Time and Place

Did Samsung copy Apple? I think so!

2012-01-10T23:53:00.000-08:00

I was reading a blog of RealDan called "Enough with the Samsung bashing", which defends the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit that Apple claims Samsung copied its products (iPhone and iPad).

I couldn't help to leave a quick comment, but I thought I would share my view in my blog as well:

For the "did Samsung copy Apple?" question, I look at this from an abstract level: Consider A and B are two students taking an exam with only one question (consider the exam is about solving consumer problems). They both got stuck at the question. A took it on by himself, thought really hard, made a few mistakes, and scored 80% on that exam. At the exam, B constructed a few thoughts, but rejected all his ideas. (Assume) he had an opportunity of checking on A's answer before the end of the exam ("looked over the should"), and he liked A's approach of the problem (before A finished the answer). B continued to solve the problem based on A's idea, but added his thoughts to complete the answer. B scored 95% on that exam.

In the above scenario, I think both Apple and Android fanboys would agree that B cheated A during the exam. However, if one ONLY compares the scores, no one would believe B cheated on A at the exam because B had a higher score! But sometimes, science or engineering solutions only takes one simple idea to make a huge difference. Everyone who's taken an exam had that "Oh, aha" or "Duh!" moment - you only need a "tip" or a "reminder" to get a complex puzzle solved.

Although Samsung offers more phones to consumers than Apple, most of their touchscreen phones and pads can come out from a single platform. Given Samsung's engineering resources, they literally can make hundreds of phone models per year, leveraging a single platform seed (e.g. "cheated") - adding buttons, changing button sizes and positions, changing screen sizes and display technologies, etc. But the originality remains in single digit.

Comparing Apple's iPad vs. Samsung's Galaxy Tab, the simple home button, the USB connector and charger, the tight software interaction between Apps...it only takes a few tweaks to improve and make products intuitive for the end user. Yet, these ideas take years of thoughts and experiments. Apple might have been cooking some prototypes for years. When they finally "got it" (as Steve Jobs said), Samsung and other mobile phone OEMs just take the ideas as is.

Granted, I must note that the South Korean market was way ahead of the U.S. for smart phones. Touchscreen phones were common (resistive-technology) and existed long before the iPhone was introduced. However, the hardware was still cumbersome and the software was not as intuitive (e.g. slide to unlock, and click on a phone number in an email to dial, etc.). Apple solved these user issues with a companion industrial design that's unique. I also should add that Samsung never had a "pad" before the iPad was launched, so no one should argue that the "pad" was Apple's idea.

Most importantly, arguing about a patent or an intuition is not about the exact screen size or the thickness of the phone, it's about how the solutions approach the problems and solves them. Just like the exam scenario I presented above.

Did Samsung copy Apple's industrial design? I believe so - they added own thoughts, made more phones, perhaps scored higher in the exam, but they copied and cheated on the originality nevertheless.

李开复和方舟子之争，对与错的宏观价值在哪里？

2011-11-30T08:02:00.001-08:00

这段时间，微博上炒李开复和方舟子的事情掀起了一个小高潮。我对此有些个人的想法，借此发表一下。

方舟子被国内（某些）人称作是“打假专家”。也许他确实有些作为，我且不去理会。最近方舟子在微博上说李开复的自传里中英文翻译不附，我也不去谈李开复是否有理，因为我想谈的，不是谁对谁错的问题，我只想和有兴趣的读者分享一下对这件事情的“哲学”看法。

当年，美国前总统克林顿出现性丑闻的时候，我不太理解“美国群众”的看法 – 当时美国很多喊声是让克林顿下台。我和朋友讨论这件事的时候，他们的看法是，美国人让总统下台，是因为他在大庭广众之下对着电视机，对着美国人撒谎了。（后来才知道克林顿还半夜打电话给苹果的乔布斯求建，乔布斯叫他“坦白从宽”。）

在我看来，“总统”的职责是搞好国际政治关系，搞好国家建设，搞好人民的生活水平。这是“总统”这个职位的“工作岗位职责”。管理一个国家，也许像管理一个公司，各有分工。如果一个人在公司里的表现出色，没有犯“原则上”的错误，那么他“下了班”后私生活怎么过是他的自由。（我要先强调，“私生活”应该不包括贪污腐败，因为如果一个国家是个公司，那么贪污有损公司的利润，所以算是“原则上”的错误。）在克林顿在位的八年，美国这个国家的经济和政治实力在国际上和历史上创造了一个顶峰。国家几乎没有赤字，而且美国人的平均收入和支出比例非常高，很多人都有工作，可谓“欣欣向荣”。虽然有人可以说克林顿是幸运的，他客观上赶上了美国高科技发展最灿烂的几年，可是这一切不能说和克林顿的外交政治和经济政策没有关系。所以说，克林顿算是美国历史上的一个“好”总统，他有尽到自己的“工作岗位职责”。所以当时在我看来，克林顿的性丑闻，他的私生活，应该和政治没有直接关系。是的，他对着电视机向美国人撒谎了，可是只有傻瓜才相信政治家在公众面前甚至电视机前不撒谎。其实，恰恰相反，我认为在公众面前演戏是一个政治家的必有能力。

我谈克林顿和“李开复对方舟子”的话题是否有关连？我们再回来谈李开复。首先，李开复是去大陆赚钱的。（如果有人以为李开复是因为自己为中华文化而贡献去了，那你就天真了。） “风险投资”在美国的资本主义制度下已经是玩了几十年的游戏了，但在迅速发展的中国市场还是一个相对比较新颖的商业模式。李开复以一个“导师”的角色开“创新工厂”，然后招来很多大陆的精英，以“孵化”的形式进行“风投”，这是很聪明的。一方面，李赚到了钱，但关键的是他让那些聪明的年轻人也赚到了钱。另一方面，他的形象（我在这里不讨论个人看法，也不定论“好”与“坏”）和公司的影响，让很多国内聪明，实干，却找不到创业方向和扶持的年轻人有了奋斗的目标。“风险投资”在九几年就已经进入了大陆市场，但是只有极少数的人懂得。 “李开复”的名字让很多想创业的人关注他，关注这个商业模式。

所以，宏观上来讲，李开复和他的创新工厂对中国的教育和年轻人的鼓励是有积极作用的。这是一个无法估算的“正面效应”（相信很多懂社会经济学的人能够同意我的看法。）这就和我前面举的克林顿例子联系上了 – 他们都有自己在社会上的角色，在宏观上都对社会有正面影响。那么，剩下的那些“鸡毛蒜皮”的小事真的那么重要吗？在我看来，那些参与其中，为各方争辩（翻历史，确定中英文翻译）和加油鼓励的人多少有些“短眼光”。

李开复在美国名牌大学毕业，在苹果和微软都有过经历（不论他是否和乔布斯还有盖茨共事过），这些社会机构和公司本身就是一个“过滤系统” – 只有（相对的）很出色的精英才能进入，这些经历就已经足够证明一个人的实力。相比，某些人在美国密歇根州大学拿了个博士，却没有被聘或者进入美国的顶级医疗或药物公司，拿高薪。这就说明博士和博士是有不同的。

另外，假设方舟子的分析完全是正确的，假设李开复对全世界的中国人撒谎了，假设李开复的形象一跌千丈，那么，中国那些想创业的年轻人换来了什么？当年美国人说克林顿撒谎了，民主党竞选败了，换来了十年的战争和负债。（现在很多美国人都抢着读克林顿的新书。）（某些）中国人想把李开复“搞下去”，那么他们想用什么来替换他的政治和经济形象？所以，吹没吹牛，吹了多少都是次要的，都是鸡毛蒜皮的。宏观上，对社会经济有贡献的，就可以算是“好”的，这些产物上是否有瑕疵，瑕疵的大小，相对而言（再次强调是“相对的”）没有那么重要。

我相信很多人不赞同我的看法。这些人会认为政治家撒谎是不可原谅的，（假设）在自传里吹牛是不可原谅的。很多人喜欢去找瑕疵，其实那是很容易的，而且从别人身上找毛病舒服。但是很多人忽视了创造一个带瑕疵的成功的难处。在我看来，可悲的是社会上总有那些小人，妒富嫉贤，为了己利而不择手段，自己不成就去拆别人的台。但更可悲的，是那些社会中被舆论夹在其中的人，其实他们自己的利益因那些小人而损了，却不得而知。

李宗盛的歌

2011-11-18T14:29:00.001-08:00

最近听李宗盛的《给自己的歌》，忽然想起以前就想写出的品论。

听大哥的歌，听的不是音乐，而是去品味人生。李宗盛的歌，对很多人来说是脍炙人口，而对我这个80年代来说，是哼着大哥的歌长大的。从《明明白白我的心》，《我是一只小小鸟》，到《凡人歌》，从《鬼迷心窍》，《当爱已成往事》，到《爱要怎么说出口》, 从《伤痕》，《领悟》，到《梦醒时分》，从《伤心地铁》，《爱如潮水》，到《我是真的爱你》。李宗盛的歌词和作曲不追求华丽的音韵和浮华的词句，它们体现的，是一个成熟的男人对生活的感受，对人生的感慨，对爱情的执着和对往事的回味。品赏李宗盛的歌，就像是吃一颗奇异的果子，刚放到嘴里，噘嚼无味，然而过了一会，就开始尝到酸甜苦辣咸，这种特殊的感受，让那些内心敏感的人反复揣摩，吃了一颗又一颗，听了一遍又一遍，时而开心而乐，时而犹然而泣，时而感慨而叹，时而惆怅而滞。

我想，曾经有幸握过大哥的手，得到他的签名，对我来说是一见荣幸。但我更希望能有机会告诉他，他的诸多作品影响了我的人生。谢谢他的作品给我带来的快乐，让我能找到诠释感情的空间。在我少年执狂的时候，李宗盛的歌指点了我很多人生的方向; 在我因情而伤的时候，我曾经哼唱他的歌敷治心的疮口。而在我回首人生的时候，大哥已经有好多歌曲帮我诠释了对人生的感慨。在流行乐坛里，没有几个人能够像李宗盛这样用简单的词句把生活描述的如此生动而真实，所以人们才如此喜欢李宗盛的作品。

随便找一个90年后的来问，很多人也许都不知道李宗盛是谁，让我感觉自己渐渐地变成了“老一辈”。然而“老一辈“就”老一辈“吧。也许等90年后的人到了而立之年，他们忽然听到大哥的歌，虽已时境变迁，但那些经典的歌曲仍然会让他们感到震撼。如果有一天有人问我李宗盛是谁，我会为他或她点一首《你像个孩子》：

你象个孩子似的
要我为你写首歌
一点也不理会
会有好多的苦从我心中重新来过
重新来过重新来过重新来过
而写歌容易写你太难
怕如果写了
因为想要你而有的苦苦坚持
就要被你统统发现被你统统发现
已经做了的决定
是不会再更改的了
自己也很清楚
会有很多的苦会从我心中重新来过
重新来过重新来过重新来过
而决定容易
可是等待太难
怕如果等了
这些年学会的一点点成熟稳重
就要被你通通化解
被你通通化解被你统统化解
工作是容易的赚钱是困难的
恋爱是容易的成家是困难的
相爱是容易的相处是困难的
决定是容易的可是等待是困难的
你象个孩子似的要我为你写首歌
你象个孩子似的要我为你写首歌
你象个孩子似的要我为你写首歌
你象个孩子似的

李宗盛《给自己的歌》

2011-11-13T19:55:00.001-08:00

李宗盛《给自己的歌》

想得却不可得
你奈人生何
该舍的舍不得
只顾著跟往事瞎扯
等你发现时间是贼了
它早已偷光你的选择
爱恋不过是一场高烧
思念是紧跟著的好不了的咳
是不能原谅
却无法阻挡
恨意在夜里翻墙
是空空荡荡
却嗡嗡作响
谁在你心里放冷枪
旧爱的誓言像极了一个巴掌
每当你记起一句就挨一个耳光
然后好几年都问不得闻不得女人香
往事并不如烟
是啊
在爱里念旧也不算美德
可惜恋爱不像写歌
再认真也成不了风格
我问你见过思念放过谁呢
不管你是累犯或是从无前科
我认识的只有那合久的分了
没见过分久的合
岁月　你别催
该来的我不推
该还的还　该给的我给
岁月　你别催
走远的我不追
我不过是想道尽原委
谁能告诉我这是什麼呢？
他的爱在心里埋藏了抹平了几年了仍有余威
是不能原谅
却无法阻挡
爱意在夜里翻墙
是空空荡荡
却嗡嗡作响
谁在你心里放冷枪
旧爱的誓言像极了一个巴掌
每当你记起一句就挨一个耳光
然后好几年都问不得闻不得女人香
想得却不可得
你奈人生何
想得却不可得
情爱里无智者

Google is Becoming Microsoft Starting with the New Google Reader

2011-10-31T23:30:00.000-07:00

Google updated their Google Reader interface today, and I was really disappointed with it.

I remember I was extremely disappointed 10 years ago, after installing Windows ME on my Windows 98 PC. After paying $60+ of my hard-earned money, only I realized that my PC ran slower with more useless features offered by Microsoft. In that era, Microsoft was a monopoly. I was not as angry with Microsoft as people at Netscape were, however, I was sometimes annoyed when Microsoft took every possible opportunity to "stir" their users stay with their software - things like Internet Explore and Microsoft Office.

I feel Google is now doing the same thing. I wouldn't mind as long as they keep their products innovated. However, I feel they're following the same pattern as Microsoft did - less innovation, more bad products, and tighter controls or less choices for the user.

I suppose Larry Page got some good advises from the legendary Steve Jobs, before he passed away. One of the best managing traits for business of Steve Jobs is that he can stay focused - he carefully chose the top priority projects that Apple should work on, and he made sure to execute. I feel Google is doing the same thing. Shortly after Page replaced Schmidt, he killed many dangling Google products (one of them was Google Desktop Search) and attempted to consolidate the rest and shift them towards Google's "social network" solution competing Facebook, the Google Plus. The PROBLEM is, along the way of this consolidation, Google did not bring out any innovation - they products are remained with the same set of features (or less), and they're turning less user friendly.

Take Google Reader for example - have you seen the new interface yet? It sucks. The previous Google Reader interface used blue and gray for distinguishing unread items - new items are well highlighted in color, and this makes the page simple, colorful and easy for navigation. The new Google Reader interface, on the contrary, has 3 fundamental design issues.

First, the interface wastes valuable space. Take a look at the following snapshot, the "A look at what's new in your Reader" logo is taking 3 rows of space! Combing it with the search bar, and the tabs for my browser, the user looses about one fifth of the screen size on a 14" laptop monitor.

Second, the navigation panel's color scheme is boring. Google is very much an engineering-driven company. With all due respect to the talents, they just don't have much marketing sense. This is why I, and many other people like Apple products. (No, I do not consider myself an Apple fanboy. I try to speak an objective opinion from the user's perspective.) Apple truly integrate technology intuitively - their product interfaces are welcoming. Google's product interfaces are typically simple - even Android. They can either be elegant or extremely boring, like the new Google Reader.

Third, again, color scheme. However, this is sever because it impacts my reading experiences. Take a look at the following picture - I have one unread item, but I cannot distinguish it from the rest because, well the BLACK looks very similar a DARK GRAY (as oppose to blue vs. gray in the previous interface). Seriously Google, are you assuming your customers are all color blinded?!

It's even more sad that I just spend 30min to write my rant. That's because I liked Google's products and enjoyed using them. As Google is turning into a new Microsoft, its arrogant would never allow it to care an end user like me. I lost Google Desktop Search not long ago, and I now just have to start looking for an alternative RSS reader.

如何把“愤怒的小鸟”的分数和游戏进度从旧iPhone转移到iPhone 4S

2011-10-15T15:19:00.000-07:00

我刚刚从iPhone 4升级到iPhone 4S。和许多人一样，我不常用iTunes同步我的iPhone 4。因此，新的iPhone 4S里面真的是“空白”。当我把所有以前iPhone 4的应用都搬家到iPhone 4S后，才发现所有应用程序的安排和设置要重新来过。另外，所有以前的游戏，比如我的得分和设置都没有被iTunes传到新的iPhone 4S里面。实在是悲剧！我花了很长时间玩“愤怒的小鸟”，得想个办法把我的游戏进展和分数转移到新的iPhone 4S。

经过一些研究和试验后，我发现下面的方法可以使“愤怒的小鸟”的进展和得分数据传输到新手机。我猜以同样的方法，也可以应用到把“愤怒的小鸟”从iPad移动到iPad 2等。

1. 首先，做任何事之前，一定要用iTunes备份手机，然后再尝试进行任何修改。这样如果出了问题，至少有个回落到目前状态的办法。

2。下载一个名为DiskAid 的程序（14天的免费试用)。当你把iPhone连到电脑后，它有点像“Windows资源管理器”的功能。

3。安装完成后，把iPhone 4连接到电脑上。打开DiskAid，并在菜单栏中点击“DiskAid”，然后选择“Preference”。新窗口跳开后，单击“Advanced”标签，并选择下面的选项：
- “Display all Apps even if they dont have their 'File Sharing' enabled";
- “Show root path for Apps”
- “Show hidden files and folders”

点击“Save”。之后，你应该能够看到所有存储在你的iPhone 4的应用程序。

4。查找"愤怒的小鸟" (Angry Birds) 的目录，单击“Documents”文件夹，你会看到两个需要转移的文件: highscores.lua和settings.lua。这两个文件记录你的游戏进展和得分。

5。点击“highscores.lua”和“settings.lua”的文件，右击，并选择“Copy to PC”。把它们存储在桌面上。

6。把iPhone 4和电脑断开，再连接iPhone 4S，按照上述相同的步骤找到“愤怒的小鸟”的“Documents”文件夹。然后选择DiskAid “Copies files to Device”的选项，选择存储在电脑里的“highscores.lua”和“settings.lua”文件，然后将它们移动到“Documents”文件夹。

7。完成以上之后，在iPhone 4S里打开"愤怒的小鸟" ，你应该看到所有以前的成绩已经恢复了！

我试过用以上的方法去搬移其他的游戏，都没成功。但至少“愤怒的小鸟”没问题，而且是我花的时间最多的，所以已经算是欣慰了！

How to Transfer Angry Birds Score and Progress to iPhone 4S

2011-10-15T14:39:00.000-07:00

I upgraded from an iPhone 4 to iPhone 4S. Like many people, I do not sync my iPhone 4 with iTunes regularly, and I didn't have the time or bothered to upgrade iPhone 4 to iOS5 before purchasing the iPhone 4S (if I do that, I would have to spend much time on reconfigurating the iPhone 4 after the OS upgrade).

As a result, my iPhone 4S is a "clean" phone, and my immediate problem is to configure all the Apps arrangements and settings. Quickly, I also realized that none of my game score and setting were carried over by iTunes. Specifically, I spent quite some time playing Angry Birds, and I wanted to transfer all my progress and scores to the new iPhone 4S.

After some research and trial, I discovered the following method for transferring Angry Birds progress and score data to the new phone. I think the same would work for moving or sharing Angry Birds between 2 iOS devices (e.g. moving from iPad to iPad 2, etc.). My disclaimer is that this worked for me on my case, and I cannot be responsible for any data or personal loss if you follow the procedures.

1. As a good practices, always back up your data using iTunes before attempting any modification on your iOS device, so that you will always have a path for falling back to the current state.

2. Download an application for PC called DiskAid. This is a paid application with 14-day free trail. It essentially functions as a "Windows Explorer" for your iPhone when it is connected to your computer's USB port.

3. After the installation, connect iPhone 4 to the PC. Open DiskAid, and click "DiskAid" in the menu bar, then choose “Preferences”. A new tab opens, click “Advanced” tab and make sure to check boxes for:
- “Display all Apps even if they dont have their 'File Sharing' enabled";
- “Show root path for Apps”
- “Show hidden files and folders”

Click "Save". After that, you should be able to see ALL the applications stored on your iPhone 4.

4. Find the Angry Birds directory, click the “Documents” folder, and you’ll see the two files you need to transfer, highscores.lua and settings.lua.

5. Click on the "highscores.lua" and "settings.lua" file, right-click, and choose "copy to PC". Store these files on your desktop or somewhere you would remember.

6. Remove iPhone 4 from your computer's connection, connect iPhone 4S, follow the same procedures above and open the "Documents" folder for the Angry Birds game on your iPhone 4S. Then choose the "Copies files to Device" option on DiskAid, select the "highscores.lua" and "settings.lua" files stored on your computer from the earlier process, and move them to the "Documents" folder.

7. After the above, open Angry Birds on your new iPhone 4S, and you should see that all your previous scores are restored. Enjoy continue playing the game!

I attempted to repeat the above processes for "Cut the Rope", "StreetFighter" and "iFighter" games. Unfortunately, they didn't work. However, "Angry Birds" was the move time-consumed game for me, so I'm happy it was taken care of!

iPhone 4S对比iPhone 4的升级总结

2011-10-15T00:10:00.000-07:00

今天本来是要把iPhone 4升级到iOS5，但后来考虑时间和功能升级的问题，就直接去买了一部新的iPhone 4S。从黑手机变白手机，但硬盘没加大，还是16GB。

升级之后，有诸多观察点，分享如下：

#iPhone 4S#对比#iPhone 4#: 一，两款手机外形很像。 iPhone 4S的静音键位置上移了一点，现有的手机套不一定能继续用。二，新A5处理器确实快了很多， iPhone 4S反映速度和iPad 2有的比，但因为系统内存没有增加，我觉得在跑多项应用时并不一定有明显差别（待试）。

#iPhone 4S#对比#iPhone 4#: 三，iPhone 4S的语音识别系统真的很给力，苹果确实在这里有很大突破。问：你好吗？答：我很好。问：你是谁？答，我是Siri，你应该已经知道了。问: 我（用户）是谁？答：我不知道你是谁，但是你可以在系统里设置。只要发音正确，都可以聪明解答- 真的是个秘书！

#iPhone 4S#对比#iPhone 4#: 四，新的相机功能有提高。 iPhone 4的相机远远超越iPhone 3GS ，感觉#iPhone 4S#的相机清晰度明显比iPhone 4还好很多。最关键是快了很多。以前用iPhone 4照相，等镜头准备好了，精彩的内容已经结束了。新手机一键快门（用声音键），很方便。

#iPhone 4S#对比#iPhone 4#: 五，买了iPhone 4S，从iPhone 4搬移很麻烦，尤其像我这种平时不用手机和电脑互联的。所有的应用几乎都要重设！比如邮件，无线上网密码，和很多应用的登录ID和密码都要重新输入。搞了几个小时！

#iPhone 4S#对比#iPhone 4#: 六，另外在iPhone 4里玩的游戏，进程不会自动转（比如在iPhone 4打完了Angry Bird，到了iPhone 4S里面要重来）。即使我在游戏的系统里有注册，游戏会记住我的总分和完成游戏的比例，但不自动让我恢复到另一部手机里的状态。我以前做过很多黑莓机的搬移，没这么累过！

#iPhone 4S#对比#iPhone 4#: 七，对中国客户来说，要不要升级iPhone 4S? 第一，如果你在用3GS，光照相一项功能就应该升级，但iPhone 4客户不一定需要。第二，如果你不懂英语，无法利用Siri的语音识别智能帮助，那么等2012年的iPhone 5更实际。

Does Netflix Understand the Concept of Brand Equity

2011-10-10T19:32:00.000-07:00

"Have you heard of Blockbuster?"
"Sure!"
"What about Netflix"?
"Yeah, of course!"
"How about Qwikster then?"
"..., what the hell is that?!"

You see, a while ago, Netflix's management somehow lost their mind and wanted to separate their Streaming and DVD business for some crazy reasons. In order to do so, they had to invent a new name for the DVD business, for which they decided to call "Qwikster".

Many marketers and companies well understand the concept and cherish the values of Brand Equity. "Brand equity is strategically crucial, but famously difficult to quantify", as says Wikipedia. Nevertheless, Brand Equity is important because the brand means "something" to the brand owner's customers. Companies spend millions of dollars to create brand awareness - it literally took too many years, since it was founded, for "Netflix" to become a well-known brand and replace "Blockbuster" in consumers' minds. Then, they decided to cut it in half and call one of the two pieces "Qwikster".

I got an email today from Netflix announcing that they decided to withdraw the "Qwikster" name and keep the same "Netflix" for both Streaming and DVD business. This is the right decision - but where the hell was Netflix's management BEFORE they decided to make the "Welcome Qwikster" announcement to the public? It looked to me as Netflix's board had no idea about Brand Equity - hey woke up one day and decided to toss it out.

Bottom line, it appears the Street didn't appreciate Netflix's "jerking around" as well. Netflix's stock is down 4.8% today, while ALL major U.S. stock indices had a fantastic run. A month ago, Netflix's stock was $203. It is traded at $111 today.

I'm canceling my Netflix account before their next billing period. I only have the streaming subscription, so my motivation of the cancellation is not because of the price jack. I don't think Netflix's streaming movies are as new and as widely-selectable as they claim. However, I do hope Netflix would keep their brand though, because "Qwikster" has no meaning in my mind, and I would not want to make a subscription with them should I decide to come back.

Did Apple Make a Mistake Naming The New iPhone 4S instead of 5?

2011-10-07T23:02:00.000-07:00

Apple announced Tuesday (10/4) of their latest iPhone product, the iPhone 4S. A lot of people anticipated that Apple would release an "iPhone 5" with radical updates from the existing iPhone 4 design. Thus, many called the iPhone 4S a "disappointment".

However, I do think the iPhone 4S is a radical update from today's iPhone 4 (perhaps many would disagree), it's a matter of whether Apple should have called the new phone "iPhone 4S" or "iPhone 5". I believe the outcome of the launch event could be oppositely different in an "imaginary world".

If we look at the following table, prepared by Engadget, the iPhone 4S features a new Application Processor, a new baseband radio, a new camera, and a wholly upgraded operating system. Come on, I think that's basically the entire gut set of a Smart Phone! Even though the form-factor/industrial design of the new iPhone 4S looks quite similar to that of iPhone 4, I'm almost certain that Apple has improved, if not completely solved the antenna reception issue associated with the iPhone 4.

Let me give an alternative example using car models. Given the same model year, a BMW M3 looks the same as a BMW 335 to an "average Joe", who doesn't know much about cars. However, to an auto enthusiast or a professional, a BMW M3 is almost a completely new car, designed from the ground up, compared to a standard BMW 3-series - The tires are different, chassis is different, the engines is different, the transmission is highly tuned, the intake, the exhaust, the interior material, etc., and the list goes on. On the opposite, sometimes automotive manufacturers offer "different year models" using the same car, perhaps with tiny external and internal updates. Porsche 911 is a good example, and more commonly and specifically, a 2008 Camry LE looks almost identical to a 2009 Camry LE - same engine, chassis, tire, etc.

So, what is my point, coming back to the mobile discussion? You see, mobile OEMs like Samsung, they develop a platform mobile design, but they create many mobile models using that platform and sell them at different regions for different prices. This is very common. Even if two models share exactly the same main control board (PCB) inside, they would have different "home" buttons, colors, or slightly distinguished external design. To an "average Joe" or consumer, they are different products. My question is, did Apple make a marketing mistake for not calling the new iPhone "5"?

I think Apple made a "rational" and "engineering based" decision. I guess their internal arguments are Apple is a company strongly focuses on industrial design, but the new iPhone's exterior did not change drastically from today's iPhone 4. (Jonathan Ive, what's up?!) In addition, the new iPhone does not support a brand new 4G LTE cellar network technology, and it also misses the (previously) highly anticipated NFC feature (which is already promoted by both Google for Android and Windows for Windows 8). In the end, Apple's marketing department (i.e. Jobs or Cook or Ive?) decided to follow the "iPhone 3G" to "iPhone 3GS" approach and named the new product "iPhone 4S".

However, I think Apple made a "marketing" mistake that affected the new iPhone's "product positioning". First, people or consumers were expecting "iPhone 5". Like I said above, since Apple has replaced most of the critical components inside the new phone, it's really nothing wrong with calling it the "next generation" product.

Second, I think Apple might have failed to understand (some) consumers' psychology of buying the new iPhone. For example, in the rapid growing China market, some people buy iPhone 4 for showing off because it looks different from iPhone 3GS. (I saw many Chinese used iPhone 4 as a standard mobile phone, taking no advantages of its Apps and "intelligence"!) Similarly, many Chinese are waiting for "iPhone 5", and they "need" the "iPhone 5" to look different from iPhone 4. It's "sad" or weird, but it's quite common among the people who got rich too quickly. I use Chinese consumers as an example because I travel to and do business in China often. However, I think similar cases exist everywhere in the world, only different by how often they occur. Apple can easily meet this expectation by, for example, making the home button square, larger, or shift the back-camera's position. Such little mechanical update is very similar to many mobile OEMs' practices I described above, and it would cause little impact to Apple's supply chain and manufacturing costs.

Third, I think Apple's biggest marketing mistake, which unfortunately is impossible to reverse given today's facts, is that Apple did not have Steve Jobs to present the new iPhone. Steve Jobs is a genius pitch man, bar none! I believe Jobs would have humbly position the new iPhone as a radical improvement from today's iPhone 4 (at least from a software standpoint), although they look similar, they are NOT the same. The new iPhone is a better product massaged to perfection. I believe Apple's executives sort of mentioned these during the product announcement, but they were not as smooth as what Jobs would deliver, not even close.

In summary, I think iPhone 4S is an excellent product. (No, I am not an Apple "fan boy", although I do have and use an iPhone 4.) Its hardware is great (I like my iPhone 4's form factor), the new camera looks awesome, and the new iOS5 features are really attractive. However, I think Apple made several marketing mistakes when they introduced the new iPhone. Very few knows if Steve Jobs was deeply involved and even watched the launch event of iPhone 4S, let alone if there is anyone knows whether he'd satisfied with the outcome. However, in an imaginary world, I wish I would do the following:

Make relatively minor exterior design adjustments to the new iPhone, be similar to iPhone 4, but has a distinctive difference that can be identified easily by a consumer;
Call the new iPhone as "iPhone 5";
Invite Steve Jobs to present the "iPhone 5".

Of course, nothing I said above really matters because whatever happened has done. The only way to evaluate and measure the result of the iPhone 4S launch is to check Apple's iPhone shipment numbers during it's next shareholder update.

I thought about writing this blog on the day of Apple's product announcement. Unfortunately, Steve Jobs passed away on Wednesday. Now, I only wish iPhone 4S would be a fantastic success, for Apple and for Steve Jobs.

US - China Trade Visualization

2011-09-14T12:16:00.000-07:00

Infographic by Visual News

Google, Discontinuing Google Desktop is a Mistake

2011-09-03T17:55:00.000-07:00

Among the list of Google products that Google plan to discontinue, Google Desktop is the least I'd see it go. I think Google is making a mistake of discontinuing Google Desktop.

According to Google's blog, below is their reason for discontinuing Google Desktop:

Desktop: In the last few years, there’s been a huge shift from local to cloud-based storage and computing, as well as the integration of search and gadget functionality into most modern operating systems. People now have instant access to their data, whether online or offline. As this was the goal of Google Desktop, the product will be discontinued on September 14, including all the associated APIs, services, plugins, gadgets and support.

I agree that there is a "huge" shift from local to cloud-based storage and computing. However, I think Google over estimated the speed of "cloud adoption" among computer user. I also think Google completely missed the benefit of Google Desktop's potential in Enterprise business.

In the Consumer market, most people store pictures, music and movies in their local hard drives. Picasa does a great job of find and organizing pictures on the hard drive, and most people have a preferred and consistent way of managing their entertainment files - iTune or dedicated folders.

However, in the Enterprise market, people store mostly documents in their local hard drives - things like emails, office documents (World, Excel, PowerPoints) and other proprietary information. For corporate security policy and technology cost reasons, most American corporations have not yet custom the applications of cloud computing. That means either they back up information in company servers, or relying on employees PC hard drives. Finding out a specific piece of information among these files was extremely painful before Google Desktop was available. PC users, which is still the majority of all computer users, should know that Windows' "Find" is almost useless and painfully slow. Windows 7 has made huge improvements on its ability of locating files quickly, but it still lacks the simple and elegant offer from Google Desktop. Similarly, finding a piece of information among the thousands of emails in Outlook is equally bad. Outlook searches by folders instead of the entire email database.

I use Google Desktop on a daily basis. Sometime, I try to find a specific email written or received several quarters back. I remember a few keywords related to the conversation, but I no longer recall the email's subject, and during which time frame I filed that email to a local folder. Using Outlook 2007's search button would sometimes drive me crazy. In these situations, Google Desktop is my time saver. A double-click of Ctrl, and a few seconds later, I can open the email or any related document in its original application (e.g. Outlook or Microsoft Word), and I can resend, attach or continue the topic of discussions very quickly.

First, I don't believe many American corporation would move to cloud computing as quickly. The benefits of cloud computing is very clear, but due to the overall economical situation, IT budget control is a realistic issue. Also, implementing, training and adopting new IT technologies take time. Moving to cloud simply takes time.

Second, cloud computing require network/Internet access. This is a "given" situation among American corporations and consumers, but believe or not, I think it's still a very expensive and luxurious thing in many countries. Countries like Japan or South Korea are the leaders in wireless and wired infrastructure coverage, but other countries like China and India are still far behind. Without sophisticated networking hardware and infrastructure, cloud computing would reduce productivity without effective offline access. Thus, I once argue that there are many corporations and people in the world store information on local hard drives, which could benefit from using a "local" search engine for locating information.

In either way, Google has the right of terminating their product whenever they want to because they were offered free. However, I think there is much more Google can do to improve Google Desktop search. Above all, people still need a "desktop" to access information, regardless where it resides. As for me, I hope to keep using Google Desktop until I no longer can find and download its installation file.

Why HP Is Better Off to Sell Their PC Business Than a Spin Off

2011-08-30T13:07:00.000-07:00

In my opinion, spinning off HP's PC business as a separate company is bad for 3 reasons:

1. Brand Equity Loss. "HP" means technology and innovation to many people. This iconic company has been contributing to American' technology growth since it was founded in the silicon valley. Consumers and business "dig" HP's PC because the brand means quality and performance. Should HP spins off their PC business, the new company will no longer be recognized as the same as "HP". If brand equity is lost, so does business. Good luck for hoping a Best Buy customer associate explaining to the customers that this X-brand PC is just the same as a HP product.

2. Reduced Cost Efficiency. "HP" as a whole has very high efficiency of leveraging their supply and manufacturing in cost control. When HP negotiates with their suppliers, from component vendors to system integrators (a.k.a. ODM), their suppliers see their business potential in the entire "HP pie". Not only HP has PC business, they also make printers, servers and other system infrastructure equipment. For a lot of their vendors, many of them apply the business strategies of losing money or breaking even at the PC division, and hope for making money from HP's other divisions after "getting their foot in the door". Similar situation exists for HP's manufacturing facilities. However, if HP spins off their PC business, I think HP would keep their high end Server business associated with their software IT solutions (think of Oracle, they bought Sun for their hardware). The result is that the new spin-off company no longer has the same bargaining power in front the vendors and ODMs. They can no longer enjoy extremely low manufacturing costs because the ODMs, like Inventec, Pegatron, Quanta, etc., will now have to deal with HP separately for the high-margin business. Without world-class cost control and manufacturing efficiency, the new spin-off company is deemed for failure competing against Dell.

3. Ever Shrinking Business Potentials. PC is at its middle age. Sad to say, but its market size is shrinking. The once glory days of personal computer are long gone. Spinning off a business with the intention of winning in the PC market is boring and risky at the best. Knowing that the business's future is shrinking, no investor will even dream for the new company to grow, let along fast. The PC industry is highly consolidated due to severe price erosion, and most OEM players are in Asia - Lenovo, Fang Zheng, Tong Fang, Asus, Acer, Toshiba, Sony, Pansonic, NEC, Fujitsu, etc. The last two standing American companies are Dell and HP, while HP has one of its knee on the ground.

HP successfully made the spin-off Agilent. Agilent successfully made the spin-off Avago. But I highly doubt HP will be successful spinning of their PC business. Or if they're successful (i.e. cashing out), the new company may not be successful.

Here is my proposal, should HP's board finally decides to spin-off their PC business, please rename the company Compaq.

Angry Birds' Score Rules - Is It Fair?

2011-08-29T15:57:00.000-07:00

"Angry Birds" is arguably the most successful game to date based on a mobile platform. People love to play Angry Birds, from young to old. The game's rules are fairly simple, and it serves well as a time-wasting entertainment.

Here is an interesting question/thought I have, solely based on my experiences with the game - are Angry Birds' score rules fair? I think not.

Well, for one, in order to judge something "fair" or "not fair", one needs to know the contents of the rules. Unfortunately, I didn't have the time and celebrity-significance of getting that information from Angry Bird's developers. Let me summarize the "rules of principles" (read NOT the entire ruling algorithm), based on my experiences, as the following:

- All Angry Birds players should know that the game has two related scoring systems. One is the actual "score", which is mathematically calculated based on how the game is played - how many pigs are killed, how many blocks are destroyed, and how many birds are used, etc. Once the level is completed (i.e. all pigs are killed), the 2nd system rates the player's overall performance and assigns a Star level out of three. Three Stars (3-Star) is the best.
- I claimed the above two systems are related because I think people would generally agree that, playing in the same episode at the same level, the higher the final score, the higher the Star level.
- The game awards a "Total Destruction" achievement if a player achieves 3-Star in all levels in each episode. In order to achieve 3-Star for all levels, players are addicted of coming back and improving their performances or scores for each level.

So far, I think most readers would agree with what I said above. But I think there are two additional ruling conditions that make the game's score rules "unfair". Based on my guess, they are the following:
- In order to achieve 3-Star for a particular level, the player must get a score higher than the previous record. For example, if the player got 160,000 points and 2-Star at a particular level, the player must get higher than 160,000 points for the possibility of winning a 3-Star when the level is played. In addition,
- the level has to be "played" in a particular way, (possibly) pre-defined by Angry Birds developers.

The last point above makes me drawing the conclusion that Angry Birds score rules are not necessarily "fair". Let me explain.

First, I don't believe the game assigns Star based on the final score in a level. I said the score and the Star are related, but the Star levels are not assigned by score ranges. For example, if the score is below 120,000, 1-Star; if the score is between 120,001 and 150,000, 2-Star; and if the score is higher than 150,000, 3-Star. This is NOT the case. I have not compared my scores with my friends for a particular level. However, I think it's possible that the game gives 2-Star to me and 3-Star to another person for a particular level, even if my highest score for that level is higher than the other person's. If I play the same level over and over again, and if I had achieved 2-Star for that level before, there is no guarantee that I would get a 3-Star no matter how much higher my new score is compared to my previous record. Getting a higher score than the previous record is one of the required conditions for getting a 3-Star, but it's not the only condition.

For the second condition, I think the game assigns Star level based on play patterns - how well the player executes the physics of the birds, and at what sequences the birds are used. In my experience, it is much easier to achieve 3-Star for some levels, even at the 1st attempt. I believe I can improve the scores for these levels (e.g. destroy more blocks, etc.) should I spend more time. However, I think I was given 3-Star because I "did it correctly" at the first attempts. In the opposite scenarios, the game simply refuses of giving 3-Star no matter how much "destruction" is made in a level, or how high the score is. In one particular example, Episode 1, Level 2, I attempted but failed many times for the 3-Star. My score record kept growing, but I always received 2-Star. When I finally "got it", I realized that I must over-shoot the red bird and let it kill a pig after bouncing from the wall. The game finally gave me the 3-Star because I think I followed "the right way". In another example, Episode 17, Level 7, I was able to kill all pigs using only two birds (many attempts and a little luck), with a total destruction of most concrete and wood blocks. I got bonus for the yellow bird and red bird I didn't use (10,000 each), and I scored 122,580 as a record for that level. I thought that was pretty high and pretty good, but I was given 2-Star (maybe the game thinks I was too lucky?). And I have not figured out how to achieve 3-Star for that level yet.

The above is perhaps read as boring and random. I wonder if there is any die-hard Angry Birds players ever paid attentions to these details. Too me, Angry Birds' Star-assignment is like a little black magic. The game rules are simple, but the scoring rules are not. When a product is defined, it is always important to strategize how the customers will perceive the final product. Some times, some perspectives of a product is designed to be "confusing" to customers (e.g. is there a correlation between the material cost of a skincare product and its retail price). In this case, I wonder if Angry Birds developers purposely made the Star levels difficult and relatively random, so that people would keep coming back and spend more time on the game.

Either way though, whether its score rules are fair, Angry Birds is still an excellent, entertaining, well designed mobile game.

Acer Chairman is Wrong - Tablet is Here to Stay and Prosper

2011-08-25T18:48:00.000-07:00

According to DigiTimes, Acer chairman JT Wang believes "tablet PC fever" is "cool down". When this story was reported by Slashdot, it was called "Acer CEO Declares a Tablets Bubble". I think Acer's chairman is dead wrong.

I talked that HP made a fatal mistake when the company decided to enter the tablet market. The situation is perhaps better in the Android world because most of other tablet OEMs adapt Google's tablet OS. The combined mass creates a comparable Apps developer community to Apple's. However, just because HP decided to quit the tablet market, it does not imply that the consumer no longer need tablets. And certainly, there is no "tablet bubble"!

Looking at Apple's iPad sales in quantity, the numbers grew quarter by quarter and year by year. Apple is projected to sell 30Mu iPad in 2H'11. There are many out there waiting for the iPad 3 coming with higher resolution, from existing iPad and iPad 2 owners, as well as those "I don't have an iPad" consumers. I believe consumers love and want to buy tablets, at the right price and with iPad-comparable performances. The reason I say so is because in the tablet market, there is only one player dominating with huge profits, Apple. That says market demand is larger than supply, and competitions cannot keep up.

Apple basically caught their competitions by surprise. No one knew Apple worked on the product for several years. After iPad was released, Apple's competitors scramble to follow, but they had much less time for both the hardware and software development. In combination, the final products are offered at comparable prices to the iPad, but with sluggish software performance. Just because the PC OEMs cannot compete, it doesn't mean there is a "bubble". Nobody is throwing money away like crazy as in a true "bubble" situation. And for those who can deliver a tablet fitting consumer needs, there is still plenty of money to be made.

I believe in the next a couple of years, we should see strong contenders to Apple's iPad (3?). I think that pack would be led by a Nokia-made tablet running Windows 8 and a Motorola Mobile-made tablet running Android. For the rest, Samsung, hTC, LG, Asus and even Acer, they should either quit tablet and stay with PC, or become much better in their designs. Just don't call it a "bubble".

How I Convinced a Colleague to Join Weibo

2011-08-25T17:27:00.000-07:00

Some people might heard of Weibo. It literary means "micro blog" in Chinese, which is basically, you know, Twitter! Although there are many Chinese social media companies try to replicate the Twitter's success, they were luckily blessed because Twitter is blocked out from the majority of Chinese Internet users. Sina.com was the first to introduce "Wei Bo" in China, and since then the word "Weibo" is recognized among the users and became widely popular.

At a business dinner with one of my colleagues in Shenzhen, I asked the question whether they use Weibo. And I was stunned to hear a quick "no" from a colleague at similar age. With over 100 Million subscribers at that time, Sina's Weibo by itself is already a white-hot topic among many Chinese citizens and is especially among the 20-40 years old. I asked my colleague why, and his answers was that he was too busy to "waste" time on tracking and listening strangers online.

I then put my "techie" hat on and tried tried to convince him that Weibo is about sharing information with more transparency and efficiency. My colleague argued how busy his life is. He travels often as a marketing person. He visits customers during the day and answers emails in the evening. He has a new born baby that cries at night, and he has to spend most of his weekend helping his wife with housework. Where is the time and energy left for Weibo?! The arguments flied back and forth, and I even dragged another lady at the dinner table who's also a Weibo activist. He could not be convinced.

I decided to give a last try and took a different approach. Knowing that Chinese parents constantly search for safe milk powder after the "contamination-gate" took place in China, I asked my colleague if he would be interested in finding where he could buy imported, safe milk powder quickly and easily. "Of course" was the quick and easy answer I expected. Thereafter, I really didn't have to sell much once I realized my customer's "needs". I told him that he could easily find out from Weibo by searching the key phrases. There are people on Weibo want to promote and sell their milk powder. There are also many groups of Chinese parents on Weibo that share their milk powder shopping experiences. Although I've never tried myself for none of these, I was pretty certain of my assumption at the time.

The story goes that after a couple of month, I visited Shenzhen again and had another lunch with the same guy. He told me he joined Weibo that night when I told him about Weibo would help him find good milk powder quicker, and he later found it was indeed very interesting to "play with". He followed a few celebrities and told me that he saw different personalities of the celebrities from his previous perceptions.

I am not a sales person for Weibo or Sina, but since I believe the product's value in life, I wanted to share it with people who also can use it in better ways. I convinced him of its value by understanding his needs, and I called that a home-run for marketing!

HP did what others not dare

2011-08-24T18:53:00.000-07:00

The story of HP quitting the tablet market is no longer news. Tech world has a much faster clock rate than many other industries. Things happened a week ago can be obsolete, but I think this story will remain as a marketing textbook classic.

The truth is HP made a fatal mistake. Just because almost every other competitor attempts to take a slice from the "iPie", it does not mean HP can win a feasible business out of the competitions. The TouchPad was poorly designed from an industrial standpoint. Its WebOS does not have the critical mass compared to iOS and Android. Thus, there is much less commitment from the developer community to contribute 3rd party Apps. And Apps is what makes Apple iPad stands out among the competitions. Releasing the TouchPad and fighting the battle against Motorola, Samsung, hTC and many others simply means HP would have to continue pouring money into the business for the sake of keep its gambling seat.

There of course is a blame war ongoing. Many would say HP should have not purchased Palm in the first place. Arguably, Palm's later mobile phones are not that great also, let alone the TouchPad. And the general manger whoever decided to enter the table competition should get fired. Many would also say that HP's board should also take responsibilities. All true, but it does not matter anymore. In business, this is considered as sunk cost. Mistakes were made, resources and capitals were spent, and nobody can reverse it. The key is what To do now. I think HP's board made a plausible decision that they have the guts of calling for a quit without further wasting of company's resource.

In many business opportunities I saw, some companies do not have the dare to admit their marketing mistakes. The marketing people didn't do the job properly (e.g. draw a "big pie") or didn't dare to stop their management from madly chasing competitions. They kept fighting the war even though they knew there would be no money made no matter how long it lasts. Companies do not easily quit for many reasons. Beyond the internal politics (a money-losing business is always a trap topic in the board room), companies are typically hesitate because quitting early often leads to credibility damage at the customers. However, sometimes, admitting a mistake and re-strategize the company can save huge amount of resources and set things right once for all. That's what I believe HP did. For an innovation driven company like HP, living with 20-30% gross margin for a product is not acceptable. HP has to "up sale" itself as a technology provider, a solution vendor, and a business partner for their customers. Killing the TouchPad and easing out the PC marketing marks a transition point for the company.

No one knows if HP's new CEO and the board can pull this off. For a company that's worth $60 Billion (before the 20% stock price drop), steering this gigantic ship is no easy job. There are the two obvious possibilities in ten years. If HP succeed of transitioning itself and become another IBM-like company, quitting the consumer electronics market would be marked as a classic business success story. Else, this move will be considered as a self-sabotage action that severally damages HP's business future.

Either way, I believe HP did what many others not dare.

惠普与WebOS

2011-08-22T16:19:00.000-07:00

惠普一年半前花12亿买PALM, 为的就是WebOS. 如今惠普宣布退出个人电脑和平板电脑市场, 停产WebOS, 就说明那12亿全都打水漂了. 最惨的是Jonathan Rubinstein, 他被称为iPod之父, 曾经是苹果的顶尖人物. 他离开乔布斯去PALM, 结果兵败惠普. 大将领兵, 才能重要, 兵力和军资更重要. 侍明主为俊杰也!

Chevy Camaro at a Dealership - Super Bowl Commercial

2011-02-01T12:29:00.000-08:00

Speculations of Outcomes from Verizon’s iPhone Launch

2011-01-13T12:42:00.001-08:00

When Verizon's iPhone's available in Feb, people will jump into "real-life" testing. At this moment, I'm guessing there are 3 possible outcomes of the Verizon's iPhone Launch.

The 1^st would be what I think most media and people "believe" today – the Verizon iPhone has great reception. The iPhone will finally be a completed smart phone, no longer limped by AT&T's poor coverage that hinges people from switching over from their brands. Perhaps there will be a couple of complaints from individual consumer. But if the general crowd is happy with the new phone, it will be another wave of laughter on AT&T and how miserable it was when iPhone lovers had no choice.

The 2^nd scenario would be the opposite of the above, and that is if Verizon fails general public's expectations. You see, expectation floats, and it rises higher and higher as more speculation and gossip charm in. People who are not familiar with the potential shortfalls of the CDMA technology might see things they didn't expect – for example, "simultaneous voice / data over 3G" is expected to be NOT available from Verizon. I believe the Verizon iPhone has better reception/voice quality than the AT&T iPhone, but SOME people may say it's no big deal.

The 3^rd one is something a little wild. What if, both AT&T and Verizon's iPhones have issues with reception, with the Verizon iPhone performing slightly better? Going back to the issue of "Antenna Gate" related to the iPhone 4's industrial design, as referred by Steve Jobs himself, it would be a disaster for Apple because people believe Verizon's network quality and technology. I assume Apple would try to fix the signal attenuation issue in the CDMA version of the iPhone, although Apple claims the slight change in the new Verizon iPhone's industrial design was only and specifically for adapting the CDMA technology.

Should I rank the likelihood of above, I'd still arrange them in the same sequence as is. Some insiders might have already tried the new Verizon iPhone (e.g. Apple and Verizon employees). And I'm sure media like WSJ would have already gotten a "pre-briefing" of the performance kick. I would just hope the media is correct and that the Verizon iPhone is the savior of the iPhone lovers. May the 26% existing AT&T customers be happier in their everyday life, thanks to Verizon. For me, I couldn't wait to read posts from Blogs that really runs a suite of RF tests and showcase the differences.

Shi Zi Lou

2011-01-07T10:48:00.001-08:00

Originally uploaded by tonycgxia

A famous restaurant in Nanjing China

ARM Cortex-M3 powered coffee machine with NXP

2010-12-17T08:45:00.000-08:00

美国兵4分钟拼装吉普车

2010-09-09T21:13:00.000-07:00

联想的"乐phone"果然乐不起来

2010-08-19T18:04:00.001-07:00

我在今天四月的时候预测过联想的"乐phone"销量超不过六十万只. 果然不出我所料, 联想的"乐phone"在今天第二季度的半个季度销售量"超过10万部" - 这是刚刚来自瘾科技中文版的消息. 通常一只手机的销售趋势都是只有在刚刚上市的时候才是最劲猛的, 所以就算联想一个季度能卖出二十万部, 我现在仍然不觉得"乐phone"的"寿命销量"能够超过六十万部. 杨元庆想卖出一百万部, 我觉得他高估了自己公司的实力.

我曾经亲耳听到一个联想中管对我说他如何如何喜欢苹果的产品, 大夸特夸自己有Mac Book等等. 如果连自己公司的人都不喜欢自己的产品, 它怎么能受到消费者的亲睐呢?

Tap Water Contains Traces of Medicine?

2010-08-06T15:35:00.000-07:00