last100 » Apple

People keep asking… what do I make of Apple’s iPad?

Steve O'Hear — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 19:03:34 +0000

Now that the dust has settled and I’ve had time to gather my thoughts, here’s what I make of the iPad, Apple’s own take on the tablet computer.

It’s an Internet appliance not a computer

While the tablet computer is nothing new, the iPad is, arguably, a completely new product category, which appears to occupy the middle ground between a smartphone and a laptop. If, of course, such a middle ground exists.

Unlike the raft of Windows Tablet PCs, which Bill Gates once claimed would be the future of personal computing, replacing the desktop and laptop, the iPad doesn’t appear to replace anything. It’s certainly too big to replace a smartphone. And it’s not capable of undertaking many tasks for which a laptop or desktop computer – read: fully-fledged desktop OS/applications and mouse/hardware keyboard – is required. But in many situations – web browsing and consuming content – the iPad is arguably better.

It’s a closed and tightly controlled platform (as I predicted), with Apple acting as gatekeeper in terms of hardware, software, applications and content. Good or bad, as a result the iPad won’t be plagued with many of the usability issues users of a more open and complex platform face (Windows/Mac OS etc.). Unlike desktop OSes, the UI/platform is also designed from the ground up to support touch input.

It’s not a computer in the traditional sense but an Internet appliance. People won’t buy the iPad instead of another computer but because it’s not a computer.

Only Apple could have built it

On one level, the iPad represents very little new from Apple, which is actually the point. It’s no more than a supersized iPod touch or iPhone without the phone. Based on the same OS, multi-touch UI, closed and controlled and dead easy to use app and content store (iTunes), best of class web browser (minus Flash of course), best of class PMP etc.

It builds on so much before it, only Apple could produce the iPad.

Not its individual parts, of course, but the sum of those parts, which are much, much greater. Who else designs the hardware, operating system, software and has a thriving eCommerce platform all completely integrated? And don’t underestimate in-app purchases. Not Google, not Microsoft or any OEM… That’s why Apple’s competitors and the media industry are shitting bricks.

It’s no surprise how much Amazon has invested in its own digital content strategy but right now Apple looks to be better positioned to be the Amazon of digital.

And the iPad is a huge part of this.

It’s not an eBook reader, it’s about convergence

Steve Jobs once said of dedicated eReaders: “It doesn’t matter how good or bad the product is, the fact is that people don’t read anymore”? And: “The whole conception is flawed at the top because people don’t ready anymore.”

Of course, he often dismisses a product category before unveiling Apple’s own take which “fixes” all of those problems.

But on this occasion, I don’t think the iPad represents a U-turn on Jobs’ part.

The iPad is no eReader both technically – no eInk – and conceptually. Sure you can read long form books on this device, just as you can on a smartphone or laptop, and some users will, but it’s not as suited to such a task as a dedicated eBook reader… but it doesn’t need to be to compete with devices like Amazon’s Kindle.

Because for many it will be just good enough.

The iPad is purely about convergence. It combines existing solutions to many existing problems in a single product tied to and built on Apple’s existing technology, design and ecosystem – the very same tech or way of thinking that solved many of those problems in the first place.

The fact that it’s not dedicated to eBook reading is why it will win out over such single function devices. And when Jobs said that people don’t read anymore, I took it as saying that the market for a single purpose eBook device wasn’t large enough for Apple to go after. Not that people don’t read. On the other hand, the market for people who read all sorts of content – long, short – on the web is huge, and the market for people who also like to watch movies, do a little email, view photos from friends, social network etc., is even greater

Apple doesn’t go after niche markets anymore. Not under Jobs’ watch.

Just like the best camera is the one that you have with you (think Nokia and Sony Ericsson’s success with camera phones, which also, err, make calls and do other stuff), the iPad is either fantastic or just good enough for many tasks in a single converged device that it will displace single purpose devices, such as the Kindle, or less well converged ones, such as Netbooks, for many tasks.

I repeat.

The iPad is all about convergence.

It’s not really a mobile device

The iPad isn’t really a mobile device. Not in the sense that the iPhone or any decent smartphone is. It’s not, primarily, for the journey, it’s for when you’ve arrived (to borrow a line from Mad Men). In that sense, I don’t think it competes with a smartphone as much as it seems. If Apple had invented an iPhone that could, upon the press of a button, triple in size, there’d be no need for an iPad.

But the company hasn’t.

Now, depending on what you want to get done once you’ve arrived, the iPad may or may not compete well with a laptop, the device it most closely impinges on.

It reflects as much as defines consumer behaviour

Perhaps the best way to describe what the iPad does best is Couch Computing, even though it’s not a computer in the traditional sense and you don’t have to be sat on the couch.

While over time it will likely influence consumer habits – think in-app purchases of content for newspapers and magazines and apps that nobody has dreamed up yet – as it stands today I think the iPad reflects a change in consumer behaviour whereby people access the Internet while doing other things. Such as checking email, looking up something on Wikipedia, reading news, Facebooking, while watching TV. Or while chatting to friends in the same room or on the phone or listening to music and texting on their mobile.

Teenagers, for example, multi-task all the time, and one ‘task’ is being online. Good or bad, that’s just how it is these days. The iPad fits this model of consumer behaviour.

It’s perfect for ‘casual’ anything online, while you’re doing other things.

Or Couch Computing.

It will sell really well and developers will flock to it

I’ve no doubt the iPad will sell really well. People tend to forget how well the iPod touch has done and the iPad will build on this and surpass it.

Developers are going to love the iPad, both in terms of how it stimulates their imagination but also that they can make real money on the device. The majority of the iPhone’s 140,000 apps will already run on the iPad, albeit compromised, and it won’t be long before lots of the killer apps are rewritten for the iPad. New apps that are only possible or suddenly make sense on a bigger screen will, of course, also be written.

The same way as the iPhone created the perfect storm for paid-for apps, the iPad isn’t cheap and nor will its customers be.

---
Related Articles at last100:

The unsolved Macbook Melted Key Mystery

Steve O'Hear — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:41:21 +0000

Late last night I looked down at my unibody Macbook’s keyboard and, shock-horror, the zero key had melted! There was no obvious color degradation – in other words, no sign of external burning as if something scorchingly hot had been dropped on it (I don’t smoke anyway) – but either way, the key had definitely melted. But how?

At this moment, I still have no idea. What I do know is that no other keys have been affected, but I’m guessing that the rubberized keys on the latest Apple Macbooks don’t need much heat to cave in, literally (see pic above). This, naturally, brings into question Apple’s build quality.

Or does it?

Let me know your own theory to explain the Macbook Melted Key Mystery by leaving a comment.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Without Apple’s help, Adobe building Flash to iPhone development bridge

Steve O'Hear — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 14:08:25 +0000

Building bridges, literally.

No, Adobe isn’t bringing Flash player support to iPhone. That would require cooperation from Cupertino, something that Apple CEO Steve Jobs is unlikely to sanction. Instead, the upcoming version of the latest Flash developer tools – Adobe Flash Professional CS5 – will offer Flash developers a way to output their finished creations as a native app for iPhone and iPod touch.

Since the source code is iPhone OS native, presumably through an Actionscript to Objective-C bridge, the resulting apps should qualify for submission to the iPhone App Store just as they would if they’d been built using Apple’s own development tools. This means that developers can re-factor their Flash creations for the iPhone and iPod touch, with Apple remaining in control of distribution.

In other words, while Adobe may have found a work-around of sorts for getting Flash content onto the iPhone (even if it’s no longer technically Flash), it’s hard to see how it doesn’t benefit Apple in equal measure. This isn’t Flash support as we know it – via a browser plug-in – and is likely to see tons of ‘casual’ Flash games arriving in the iPhone App Store, some of which will be paid-for apps where Apple takes a 30% cut. Adobe won’t see a penny of this directly but will hope to sell more copies of it CS5 developer tools with the wide ranging promise of ‘build once, run anywhere’.

Java anyone?

---
Related Articles at last100:

Adobe Flash seen running on Palm Pre – Netbooks, MIDs, and other smartphones also set to win (iPhone aside)

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:30:12 +0000

Adobe has long talked up its ambition to have Flash running on all manner of screens, not just the humble PC, and today the company got a lot closer to walking the walk not just talking.

Through the Open Screen Project, Adobe was already known to be working with smartphone platforms from Palm (WebOS), Nokia (Symbian) and Microsoft (Windows Mobile), along with a raft of content providers, chip makers and consumer electronics companies. Today, the company added Google and Research In Motion to the list, with relation to Android and Blackberry-powered smartphones respectively, leaving Apple’s iPhone as the odd one out regarding planned support for full Flash (or any Flash support at all).

Historically, Apple has always defended iPhone’s lack of Flash support by arguing that it’s too processor and power intensive, and that the cut down mobile version of Flash (Flash Lite) just isn’t up to the job. With Moore’s Law kicking in (faster smartphone processors) and Adobe working hard to optimize Flash for the latest mobile chips, this argument is holding less and less water. In the video demo below, we can see Flash performing pretty well on Palm’s Pre smartphone, a device that shares much under the hood with the latest iPhone 3GS.

Instead, as I’ve argued previously, Apple has a very different motive for keeping Adobe Flash away from the iPhone.

… as we all should know by now, the real reason why Apple doesn’t want to embrace Adobe’s Flash is that it would offer third-party developers an alternative “runtime” on which to develop and, perhaps more importantly, distribute apps for the iPhone, bypassing Apple’s control (and that of its partner carriers) and the iTunes App Store itself. And we can’t have that, can we?

The other big win for the Open Screen Project are the latest Netbooks and future MIDS (Mobile Internet Devices) or so-called smartbooks, reports Engadget. “Flash 10.1 will take advantage of GPU acceleration on a number of key mobile platforms, including both nVidia’s Tegra and Qualcomm’s Snapdragon alongside ION for smooth (well, theoretically smooth) 720p and 1080p video on the latest generation of netbooks and smartbooks.”

Where all of this leaves Microsoft’s own Flash competitor Silverlight on mobile is anybody’s guess, although probably not in the best of shape. While Nokia is partnering with Redmond to bring Silverlight support to Symbian, Microsoft itself is simultaneously supporting Flash for Windows Mobile, such is the anbundance of exciting Flash-powered content on the Web.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Vodafone UK lands iPhone too but Apple unlikely to sanction a price war

Steve O'Hear — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:44:48 +0000

Following yesterday’s news that mobile carrier Orange are to begin selling the iPhone here in the UK, Vodafone have announced that they too are jumping on the Cupertino bandwagon, albeit not till early 2010.

And with O2’s two-plus year monopoly on Apple’s iconic device therefore well and truly broken, overpaid analysts and most of the tech press/blogosphere have been quick to predict a pending price war for the iPhone and associated tariffs this side of the pond. However, I’m still not convinced that this will be the case.

As I’ve already argued, the carriers need the iPhone more than Apple needs them, resulting in a classic case of divide and conquer. Orange and Vodafone could afford no more to sit by and watch their high end customers flock to O2 in order to get their hands on the so-called Jesus phone. Vodafone CEO Vittorio Colao has admitted as much, telling investors that not having the iPhone has hindered the ability for the carrier to remain competitive in the UK.

So instead of one carrier signing a pact with the devil, we now have three.

Remember Apple has already achieved what Nokia, the world’s largest handset maker, has been trying to do for years: completely own the customer relationship (think marketing, post-sale services and billing). Only, as The Register reports, Apple also appears to own the carrier relationship too.

Our understanding is that Apple not only reserves the right to get involved in pricing of handsets, but also expects “partner” operators to contribute generously to Apple-controlled advertising. This is on top of the ongoing revenue share to which operators around the world have signed up. Operators used to demand exclusivity before agreeing to such things, but such is the lure of the iPhone, that Apple can call the tune without having to offer the additional inducement of an exclusive deal.

Apple already offers the iPhone through multiple carriers in many countries, but the company is very careful to maintain control of the platform, regardless of the network from which their customers get their iPhones. Apple considers iPhone users to be Apple customers – network operators are just dumb pipes to Cupertino.

The end result of Apple ‘owning’ both customer and carrier relationships, says The Register, will be “near-identical offerings, differing only in the colours of the attached [carrier] logos”.

In other words, don’t expect an iPhone price war anytime soon.

---
Related Articles at last100:

iPhone UK exclusivity to end, the future’s Orange but is it any brighter?

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:50:12 +0000

Exclusive handset offerings are certainly good for carriers and are probably good for handset makers too as they help drive up the price during negotiations – presuming there is a demand for said device in the first place. But it’s hard to see how they are ever in the interest of consumers who end up paying more through higher tariffs via the subsidy merry-go-round.

That’s because exclusives create a monopoly by any other name. In the case of the iPhone, if you want Apple’s iconic device here in the UK, you have no real choice but to become a customer of O2. Thankfully, that’s set to change with rival carrier Orange announcing that they have partnered with Apple to officially offer the iPhone.

Logically, based on my reasoning above, this added competition — the newly formed duopoly – should lead to greater competition and therefore lower prices for consumers. However, where Apple is concerned, I wouldn’t count on it. My bet is that the iPhone tariffs and up-front pricing will remain fairly close to where they are today, for the time being at least, and that Orange’s offering will be similar to O2’s. Such is demand for the iPhone, Apple is unlikely to have had to reduce what it charges either carrier in concession to ending exclusivity.

Instead, Orange will have paid ‘whatever it takes’ to secure the device as a strategy to acquire and retain high end customers who are crying out for the iPhone.

O2 the same.

(I’m basing this, in part, on reports that T-Mobile UK have been unofficially offering Apple’s device to its most profitable customers as a last ditch attempt at stopping them from leaving.)

So what will UK consumers get from the end of O2’s exclusivity? Better 3G coverage might well be the answer. Or at least a genuine choice of 3G networks.

As a side note, I was a customer of Orange UK for my first ten years of mobile. I left the carrier a few years ago not because they were a little more expensive than their cheapest rival but because they didn’t offer the handset I wanted at the time (the Nokia E61). Ironically, I could be about to leave my current carrier — 3 UK — in favor of O2 as they have the exclusive on the Palm Pre.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Spotify on iPhone approved by Apple

Steve O'Hear — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:59:59 +0000

With Apple stuck between the FCC, Eurpean Union regulators and a hard place, I’m not that surprised to see the approval of music streaming service Spotify’s iPhone app. Apple today confirmed to paidContent that Spotify (currently Europe-only) has been given the green light and will be available in the App Store “very soon”.

While many had speculated that the app might be rejected by Cupertino on the grounds of ‘duplicating’ (read: competing with) the iPhone’s built in functionality — iTunes — I was confident that, especially in the current climate, Spotify would be approved.

I predict that Apple will in the end give Spotify the green light based on several factors. Avoiding monopoly accusations being one. Spotify’s pricing model being another (the iPhone app will only be available to premium subscribers so it’s far from a free-for-all). And then there’s Apple’s kludgy multitasking solution. The latter of which means that Spotify on iPhone will be unable to run in the background. Switch to a different app and the music stops.

One thing we don’t yet know, however, is if Apple has in anyway restricted any of the features of the Spotify iPhone app, in particular the ability to cache playlists for off-line playback. This feature alone means that Spotify competes more heavily with iTunes than other streaming music apps that already exist for the iPhone.

Overall though it looks like great news for Spotify and bodes well for the future of Rhapsody’s iPhone app, which is currently pending Apple’s approval.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Real’s Rhapsody enters App Store submission hell, could bode well for Spotify?

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:58:27 +0000

Adopting a similar PR strategy to Spotify, U.S.-only music subscription service Rhapsody ($14.99-a-month) has published details of its iPhone app, mid submission process to Apple’s App Store. While submitting an app alone far from guarantees that it will ever see the light of day through Cupertino’s official channel, by showing off the app now, including a video demo (below), it does ensure that any dirty linen on Apple’s part is aired in public. It also helps to build consumer demand from existing Rhapsody subscribers who also own an iPhone in preparation for a backlash should the app be rejected.

And rejection is certainly a possibility.

While other music streaming services have been green lighted by Apple, like European-based Spotify, it’s the on-demand nature of the service that potentially competes too heavily with the iPhone maker’s own iTunes. Unlike traditional Internet radio-type offerings, subscribers can pick a specific song or album from a catalog of eight million tracks for near-instant playback.

In other words, it’s like having the largest iTunes library in the world or kinda.

That is, it would be, if Rhapsody’s iPhone app enabled you to cache playlists for offline playback when you’re outside 3G or WiFi coverage, a feature that Spotify offers, even if like Rhapsody, the app has also yet to be approved by Apple. Rhapsody says it plans to offer caching in a version 2.0 of its iPhone app, presumably taking a one step at a time with regards to App Store submission hell.

Should Rhapsody’s iPhone app be rejected, it could actually help Spotify’s case, especially in the context of the current FCC investigation into the whole App Store submission process. Spotify is a relatively new startup, albeit one backed by the major record labels, and is currently a Europe-only offering, while Real’s Rhapsody has been around for a lot longer and is an American company. Real also hasn’t been shy of upsetting Apple’s legal team in the past either.

Rhapsody on iPhone from Jamie on Vimeo.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Palm Pre to launch on O2 in the UK, just don’t mention the competition

Steve O'Hear — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:45:34 +0000

It’s now official: The Palm Pre will launch exclusively on Telefonica-owned O2 here in the UK.

When?

“In time for the holidays”, say Palm and O2, with no word yet on pricing. My guess is that we’re talking early October, enough time to ramp up for Christmas spending.

Either way, it’s a pretty long time to wait, especially since O2 will have been busy pimping its other flagship exclusive. Apple’s newly launched iPhone 3GS.

And then there’s the rest of the competition.

Handsets already on the market in the UK that will/are to varying degrees going head-to-head with the Pre and iPhone include Nokia’s N97 (see my review), which is already getting its own TV and other advertising blitz, Vodafone’s Android debut, the HTC Magic (reviewed here), and Samsung’s HD video capable touch screen monster, the i8910 HD.

But perhaps more significant are the growing number of handsets, announced or known to exist, that will debut closer to the Palm Pre’s UK release.

First out of the gate is HTC’s newest Android phone, the Hero, with its Palm Pre-esque custom User Interface. We also know of Samsung’s Android-powered I7500 (another O2 offering), Sony Ericsson’s Satio (previously known as Idou), another touch screen device but one with a headline grabbing 12 megapixel camera. There’s also the expected BlackBerry Storm 2, Sony Ericsson’s own Android debut, and likely another flagship from Nokia.

That’s one crowded smartphone market, and knowing the competitive nature of the mobile phone space here in the UK, most, if not all of these Palm Pre competitors will come highly subsidized (or made to look that way), with pricing closer to “free” with a 18-24 month contract.

---
Related Articles at last100:

After pressure from EU, Apple dumping iPhone’s Universal Dock Connector? (microUSB)

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:24:14 +0000

When news first hit that three of the leading mobile phone industry organizations had agreed on micro-USB as a mobile phone charging standard, Apple was notably absent. The iPhone maker is particularly fond of its proprietary Universal Dock Connector, you know the one that enables all sorts of third-party after market device goodness and also generates the company a nice little revenue stream through its ‘Made for iPod’ program. Today, however, the European Union (EU), after applying pressure to the industry, announced that Apple had joined competitors, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, LG, Research in Motion, Samsung and others, in agreeing to switch to the micro-USB standard from next year.

(via Rueters)

---
Related Articles at last100:

Intel and Nokia announce “long-term relationship” to develop Intel-based mobile devices

Steve O'Hear — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:46:31 +0000

This one feels like a bit of a re-announcement but over time could well amount to more. Chip maker Intel and handset maker Nokia held a joint press call today to tell the world about a new “long term relationship” to share R&D and key technologies to develop a new mobile platform or range of devices that “go beyond today’s smartphones, notebooks and netbooks”.

Oh and said devices will be powered by future Intel processors, of course.

Which, as The Register points out, sounds a lot like the Mobile Internet Devices (MIDs) Intel has been to touting for years, and very similar to Nokia’s own – albeit non-Intel based – N810 Internet tablet (see my review).

See also: Should Nokia release a Netbook?

Both companies are already investing heavily in their own Linux-based mobile operating systems and this will continue. Intel will carry on working on the development of Moblin, designed to run on Netbooks and MIDs, and Nokia will keep plugging away at Maemo, which currently powers the N810 and is also being pitched as a Plan B for Nokia should its open sourcing of Symbian OS not bear the fruits that the company hopes for. This despite both companies talking up their partnership as a way of consolidating their open source efforts.

As a side note, Intel is of course a major partner for Apple and one would presume that the company had been hopeful that sometime in the future it could persuade the iPhone maker to put ‘Intel inside’ its future phones. That ambition may have now been squashed upon recent news that Cupertino has been busily recruiting its own chip-designing team.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Vudu now offering Disney HD movies for purchase on same ‘day and date’ as Blu-ray

Steve O'Hear — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 13:19:37 +0000

Disney HD content for purchase on Vudu

Vudu (U.S.-only) is to offer new Disney HD releases for purchase through its set-top box movie service on the same “day and date” as their competing DVD/Blu-ray release. It’s the first time that Disney has broadly licensed its content in HD for sale through an online video service, beyond one-off offerings or ‘rental-only’, says Vudu. Alongside new releases, 60 library films are also being added to Vudu’s ‘for purchase’ HD catalog. Disney chose to work with Vudu, says the company, “in large part because of the [picture] quality” offered by the service.

Interestingly, Steve Jobs, the guy who runs Apple, is also Disney’s majority shareholder after the motion picture company bought animation studio Pixar a few years back. Therefore, I wonder how long it will be before iTunes secures the same access to Disney’s HD library as Vudu, if it hasn’t already.

---
Related Articles at last100: