LG – Tech.pinions

NVIDIA’S Tegra 3 Leading the Way for Smartphone Modularity

I have been an advocate of modularity before it became popular to do so. The theory seems straight-forward to me, in that if the capabilities of a smartphone were outpacing the usage model drivers of a rich client PC, then consumers someday could use their own smartphone as a PC. Large displays, keyboards and mice still exist in this usage model, but the primary intelligence is in the smartphone then combined with wireless peripherals. At this year’s Mobile World Congress, NVIDIA took us one step closer to this reality with their partners and the formal announcement of Tegra 3 based smartphones.

Tegra 3 for Smartphones

Tegra 3 is NVIDIA’s latest and greatest SOC for smartphones, “superphones“, and tablets. It has four ARM A9- based high performance, 1.5 GHz cores and one “battery saver” core that operates when the lowest power is required. The fifth core comes in handy when the system is idling or when the phone is checking for messages. Tegra 3 also includes a very high performance graphics subsystem for games and watching HD video, much more powerful than Qualcomm’s current Adreno 2XX hardware and software implementation.

NVIDIA announced five major Tegra 3 designs at Mobile World Congress; the HTC One X, LG Optimus 4X HD, ZTE Era, Fujitsu’s “ultra high spec smartphone” and the K-Touch Treasure V8. These wins were in what NVIDIA coins as “superphones” as they have the largest screens, the highest resolutions, the best audio, etc. You get the idea. For example, the HTC One X sports a 4.7″ 720P HD display, the latest Android 4.0 OS, Beats audio, NFC (Near Field Communication), and its own image processor with a 28mm lens to take great pictures at extremely low light. You get the idea.

There is a lot of goodness in the package, but that doesn’t remove the challenge of communicating the benefits of four cores on a 5 inch screen device.

Quad Core Phone Challenge

As I wrote previously, NVIDIA needs to overcome the challenge of leveraging four cores beyond the spec on the retail tear pad. It’s a two part challenge, the first to actually make sure there is a real benefit, then to articulately and simply communicate that. These are similar challenges PC manufacturers had to deal with. The difference is that PC makers had 20 years of dual socket machines to establish an ecosystem and a messaging system. Quad core tablets are an easier challenge and quad core convertibles are even easier in that you can readily spot places where 4 cores matter like web browsing and multitasking. Smartphones is a different situation in that due to screen size limitations, multitab browsing and multitasking rarely pegs a phone to its limits. One major exception is in a modular environment where NVIDIA shines the most.

Tegra 3 Shines the Most in Modular Usage Models

Modularity, simply put, is extending the smartphone beyond the built-in limitations. Those limitations are in the display, audio, and input mechanisms. When the smartphone breaks the barriers of itself, this is where NVIDIA Tegra 3 shines the most. I want to be clear; Tegra 3 is a competitive and differentiated smartphone and tablet SOC without modularity, but is most differentiated when it breaks free from its limited environment.

NVIDIA has done a much better job showing the vision of modularity but its partners could do a better job actually delivering it. On the positive side, partners are showing some levels of modularity. HTC just announced the HTC Link for the HTC One X, software and hardware solution that plugs into an HDTV where you can wirelessly mirror what is on the phone’s display. It’s like Apple’s AirPlay but better in some ways like being able to project a video on the large display and do something different on the phone display, like surfing the web. Details are a bit sketchy specifically for the HTC One X and HTC Link, but I am hopeful they will roll out some useful modular features in the future for usage models. Apple already supports wireless mirroring supporting games so in this way, HTC Link is behind.

What NVIDIA Tegra 3 Should Do

What NVIDIA’s partners need to create is a game console and digital media adapter solution that eliminates the need to buy an XBOX, PlayStation, Wii, Roku, or Apple TV. The partners then need to attack that. All of the base software and hardware is already there and what HTC, ZTE, or LG needs to do now is package it to make it more convenient for gaming. This Tegra 3 “phone-console” should have a simple base near the TV providing it power, wired LAN, HDMI, and USB. This way, someone could connect a wireless game controller and play games like the recently announced Tegra 3 optimized games in great resolutions with rich audio. The user would have the ability to send phone calls to voice mail or even to a Bluetooth headset. Notifications can be muted if desired as well. And of course, if you want to watch Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon movies it’s all there, too. The alternative to this scenario is for a Wi-Fi Direct implementation that doesn’t require a base where the user can utilize the phone as a multi-axis game controller with force feedback. The challenge here is battery life but the user can pause the game or movie and pick up phone calls and messages. This usage model isn’t for everyone, but think for a moment about a teenager or college bound guy who loves gaming, wants a cool phone, and doesn’t have the cash to buy everything. You know the type.

Other types of modularity that NVIDIA’s partners must develop are around productivity, where the phone drives a laptop shell, similar to Motorola’s Lapdock implementations as I analyzed here. Neither the software, hardware, or price made the Lapdock a good solution, but many of the technologies now exist to change that. NVIDIA’s Tegra 3 would be a great start in that it enables real multitasking when using the Lapdock in clamshell PC mode. Android 4.0 provides a much more modular computing environment to properly display applications on a 5″ and 11″ display including scaling the fonts and reorienting windows. The Motorola Lapdock used two environments, one Android Gingerbread a a different one for PC mode. Unsurprisingly, it was a good start but very rough one too, with room to improve.

NVIDIA, the Silicon Modularity Leader with Tegra 3

NVIDIA with its Tegra 3 solution is clearly the current silicon leader to support future modular use cases. They are ahead of the pack with their modularity vision, patiently waiting for their partners to catch up. This was the most evident at CES where NVIDIA showed an ASUS Transformer Prime connected to an XBOX controller and an HDTV playing high quality games. They also demoed the Prime playing high end PC games through remote desktop. Now that is different.

The opportunity for HTC, ZTE, LG and potentially new customers like Sony, RIM, and Nokia is there, and the only question remains is if they see the future well enough to capitalize on it. With all the complaints from handset vendors on differentiation and profitability with Android, I continue to be puzzled by their lack of aggression. An aggressive handset maker will jump on this opportunity in the next two years and make a lot of money doing in the process.

What Intel Must Demonstrate in Smartphones (and soon)

Intel made a big splash at CES 2012 with the announcement that Motorola and Lenovo committed to Intel’s Medfield smartphone solution. This came on the heels of a disappointing break-up between Intel and Nokia as well as a lack of previous traction with LG. While Intel has come farther than they have ever come before with one of their X86 SOCs, they still have a long way to go to claim smartphone victory. Of course Intel knows this and is working diligently and sparing no expense. The biggest challenge Intel faces is attacking a market where the incumbent, ARM ecosystem partners Qualcomm, NVIDIA, and Texas Instruments have almost 100% market share. To start gaining share in smartphones, Intel must demonstrate many things in the near future.

More Design Wins with Key Players

The Motorola announcement was impressive in that Moto has a respected name in smartphones, but they won’t carry Intel that far alone. Lenovo is an even smaller player and while very successful in PCs, hasn’t been able to secure a lot of smartphone market share even in their home country, China. Intel knows they need a few more partners to start chipping away at market share and I expect them to announce at least one at this year’s Mobile World Congress.

One of the challenges is that many of the top players are already locked-in in one way or another, Intel has some negative history with, or has rapidly declining share. Apple already has their own A-Series SOC, Samsung has Exynos SOC, and Nokia rebuffed Intel last year and is clearly locked into ARM and Microsoft for the time being. RIM as a partner is a shaky proposition and HTC is an aggressive player but is recently dropping share. That leaves lower smartphone market share holders LG, Sony, Sharp, NEC and ZTE in the short term.

Longer term, I don’t expect Apple or Samsung to get out of the SOC business because they have been successful with their own strategies. I cannot see Nokia or Microsoft motivated to drive a change or provide dual support for X86 until Windows 9. RIM is in a free-fall with no bottom in sight. Intel is forced to take the long-term approach as they are with Lenovo by developing smaller smartphone players to become larger ones. ZTE certainly is a good long term prospect as is Huawei. If Intel can leverage their PC franchise with them I could see them being successful.

Relevant, Differentiated, and Demonstrable Usage Models

In fighting any incumbent, the new entrant must provide something well above and beyond what the incumbent offers to incent a change in behavior. I am assuming that Intel won’t lead in low price or lowest development cost, so they must offer handset makers or the carriers a way to make more money or get consumers to demand an Intel-based smartphone. Regardless of which variable Intel wants to push, they must devise relevant, differentiated and demonstrable usage models that ARM cannot.

By relevant I mean that it must be fixing a known pain point or creating a real “wow” feature consumers never asked for, but is so cool it cannot be passed up. One pain point example is battery life. Battery life is simply not good enough on smartphones when used many times daily. If this weren’t true, car chargers and battery backs wouldn’t be so popular. Wireless display is useful and cool but not differentiated in that Apple can enable this via AirPlay. Demonstrable means that it must be demonstrated at the store, an ad, or on-line on a web site. If something isn’t demonstrable then it may as well not exist.

I would like to see Intel invest heavily in modularity, or the ability to best turn the smartphone into a PC through wireless display and wireless input. Yes, this is dangerous short-term in that if Intel does a great job at it then they could eat into their PC processor franchise. But, this is the innovator’s dilemma, and a leader must sacrifice something today to get something tomorrow. I could envision an Intel-based emerging region smartphone that enables PC functionality. ARM cannot offer this well today but will be able to in the future with their A15 and beyond-based silicon. Intel should jump on the modularity opportunity while it lasts.

One other opportunity here is for Intel to leverage their end-to-end experience from the X86-based Intel smartphone to the X86-based data center. If Intel can demonstrate something incredible in the end-to-end experience with something like security or a super-fast virtualized desktop, this could be incredibly impactful. One thing that will be with us for at least another 5 years is bandwidth limitation.

Carrier Excitement

Outside of Apple, the carriers are the gatekeepers. Consumers must go through them to get the wireless plans, the phones, and most importantly, the wireless subsidy. Apple’s market entry strategy with AT&T on the iPhone was a strategic masterpiece in how to get into a market and change the rules over time. Apple drove so much consumer demand for iPhones that the carriers were begging Apple to carry the iPhone, the exact opposite of the previous decade.

Intel must get carriers excited in the new usage models, bring them a new stream of revenue they feel they are being cut out from, or lower their costs. Intel doesn’t bring them revenue from content side but could I can imagine Intel enabling telcos to get a piece of classic retailer’s PC action once “family plans” become a reality. While telco-distributed PCs weren’t a big success in the past, this was due primarily from the absence of family data plans. I can also imagine Intel helping telcos lower the costs of their massive data centers with Xeon-based servers. Finally, if Intel could shift traffic on the already oversold “wire” by shifting processing done in the cloud and onto their SOCs, this would be very good in a bandwidth-constrained environment.

Competitive Handset Power

At CES, Intel showed some very impressive battery life figures for Medfield handsets:

• 6 hour HD video playback

• 5 hours 3G browsing

• 45 hour audio playback

• 8 hour 3G talk time

• 14 day standby

This was measured on Intel’s own reference platform which is somewhat representative of how OEMs handsets will perform. What will be very telling will be how Medfield performs on a Tier 1 handset maker, Motorola when they launch in Q3 2012. There is no reason to think the Moto handset won’t get as impressive battery life figures, but Intel could gain even more credibility by releasing those figures as available.

When Will We Know When/If Intel’s Smartphone Effort is a Success?

Intel has slowly but surely made inroads into the smartphone market. Medfield is impressive but competing with and taking share from an incumbent with 99%+ market share is a daunting task. The easy answer to measure Intel progress is by market share alone but that’s lazy. I believe that Intel smartphone efforts should first be measured by handset carrier alliances, the number of handset wins, the handset quality and the new end usage models their SOCs and software can enable. As these efforts lead to potential share gain does it make sense to start measuring and scrutinizing share.

Maybe Apple Can Fix Television; Someone Has To

Not long before his death Steve Job famously told biographer Walter Isaacson that he had “finally cracked” the problem of television. No one knows quite what he meant, and Apple has shed no light on the subject, but for the sake of the future of TV, let’s hope Steve left something important behind.

Photo of LG booth — The LG booth at CES 2012

At the International Consumer Electronics Show, the overwhelming feeling I got about television is stasis. My colleague Patrick Moorhead has a solid piece on TV makers’ experiments with new user interfaces. But those remain experiments, with no commitment to when, or if, we will see them on TVs you can actually buy. And the user interface, while desperately in need of improvement, is only one piece of a much bigger puzzle.

Related Column: How Sony can beat Samsung and LG on Smart TV Interfaces

The sad truth if you had told me that the TV displays in the Panasonic, Samsung, and Sony booths were actually left over the the 2011 show, I wouldn’t have argued with you. The main difference was much less emphasis on 3D, which the makers now realize is just a feature, not a revolutionary product. Only LG’s booth showed real commitment to 3D, and not necessarily in a good way. Its booth was a jarring riot of gimmicky 3D images coming at you from all sides, an effect allowed by LG’s move to passive, battery-free glasses that don’t need to sync to a particular set. Both LG and Samsung showed 55″ OLED displays, each claiming the world’s largest, but to my eyes OLED remains oversaturated, garish, and a dubious improvement on LED-backlit LCD or plasma.

Even the internet connected TVs, which the makers promoted as this year’s big thing, seemed tired. Basically, they build the capability of a Roku box or other internet-connected device directly into the set. It’s an improvement in convenience, mainly though getting rid of one remote, but hardly enough to send anyone out to buy a new TV.

The fix TV desperately needs is an integrated solution. I want to get all of my TV–the stuff I get over cable as well as the content streamed over the internet in a single box that seamlessly combines all the sources. I don’t much care whether this is built into the set or done in a separate box–the box would have the advantage of allowing ample local storage, while a TV solution would probably have to rely on the cloud to save recorded programs. The difference in convenience is not very significant.

Such a solution would require a new user interface, something much better than Google managed for Google TV. But much more important, and much harder, it requires an entire new business model for content distribution. As I have written many times, the biggest impediment to a this breakthrough is not technology, since the technology needed to make it happen is available today, but breaking the iron triangle of content owners, networks, and cable and satellite distributors who are prospering under the status quo. Can Apple succeed where everyone else has failed? I rather doubt it. But I’m cheering for them anyway.

How Sony can beat Samsung and LG on Smart TV Interfaces

As I wrote last week, Samsung and LG are following Microsoft’s lead in future interfaces for the living room. Both Samsung and LG showed off future voice control and in Samsung’s case, far-field air gestures. Given what Samsung and LG showed at CES, I believe that Sony could actually beat both of them for ease of interaction and satisfaction.

HCI Matters
I have been researching in one way or another, HCI for over 20 years as an OEM, technologist, and now analyst. I’ve conducted in context, in home testing and have sat behind the glass watching consumers struggle, and in many cases breeze though intuitive tasks. Human Computer Interface (HCI) is just the fancy trade name for how humans interact with other electronic devices. Don’t be confused by the word “computer” as it also used for TVs, set top boxes and even remote controls.

Microsoft recently started using the term “natural user interface” and many in the industry have been using this term a lot lately. Whether it’s HCI or NUI doesn’t matter. What does matter is its fundamental game-changing impact on markets, brands and products. Look no farther than the iPhone with direct touch model and Microsoft Kinect with far-field air gestures and voice control. I have been very critical of Siri’s quality but am confident Apple will wring out those issues over time.

At CES 2012 last week, Samsung, Sony, and LG showed three different approaches to advanced TV user interfaces, or HCI.

Samsung
Samsung took the riskiest approach, integrating a camera and microphone array into each Smart TV. Samsung Smart Interaction can do far field air gestures and voice control. The CES demo I saw did not go well at all; speech had to be repeated multiple times and it performed incorrect functions. The air gestures performed even more poorly in that it was slow and misfired often. The demoer keep repeating that this feature was optional and consumers could fall back to a standard remote. While I expect Smart Interaction to improve before shipment, there’s only so much that can be done.

LG
LG used their Magic Motion Remote to use voice commands and search and to be a virtual mouse pointer. The mouse

pointer for icons went well, but the mouse for keyboard functions didn’t do well at all. Imaging clicking, button by button, “r-e-v-e-n-g-e”. Yes, that hard. Voice command search worked better than Samsung, but not as good as Siri, which has issues. It was smart to place the mic on the remote now as it is closer to the user and the the system knows who to listen to.

Sony
Sony, ironically, took the safe route, pairing smart TVs with a remote that reminded me of the Boxee Box remote which has a full keypad one side. Sony implemented a QWERTY keyboard on one side and trackpad on the other side which could be used with a thumb, similar to a smartphone. This approach was reliable in a demo and consumers will use this well after they stop using the Samsung and LG approaches. The Sony remote has microphone, too which I believe will be enabled for smart TV once it improves in reliability. Today the microphone works with a Blu-ray player with a limited command dictionary, a positive for speech control. This is similar to Microsoft Kinect where you “say what you see”.

I believe that Sony will win the 2012 smart TV interface battle due to simplicity. Consumers will be much happier with this more straight forward and reliable approach. I expect Sony to add voice control and far field gestures once the technology works the way it would. Sony hopes that consumers will thank them too as they have thanked Apple for shipping fully completed products. Samsung and LG’s latest interaction models as demonstrated at CES are not ready to be unleashed to the consumers as they are clearly alpha or beta stage. I want to stress that winning the interface battle doesn’t mean winning the war. Apple, your move.

Samsung & LG Validate Microsoft’s Living Room Interaction Model

Microsoft launched Kinect back in November 2010 in a move to change the man-to-machine interface between the consumer to their living room content. While incredibly risky, the gamble paid off in the fastest selling consumer device, ever. I saw the potential after analyzing the usage models and technology for a few months after Kinect launch and predicted that at least all DMA’s would have the capability.

The Kinect launch sent shock waves into the industry because the titans of the living room like Sony, Samsung, and Toshiba hadn’t even gotten close to duplicating or leading with voice and air-gesture techniques. With Samsung and LG announcing future TVs with this capability at CES, Microsoft’s living room interaction strategy has officially been affirmed at CES and most importantly, the CE industry.

Samsung “Smart Interaction”

Samsung launched what it called “Smart Interaction”, which allows users to control and interact with their HDTVs. Smart Interaction allows the user to control the TV with their voice, air-gestures, and passively with their face. The voice and air gestures operate in a manner similar to Microsoft in that pre-defined gestures exist for different interactions. For instance, users can select an item by grabbing it, which signifies clicking an icon on a remote. Facial recognition essentially “logs you in” to your profile like a PC would giving you your personal settings for TV and also gives you the virtual remote.

A Step Further Than Microsoft ?

Samsung has one-upped Microsoft on one indicator, at least publicly, with their application development model. Samsung has broadly opened their APIs via an SDK which could pull in tens of thousands of developers. If this gains traction, we could see a future challenge arise where platforms are fighting for the number of apps in the same way Apple initially trumped everyone in smartphones. The initial iPhone lure was its design but also the apps, the hundreds of thousands of apps that were developed. It made Google Android look very weak initially until it caught up, still makes Blackberry and Windows Phone appear weaker, and can be argued it was the death blow to HP’s webOS. I believe that Microsoft is gearing up for a major “opening” of the Kinect ecosystem in the Windows 8 timeframe where Windows 8 Metro apps can be run inside the Kinect environment.

Challenges for Samsung and LG

Advanced HCI like voice and air-gesture control is a monumental undertaking and risk. Changing anything that stands between a CE user and the content is risky in that if it’s not perfect, and I mean perfect, users will stop using it. Look at version 1 of Apple’s Siri. Everyone who bought the phone tried it and most stopped using it because it wasn’t reliable or consistent. Microsoft Kinect has many, many contingencies to work well including standing in a specific “zone” to get the best air gestures to work correctly. Voice control only works in certain modes, not all interactions.

The fallback Apple has is that users don’t have to use Siri, it’s an option and it can be very personal in that most use Siri when others aren’t looking or listening. The Kinect fallback is a painful one, in that you wasted that cool looking $149 peripheral. Similarly, Samsung “Smart Interaction” users can fallback to the remote, and most will initially, until it’s perfected.

There are meaningful differences in consumer audiences of Siri, Kinect, and Samsung “Smart Interaction”. I argue that Siri and Kinect users are “pathfinders” and “explorers” in that they enjoy the challenge of trying new things. The traditional HDTV buyer doesn’t want any pathfinding or exploring; they want to watch content and if they’re feeling adventurous, they’ll go out on a limb and check sports scores. This means that Samsung’s customers won’t appreciate anything that just doesn’t work and don’t admire the “good try” or a Siri beta product.

One often-overlooked challenge in this space is content, or the amount of content you can actually control with voice and air gestures. Over the top services like Netflix and Hulu are fine if the app is resident in the TV, but what if you have a cable or satellite box which most of the living population have? What if you want to PVR something or want to play specific content that was saved on it? This is solvable if the TV has a perfect channel guide for the STB and service provider with IR-blasting capabilities to talk to it. That didn’t work out too well for Google TV V1, its end users or its partners.

This is the Future, Embrace It

The CE industry won’t get this right initially with a broad base of consumers but that won’t kill the interaction model. Hardware and software developers will keep improving until it finally does, and it truly becomes natural, consistent, and reliable. At some point in the very near future, most consumers will be able to control their HDTVs with their voice and air gestures. Many won’t want to do this, particularly those who are tech-phobic or late adopters.

In terms of industry investment, the positive part is that other devices like phones, tablets, PCs and even washing machines leverage the same interactions and technologies so there is a lot of investment and shared risk. The biggest question is, will one company other than Microsoft lead the future of living room? Your move, Apple.