majority of consumers we interviewed used less than five primary applications on a daily basis and none of those applications were CPU intensive.

To further highlight this observation I want to share a chart containing some research from Alpha Wise and Morgan Stanley. In a large survey with mainstream consumers, their research findings came back very similar to our observational research. Specifically that roughly 75% of the time consumers were not using their PCs to do things we would consider “heavy lifting.” Although I am not sure that term applies to the mass market consumer.

Now the question I have after looking at that chart is: Which of the above tasks can not be done on an iPad? The answer is none.

Now if you are like me and you have large numbers of friends, family, social acquaintances, people who come up to me when they see me using my iPad with a keyboard at Starbucks, etc., then you probably give advice on what types of technology to buy. So when I ask them what they use their computers for, the answer almost always comes back the same. Not much they say, I mainly browse the internet, check email, watch videos, and occasionally need to make a spreadsheet or use a word processor.

Interestingly the overwhelming majority of conversations I have had around this topic, the person asking me the question is already leaning toward an iPad because they recognize it can do most of what they need it to the large majority of the time. So the question generally centers around whether or not they need a new notebook or whether they should just get an iPad and keep using their old notebook.

The long and short of it is that unless the person asking the question is a power user, creative professional, etc., it is very hard to not recommend them getting an iPad and just keep using the notebook they have for the less than 15% of the time they may possibly need it. You can probably guess what my advice generally is and I know many happy consumers who have taken this path.

Things We Hold We Love

Now I want to make one last point. The fascinating thing about tablets besides the points I made above, is that we don’t just touch them when we use them, we hold them. I am convinced there is something psychological about this that makes the tablet more personal than a notebook. With a notebook we touch (the keyboard and mouse / trackpad) but we don’t hold it while using it. The notebook form factor is not conducive to this usage model because it must be sitting on a flat surface, like a desk, table, or lap to be used.

We also hold tablets much closer to our person while we use them the majority of the time. Whereas with notebooks, we keep them at arms length. This fundamental difference in closeness is another reason I believe there is a deeper psychological attachment and lure to tablets than with notebooks.

If I was to rank emotional attachment to devices of a personal nature I would say the smartphone comes first, then the tablet, then the notebook. Smartphones and tablets we touch to use and hold to use, while the notebook we just touch, and I use the word touch loosely with the notebook form factor because it is not a touch computer like the smartphone and tablet–and I am not convinced it ever will be.

The fundamental truth is that there is a distinctly different relationship consumers are beginning to form with tablets that they never developed with notebooks. We continually hear in consumer interviews how much people love their iPads and can not live without it. Had this attachment developed with notebooks they wouldn’t have delegated them to the back room. And think about the millions (and growing) of kids who are developing this relationship with tablets in their formative years. I am confident my kids will have no use for a notebook in the future. Desktop maybe, or perhaps central home server, but notebook– not so much.

Following my logic, it should not be tough to see why we are so bullish on tablets. There are the above reasons, along with many more than I have time to get into (but will in our upcoming tablet report, shameless plug), which are all transforming and reshaping this industry before our eyes. The challenge is not everyone sees it.

The Opinion Cast: Is there a 7-Inch Tablet Market?

In this episode of our opinion cast Steve Wildstrom, John Kirk and myself discuss the potential for a 7″ tablet market.

We explore Amazon’s strategy, Apple’s potential entry with an iPad mini, and Google’s Nexus 7″. Business model issues were a key part of the conversation as well as whether or not Apple needs to make a 7″ tablet.

You can also subscribe to our opinion cast in iTunes here.

Customers May Have Forced Apple’s EPEAT Retreat

No EPEATWell that didn’t take take long. Just a week after Apple announced that that it was pulling its products from EPEAT environmental certification, it reversed itself and said it would continue with the program and work with EPEAT to evolve more modern standards.

In an open letter, Bob Mansfield, Apple’s soon-to-retire senior vice president for hardware engineering, said:

“We’ve recently heard from many loyal Apple customers who were disappointed to learn that we had removed our products from the EPEAT rating system. I recognize that this was a mistake. Starting today, all eligible Apple products are back on EPEAT.”

This sort of public retreat is rare, if not unprecedented, for Apple. So what happened? As usual, we have no clue as to what led to the change and Apple isn’t talking beyond the release of the letter. But I think I can make a pretty good guess, and the primary clue is Mansfield’s first sentence.

———————-
Related content: Does Apple Hate the Environment?
———————–

Whether EPEAT is a good standard or not, many organizations are deeply committed to it. A fair number, mostly in the public sector, have formal commitments that require them to buy EPEAT-certified products. And Apple may have miscalculated just how important that would be.

I think the most significant pressure may have come from schools, both K-12 systems and colleges. Many governments, including federal, have EPEAT requirements,  but they are not significant buyers of Macs. (Current EPEAT standards cover desktops and notebooks but not tablets or phones, so iPad and iPhone sales would not have been directly effected.) But the education market is hugely important to Apple.

As best I can tell, no institution said publicly that it would stop buying Apple products because of EPEAT, but The Boston Globe quoted Bill Allison, director of campus technology services for the University of California at Berkeley as saying: “When something like this happens it is a significant change in the landscape. We are reviewing the impact of this.”

The language in private, I suspect, was stronger and that is what most likely led Apple to accept a rare public embarrassment and reverse its decision.

 

PC Growth isn’t Flat, Windows Is

We are living in fascinating times as the personal computing industry is undergoing its biggest transformation since its inception. Tablet computing is leading the charge and forcing nearly everyone in the industry to relearn what they knew about personal computing and its future.

There is no doubt that personal computing is evolving and transforming. With my role as an industry analyst, I believe it is important to present information to the industry which reflects what is accurately happening in the market at any given time. It is for this reason that I believe that not including tablets in industry wide PC sales numbers and forecasts is disingenuous and does not accurately reflect market conditions.

Recent quarter estimates from IDC and Gartner made headlines as they point out that PC growth is remaining relatively flat. There are more theories surrounding this point than I have time to get into but the bottom line is that there is simply no growth happening right now with desktops and clamshell notebooks.

So what is happening in the market and what can we learn about the current conditions within consumer markets? A series of interesting data points lead to an important observation. That observation is that PCs aren’t flat or in decline, demand for the Windows platform is.

Horace Dediu at Asymco created a fascinating chart and series of data points where he broke down the Windows platform advantage and how it is eroding. In the following chart he created he points out how in 2004 the Windows platform peaked in its multiple of Windows products shipped per single Mac shipped. After 2004 multiples began to decrease and starting in 2007 with the release of the iPhone, there is a steady and rapid decline of the Windows platform advantage.

This chart can be summed up with the following significant point Horace makes in his article:

“If we consider all the devices Apple sells, the whittling becomes even more significant and the multiple drops to below 2. Seen this way, Post-PC devices wiped out of leverage faster than it was originally built. They not only reversed the advantage but cancelled it altogether.”

Now turning to the flat notebook and desktop growth trend. My conviction is that tablet computers (defined as tablets with screen sizes larger than 9.7 inches) is an evolution of the computing form factor but still a personal computer. This is why I agree with Canalys who includes tablets as PCs in their market data.

I shared my opinion about tablets and the new era of personal computing in this column.

If we were to include tablets into the data for personal computers we would see that the market is not in decline but actually a steep incline. In fact if we were to include tablets into personal computer shipment forecasts for 2012 we would see over 100% year over year growth.

By choosing to not include tablets we will be lucky if we see 20% growth in this calendar year. But as I stated at the beginning of this column, to not include tablets in PC shipments would not be an accurate reflection of what is happening in the market.

We can debate semantics all day as to whether or not tablets should be considered PCs. All the while our interviews with consumers are consistently proving that they are using their iPads as computers to do many, and in some cases all, of the regular tasks they used to do with their notebooks. Given the ways we see consumers using iPads there is simply no denying that the iPad is a personal computer. Some people will have their personal computing needs met by a tablet, others by notebooks, and others by desktops, or even perhaps some combination of the three.

The iPad, and tablets in general, simply represent an evolution of the form and function of a personal computer. Therefore we should count them as PCs but breakout their specific shipment growth amidst other computing form factors like we do already with desktops and notebooks.

Now obviously if we did this we would show that most if not all of the PC growth belongs to Apple. But as I said at the beginning I am interested in accurately presenting what is happening in the industry and most of the growth does in fact belong to Apple.

So now the question remains as to whether or not Windows 8 will be the great equalizer and inject growth into PCs, both clamshell and tablet, for non Apple vendors. That is a question I will let linger until a later time.

However, this fact remains and needs to be continually emphasized. If we step back and look at what is happening holistically in the personal computer market, it is clear that we are not in a phase of flat or declining growth, rather we are at the beginning of a rapid and exciting growth phase.

The Tech.pinions Opinion Cast: An Evolving Idea

An analyst colleague of mine and I were joking recently at a major tech trade show. We thought it would be funny if we put up a table in the hallway with a sign that said Ask the Analyst and charged a fee per 5 min for our advice.

Of course this would never work but we thought it was an entertaining idea to kick around. I personally don’t listen to many Podcasts, to be honest. If I want insight or perspective I call the people I trust, they are usually analysts or executives, and we have a conversation. Yet I have been getting many emails from readers asking if we would do a podcast. So we decided to try our hand again but we decided to call it an Opinion Cast and focus more on sharing our wide ranging opinions on matters related to tech. So tomorrow in the afternoon we will have our Podcast rebranded as our Opinion Cast to stream or download.

But I wanted reach out to readers prior and see if there were any specific topics they would like to see us address on this Opinion Cast. We already have a few topics in mind but if anyone would like to submit specific topics for us to tackle we will be glad to consider them for this or future Opinion Casts.

In the future I would like to try streaming one live and letting readers chime in with questions or comments. I’m just thinking out loud here as we try to figure out how to do something valuable with the Opinion Cast.

Any thoughts, ideas, or topic suggestions are appreciated. Feel free to make them in the comments below.

Does Apple Hate the Environment?

No EPEATApple has had a complicated relationship with environmentalists. The company prides itself on its greenness in many ways, having been a leader in eliminating lead, bromides, PVC, and excess packaging from its products and building renewable energy sources for its North Carolina data center. But it has tangled frequently with environmental groups, especially Greenpeace.

Some of Apple’s clashes appear to result from tension between a narrow, regulation-based view of environmentalism and the demands of product innovation. Apple ignited the latest round in a running battle this week by pulling out of EPEAT, a organization dedicated to, as its mission statement says, “a world where the negative environmental and social impacts of electronics are continually reduced and electronic products are designed to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainability.” Not only will Apple not submit new products for EPEAT certification, but it asked to remove 39 already certified products from the EPEAT registry.

Apple, as usual, remains opaque about its motivations and intentions. It is stoic in the face of criticism–a Greenpeace spokesman said Apple “has pitted design against the environment — and chosen design. They’re making a big bet that people don’t care, but recycling is a big issue.” Prodded by The Loop’s Jim Dalrymple (a Tech.pinions contributor), Apple’s Kristen Huguet said: “Apple takes a comprehensive approach to measuring our environmental impact and all of our products meet the strictest energy efficiency standards backed by the US government, Energy Star 5.2. We also lead the industry by reporting each product’s greenhouse gas emissions on our website, and Apple products are superior in other important environmental areas not measured by EPEAT, such as removal of toxic materials.”

Pulling out of EPEAT could cost Apple. The City of San Francisco has a policy that requires it to buy EPEAT certified products and it says it won’t be buying any more Macs from Apple. (EPEAT standards cover laptops and desktops, not phones or tablets.) Federal agencies that wish to buy Macs would have to seek waivers to purchase non-certified products. But it’s worth noting that while enterprises have begon to buy iPads in large numbers, they have not be major Mac customers.

There may be less here than meets the eye. With the newest iPads and MacBook Pros, Apple has moved to more integrated designs. Display electronics are bonded to glass and batteries are bonded to the case. This violates EPEAT standards, which require that that electronic product be easy to disassemble into recyclable components. This doesn’t mean that Apple products can’t be recycled or even necessarily that they are harder to recycle (though they may be.)  All we can say for certain is that the new Apple products fail to meet a set of prescriptive rules that define “sustainability” in a very specific way.

This is a frequent problem with regulation. Regulators, whether government agencies or private alliances of “stakeholders” like EPEAT, love to prescribe solutions. Follow the checklist and you get certification. It’s easy for the regulators, the regulated, and for the compliance-assistance industries that inevitably spring up. But it is hell on innovation. Prescriptive regulations are most easily complied with if you go on doing things the way they have always been done. Regulators, public or private, respond more slowly than markets and often serve to discourage the adoption of new technologies that don’t fit well into the existing regulatory paradigm. Regulations also tend to lag well behind changes in the markets; witness the fact that EPEAT has not yet caught up with smartphones or tablets. (If you want a particularly horrible example of regulatory lag, consider the Federal Communications Commission, which is trying to shoehorn rapidly evolving radio technologies into a regime of spectrum allocation that seems stuck in the mid-20th century.)

Because of Apple’s reticence, I don’t know whether its new products are really less “green” or “sustainable”–whatever, exactly, that means. Perhaps, the difficulty of disassembling them is offset by less use of materials, or elimination of toxics, or other gains. The company, in its magnificent indifference, is losing the PR war by refusing to fight. But we should be very careful not to assume that just because Apple has withdrawn from a voluntary standard that is has decided to rape the environment–or even that it is sacrificing responsbility on the altar of design.