Tom, thanks. Steve and I (and a few others of us) got pinged a while
back for stressing the Ecology of all our digital devices and their
data .. not just "web" but TV and phones and the whole shebang. Even
including books (we really like the kindle).
This guy, not only writes well, but understands this ecology.
-- Owen
On Jan 29, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Tom Johnson wrote:
this is for you, pal.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: O'Reilly Radar - Insight, analysis, and research about
emerging technologies. <radar+feedbur...@oreilly.com>
Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:37 AM
Subject: O'Reilly Radar
To: jtjohnson...@gmail.com
O'Reilly Radar
Check Mate: Apple's iPad and Google's Next Move
Posted: 28 Jan 2010 07:29 AM PST
"I think this will appeal to the Apple acolytes, but this is
essentially just a really big iPod Touch," said Charles Golvin, an
analyst at Forrester Research, adding that he expected the iPad to
mostly cannibalize the sales of other Apple products. - The New York
Times
There is an axiom that the biggest game-changers often result from
ideas that, at first blush, seem easy to dismiss. So it goes with
yesterday's launch of the iPad, Apple's entry into what they call
the 'third category' of device -- the middle ground that exists
between smartphone and laptop.
Why is the iPad (seemingly) so easy to dismiss? Well, for one, it is
an evolutionary device when conventional wisdom suggests that it
needs to be a revolutionary device to find a wedge into a new market.
After all, the iPod and iPhone that came before it were truly
revolutionary devices, offering wholly new functionality, delivering
new value chains, and fundamentally changing the relationship that
consumers had with, first their media (in the case of iPod) and then
their communications (in the case of iPhone).
By contrast, the iPad truly does look like a really big iPod Touch,
and given its evolutionary nature, it begs the question of who buys
this thing and why, especially if you already have a smartphone and
a laptop?
Confusing the Tail with the Dog
Thus, a reasoned analysis is that the iPad is to the iPhone & iPod
Touch as the MacBook Air is to the MacBook. In other words, a cool
product with a devoted base of happy customers, but in relative
terms, a niche product in Apple's arsenal of rainmakers.
In fact, the opinion of the above-referred Forrester analyst is
hardly unique. Quite the contrary. Check out the discussion boards
across Engadget, AppleInsider, and Silicon Alley, to name a few, and
do a twitter search on iPad, and the sentiment is 5 to 1 to the
negative, with recurring phrases like 'fail,' 'yawn,' 'over-hyped'
and 'apple blew it.' Heck, even two-thirds of the audience invited
to Apple's own event look bored, offering only feint applause when
prompted by Apple CEO, Steve Jobs.
So is Apple hosed? Did they blow it? Not even close.
But before I get into the 'Why,' let me present, to set some
contrast, a favorite saying within Google. Google, after all, is
Apple's open 'ish' frienemy, and the company who so many cite as
being 'destined' to beat Apple in the mobile wars (if interested in
that fork, check out 'Android's Inevitability and the Missing Leg').
If what's good for Google is not so good for Apple, then perhaps the
opposite might be true, right?
In any event, within Google they like to say that what is good for
the Web is good for Google, the premise being that the more the Web
evolves as the core fabric from which applications, communications,
entertainment, social engagement and information exchange
proliferate around, the better it is for Google as the company that
organizes it, makes it searchable, and then monetizes it via
advertising.
So if what is good for the Web is what is good for Google, then what
is good for Apple?
It's the Platform, Stupid!
As I am listening to and watching Steve Jobs deliver what very well
could be his last launch of an entirely new product for the same
company that he birthed (with Steve Wozniak) 34 years ago (in 1976),
I am struggling with two conflicting sensibilities.
One is that some of the heart-stopping, holy-sh-t, gaming-changing
aspects of Apple's tablet creation still lie below the surface, like
an iceberg that only reveals a fraction of its actual mass above the
waterline. (More on that in a bit.)
In other words, add me to the list of expectant Kool Aid drinkers
struggling (then) with a cupful of 'that's it?' punch.
But, far more resonant is a second sense that a rapidly rising tide
called iPhone Platform is lifting all boats derived from it; namely
iPhone, iPod Touch and now iPad (and I still very much believe that
Apple TV is due for a near-term reboot to plug into the same
ecosystem).
And here's the thing, if this was a presidential debate between
Apple and Google for the hearts and minds of consumers, developers,
media creators, publishers and businesses of all sizes, then the
launch of the iPad is Apple's closing argument for why they should
be #1 (watch the full video, and let me know if you agree//disagree).
Consider this: A $50 billion company that is so profitable that in
the last quarter alone they dropped another $5.8 billion of cash
into their coffers (now they have $40 billion in cash). Assertion
one: not only do we build great products, but we run our business
the right way (read about Apple's Q1, 2010 Earnings Call HERE).
No less, this same company has been the game-changing innovator at
not only the inception of personal computing and not only in
transforming the music business, but also the mobile phone.
Assertion two: we are the only game-changing innovator who has both
stood the test of time and repeatedly matched past successes with
new successes.
But, here's the kicker; in iPad, Apple is presenting multiple levels
of leverage that virtually assure that they will be successful with
this new entrant. Why? Because even if iPad (somewhat) cannibalizes
sales of another Apple device, as the afore-mentioned Forrester
analyst proffers, it's money going out of one Apple pocket and into
another.
In fact, far from shying away from this truth, Apple wholeheartedly
embraces it, with Steve Jobs specifically noting in yesterday's
presentation that "because we've shipped over 75M iPhones and iPod
Touches, there are already 75M people who know how to use the iPad."
A note aside, this premise that existing iPhone and iPod Touch users
simply pick up the iPad and know what to do with it is a concept
that not only has been affirmed by virtually everyone I know who has
played with the device, but is an idea that should be wholly
unsurprising to anyone that currently owns either an iPod Touch or
iPhone.
Now, perhaps you might argue that that's fool's gold, tapping into a
mine that is destined to run dry, but that belies the fact that
Apple just recently sold their 250 millionth iPod, so I would argue
that 'there's a lot more gold in them thar hills.'
And that is the key thing that you should take from the iPad launch
event; namely, that being evolutionary and doing the same thing over
again - by creating a derivative product from the original mastering
effort (just as the iPod and iTunes gave rise to iPhone, iPod Touch
and App Store) - is good strategy when the strategy not only is
working in the market, but also rewards the investment your
customers and partners have already made in your ecosystem.
Along those lines, virtually the entire library of 140,000 iPhone
Apps will run unmodified in iPad (with pixel for pixel accuracy in a
black box, or pixel-double running in full-screen), a decision that
takes care of both current iPhone Developers and iPhone/iPod Touch
Owners. As you might expect, the same is true with iTunes libraries.
I can tell you that when I bought a second iPod Touch for my kids
over the holidays, the premise that my entire library of apps and
media (not to mention, photos) from my first iPod Touch could
seamlessly be re-used in the new device was a bit of an 'AHA'
moment. Leverage, after all, is a good thing.
Mind you, this is independent of the iPad-specific optimizations
that developers can take advantage of within the updated SDK (a note
aside, now with two flagship devices that are not phones, calling
the platform 'iPhone Platform' seems decidedly out of date, and I
noticed that in referring to the updated SDK, Jobs & Company
referred to it as the SDK, versus iPhone SDK. Expect a developer
event, likely tied to the release of iPhone OS 4.0, that brings some
order to the naming confusion, in addition to formally conveying
clearer constructs for harmonizing development across the two
different form-factors).
Okay, one last chess move laid out by Apple yesterday, and
seemingly, a more focused shot across the bow of Google, and their
loosely-coupled approach, was the assertion that "we're the only
company that can deliver this type of solution with this price and
performance."
This point, which is also amplified on the Apple web site (check out
the iPad intro video, which feels in its presentation style akin to
getting the co-creators of iPad to sign their name on the product),
is bolstered by the fact that the iPad is the first device using
Apple's own proprietary silicon - the A4 chip, the first offspring
of the P.A. Semi acquisition - yet another piece in Apple's
proprietary integration chain, including battery technology (iPad
touts ten-hour battery life), hardware design, software, developer
tools and online services.
Google, your move.
The Good, Bad and (not so) Ugly of iPad
Let's start with the good. The consistent refrain from users that
have actually played with the device is that it is fast,
surprisingly fast. As John Gruber of Daring Fireball notes,
"everyone I spoke to in the press room was raving first and foremost
about the speed. None of us could shut up about it. It feels
impossibly fast." In other words, unlike netbooks, there is nothing
underpowered about this device.
Secondly, is the fact that with over 1,000 sensors in the touch-
based user-interface, Apple is effectively doubling down on the core
belief that they have found the future of personal computing, and it
doesn't involve a mouse and a physical keyboard.
In fact, noteworthy is that not only did Apple deign to completely
re-design it's iWork productivity suite for the iPad (it looks very
functional,), but a number of the demos spotlighted how having a
larger touch-based user interface facilitates all sorts of
interesting innovation around virtual controller schemas, since you
simply have more real estate to play with, and the level of sensor
density translates to a high degree of responsiveness.
For example, EA's re-work of their 'Need for Speed SHIFT' racing
game showcases the ability to quickly toggle between the inside and
outside of a race car, and the ability to change gears from the
inside of the car, something unimaginable in the much smaller iPhone.
Similarly, MLB (Major League Baseball) showcased their MLB app,
which overlays graphics, information feeds, video clips and live
game programming in a way that is simultaneously immersive,
interactive and highly entertaining. It is both suggestive of a
media-centric killer app for the IPad and a bellwether for the
future of TV Anywhere, yet another reason that I believe Apple's
ambitions with respect to Apple TV remain very much alive.
Anecdotal, to be sure, but also pointing in the Apple TV direction,
is the fact that iPad applications will be able to display content
specifically targeted to an external display connected to the iPad
(via the Dock connector), a capability that was never allowed with
the iPhone SDK.
But the final bit of noteworthy, and compelling, good about iPad is
that this just feels like the device that real people (read: non-
techies) are going to flock to. For one, the intimidation factor of
a tiny device, something that held back Baby Boomers, like my
parents, suddenly becomes a non-issue, and, of course, there is the
matter of the price.
At a $499 entry point, mass consumer is an achievable goal in due
time (plus, no pricing overhang for competitors to swoop in).
So what's not to like? Well, for starters, Apple was slim on the
details behind their vision for tablet-optimized applications,
although it's worth noting that the iPhone SDK didn't actually
launch into beta until a full eight months after the release of the
first iPhone. In other words, the developer side of the iPad story
has a second act that is forthcoming, no doubt gated by the extreme
secrecy leading up to the device's launch.
Similarly, while iPad lays clear Apple's ambition to pursue the e-
book market aggressively (they demonstrated a nice iBooks player and
added an iBook Store to complement the iTunes and App Store
marketplaces), they demonstrated virtually nothing that harnesses
the touch, tilt, rich media and programmatic elements that they can
bring to the re-invention of print media.
This could be gated on the aforementioned developer's event or on
difficulties with the print media industry, but it's worth level
setting that what they launched is, more or less, iterative to the
Kindle's value proposition (Jobs even gave props to Amazon in the
presentation) than a complete disruptor.
Other random quibbles are the lack of a camera in iPad (for video
conferencing, augmented reality apps and plain old photo taking); a
lackluster carrier value proposition on the 3G version of the iPad;
and for some, the continued (and I assume permanent) lack of support
for Adobe Flash. But these are quibbles, not what I consider
showstoppers that stand in the way of iPad's eventual success.
Netting it out: The best way to think about iPad is as the device
that inspired Steve Jobs to create the iPhone and the iPod Touch.
It's the vaunted 3.0 vision of a 1.0 deliverable that began its
public life when the first generation of iPhone launched only two-
and-a-half years ago, and as I wrote about previously HERE, it is a
product that is deeply personal to Steve Jobs, and I believe the
final signature product on an amazing career. I would view
yesterday's launch in that light.
Related Posts:
Rebooting the Book: One iPad at a Time
iPad: The 'Boomer' Tablet
It's in the Bag! The Apple Tablet Computing Device
The Chess Masters: Apple versus Google
Holy Sh-t! Apple's Halo Effect
You are subscribed to email updates from O'Reilly Radar - Insight,
analysis, and research about emerging technologies.
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. Email
delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
--
==========================================
J. T. Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
www.analyticjournalism.com
505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
http://www.jtjohnson.com t...@jtjohnson.com
"Be Your Own Publisher"
http://indiepubwest.com
==========================================
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org