Mobile Ambition

iPhone 4 vs. iPhone 3GS - Fight

2010-12-12T17:41:00.000-08:00

Quick iPhone Fight

Let me say that other than the dropped calls (which is part phone and part AT&T), I have LOVED my iPhone 3Gs. It has been a stalwart performer. Feels good in the hand, is responsive and has done everything that I have ever thought a handheld device ought to do...

But, my battery finally died...so I decided to upgrade to the iPhone 4. And the difference is amazing and underwhelming at the same time.

The Good:

The screen is simply amazing. Photos are stunning. Web pages look perfect.

The camera is a revelation. Simple, with fast shutter times, the camera creates images that are worthy of cameras rather than phones. The HDR mode (takes three pictures and blends the best parts of each to make a great image) is excellent, and the inclusion of a flash is just great. I have taken more photos in an afternoon than I do in a month because the images are that much better.

The presence of easy to access volume buttons is really nice.

FaceTime is also really very delightful.

What isn't so good:

The feel in your hand. The phone is kind of angular and sharp. I really miss the rounded plastic back of the 3Gs. I don't want to hold the iPhone 4.

The phone experience is really great...other than the physicality of the phone...

Thinking About Kid's Phones

2010-11-16T14:00:00.000-08:00

So, just the other day, my son asked when he could get a cell phone. And, of course, I thought "You are 8. Who are you going to call?" And then the answer was clear..."Me." He wants a phone because it is a cool toy that is like his Nintendo DSi. But I want him to have a phone so that I can find him on the playground, or at his friend's house. I want a phone to keep the connection when I can't see him.

It is a big responsibility for a kid...a phone. To know to use it carefully and manage minutes and texts...that is a lot for an 8 year old. But the convenience and security of it are meaningful for me. This is a mobile umbilical cord...not so that he is smothered, but so that he can have his independence (even at 8 that is crucial) and know that he can be responsible and responsive when he is called.

So, that seals it. He gets a phone...at 8. Uggh. That is so young.

So, do we get him a phone on my plan, or does he get his own from a place like Kajeet that specializes in kids cell phones? Do any of you have any experience there?

Does the World Need Another Mobile Platform?

2010-10-12T08:59:00.000-07:00

So, Windows Mobile was DEAD. Just plain old dead. It was killed off by Apple's iOS, and Android. These significantly more modern operating systems were just killing off smartphone operating systems left and right.

Symbian? See ya.

Palm OS. Puh-leese. (Which is not to say that the WebOS isn't solid...)

Blackberry. Uh...well, it hasn't died yet, but it is creaking under its own emphasis on e-mail. All the cool kids have moved on from that.

And yesterday, Steve Balmer unleashed Windows 7 phones.

And truly, if you are a Windows user, and groove on the Windows Live phenomenon, these phones are pretty terrific. Free storage via SkyDrive, free OTA syncing...very good social integration, reasonable browser (not as good at iPhone or Android, but OK, frankly).

So, does the world need another phone OS?

Well, goodness gracious, it does!

I am an iPhone user. I love it.

Android phones have amazing functionality and potential, but are a little hampered by carrier oversight, but as a group they are a very exiting development.

And these new Windows phones add a great wrinkle to the eco-system because they graciously integrate with the users other computing life (Windows) and add a modern sense of social integration and easy top level nav.

Will Windows 7 phones win? I seriously doubt it. But they will keep Apple moving ahead, and force all of the OEMs to upgrade to the latest versions of Android. Think of Windows 7 phones as a pest. They have potential. They have some samrts, but they are late to the party and hampered by an overly done OS. But they have marketing muscle, marketing money, and a vision. That will push the others ahead, just to insure that they stay a pest and not a player.

Dell, The Aero, The Streak, The Looking Glass & More

2010-09-27T07:20:00.000-07:00

Dell is jumping into mobile devices and services in a huge way. Of course it has sold Dell branded netbooks and notebooks with carrier data services, but with the introduction of The Streak, the Aero and Michael Dell's very non-chalant introduction of a 7 inch tablet, Dell is positioning itself as a significant player, both domestically and internationally of connected devices that fill various niches. None of the devices that I have seen from Dell will dramatically change the paradigm as one could argue the iPad has, BUT, Dell is working the smaller niche markets with enough flair and focus to become, in aggregate, a strong player in the market. Much like in the PC world, I am not sure that Dell dominates any conversation with it's products, but because of volume and breadth, it is a huge force.

So, too, will it be in mobile devices. In fact, Dell sells third party cell phones through its own storefront. Dell is covering all of its bases. If you want a Streak, an Android phone, a messaging phone, a netbook with carrier access, or the latest 4G hotspot, Dell is your man. Watch out Best Buy...

So, I am back at it...

2010-09-20T09:29:00.000-07:00

There is just so much happening in mobile, from the OS wars to the rise of tablet computing, I need to keep my thoughts segregated. Of course I will keep going with the other blog (www.timkilroy.com) but look for more coming from Mobile Ambition!

Moving over to www.timkilroy.com

2009-04-30T08:19:00.000-07:00

Hey gang, after writing mostly about mobile for a couple of years, my aspirations have grown, and I am writing about mobile, search engine optimization, social media, internet marketing and more over at www.timkilroy.com....hope to see you there!

iPhone Jailbreaking Illegal?

2009-02-13T13:23:00.000-08:00

From our friends over at TUAW, the latest reports are that Apple considers jailbreaking a violation of their copyright. Now listen, I am a big Apple fan. I only use Windows computers under duress, and I simply love my iPhone (and my iPod, and my wife's MacBook, and the 9 other Apple computers that I have owned). I think Apple is a great company that makes wonderful products.

But come on...seriously? Jailbreaking is a violation of your copyright?

I believe that taking oneself too seriously is one of the most serious infringements to human happiness. If you really believe that what you do is so important that it can't be done with humor and good sharing, well then, frankly you perhaps need to head back to kindergarten for some manners.

I understand that Apple spent umpteen billion dollars creating the iPhone. I understand that they want to protect their investment. I also understand that Apple has a vision for the way the device works. I get that stuff. I appreciate it. But seriously, some enterprising geeks want to tweak your software and you complain to the trademark office? Holy Christmas! I am astounded by Apple's decision to pursue this kind of action. Perhaps there are more significant issues of technology secrecy and business protection here, but on the simple face of it, this is just plain silly. Apple has clearly gone bonkers here...

Once you buy the device, it is yours to do with what you will. Sure, jailbroken phones do potentially derive Apple of some revenue (especially if they are older iPhones that have a rev-sharing plan with ATT) but for new phones, since this is a traditional subsidized phone sale, Apple is completely whole, even if someone jailbreaks a phone. They are still getting that subsidy payment from ATT. (This could be a complaint by ATT made through Apple to stop jailbreaking, I suppose).

The only folks that I can imagine Apple really going after are people that sell jailbreaking software (if there are any). Then I can understand that Apple is going after a company that facilitates the act of jailbreaking, which Apple feels impinges on its copyright. And, in order to maintain the copyright on something, you need to zealously defend it. But really, can you imagine if cars had copyrights, that Ford or Toyota or GM would go after the millions of tuners and mechanics out there? Does Microsoft freak out if people tweak Windows? I guess I am lost as to Apple's reasoning. It just doesn't make any sense to me. In fact, since I am not a copyright lawyer, I have to think that Apple should be pretty proud of themselves. They have created a device that millions are thrilled with and use as Apple intended. And then there are thousands (millions?) of people who are so inspired by by the promise of the device that Apple had made that they go out of their way to expand on its capabilities. Jailbreaking, to me, is a real compliment. Jailbreaking is using the building blocks of Cupertino's imagination to create a unique user experience. Should Apple be mad? I don't think so. They ought to be honored.

Hey, Apple, stop taking yourself so seriously...this just makes you seem vain and vituperative. (And if it makes you feel better, I was tempted to jailbreak my iPhone after hearing about this, but T-Mobile has even worse coverage that ATT where I live, so my iPhone is just as you made it...are you happy now?)

Why are the "cross-platform" mobile developers dying?

2009-02-10T10:50:00.001-08:00

Last week, a startup that I worked for moved on to the great start up graveyard. They had a "write once, run anywhere platform". It was a terrific idea with great technology. Another, larger company I worked for is now 20% of its former size. They create rich multi-media applications that scale massively. They are chugging along, but it seems like the sure-fire glory that they were headed towards won't materialize. Action Engine famously imploded.

The premise behind all of these companies is sound. Create a platform that allows publishers to gracefully navigate the fragmented handset landscape and achieve massive distribution through a single publishing feed. This makes sense: a single XML feed gets your content onto millions of handsets across manufacturer, carrier, etc. So why are these companies falling apart.

Contrary to your instinct, it has nothing to do with the economy (well maybe a little). Primarily it is the fault of two factors:

Pricing
Friction

Pricing: The platform companies typically work in reverse of usual logic. The cost of developing an application on one of these platforms typically costs MORE than if you were to hire someone to develop the application from scratch. (This ma in y not universally be true, but humor me.) The reasoning behind this is that the platform is scalable, has built-in billing and subscription management solutions, advanced multi-media encoding and decoding, etc, etc, etc. The feature set can be very deep. But because of the complexity of accommodating hundreds of handsets, the cost of the platform is enormous. It might actually be cheaper, if less elegant, to build unique instances of the application for specific handsets. That seems simply CRAZY. So why are these amazing application development platforms fall apart? Let's look at some corollaries in the web world: WordPress and Drupal. Both are fundamentally sound web development platforms. They are flexible, offer 100% standards compliance, and are found everywhere from blog sites to major e-commerce sites to rich media sites. These development platforms have been huge successes because they are flexible, scalable and FREE. Unlike they mobile developers, the organizations behind Drupal and WordPresss are looking to monetize the platforms, but rather the applications and services that results from the platform.

Imagine if the mobile application development environment was open-sourced, and if the platform developers didn't charge for access to their platform, but rather just the professional services. The cost of a large scale mobile development project might be cut in half, or even more. The game that has been learned so well on the web has yet to be learned in mobile. Few will pay for your software, they'd rather pay for the results. No one will pay for Drupal, but thousands of site will pay for someone to develop in Drupal. Give away the platform, and get paid for your work. That will drive more business. It may be too little too late if someone were to open source their platform (are you listening folks that I used to work with...open source) but it would be a breath of fresh air. (And, if you make the platform FREE to develop on (iPhone SDK or Android anyone?) imagine how much more exciting the opportunity is for creative deployments when the content owner doesn't need to worry about a $200K platform licensing fee?)

The second reason why these folks have/are failed/failing is friction. The friction is the non-standard application of the underlying platform (Java, mainly) and business friction in the mobile ecosystem. There are just too many secrets, too many tricks, and too many "exceptions" in mobile development because of proprietary interests. Everyone in the system wants control of the experience and the money that results from the experience. Handset folks develop funky implementations of Java so that they can control the final experience, carriers block certain functionality because they want to maintain the integrity of the network and monetize specific functionalities, and developers make it hard on themselves for insisting that their secret sauce is better than someone else's.

The pricing and the friction make large scale mobile development a nearly impossible solution that is so full of compromises that the end result isn't satisfactory. The eco-system will only get better as the development tools get more standardized (iPhone SDK) and the platforms get more open source (Android) or the manufacturer starts to actively court and support developers (BlackBerry).

The mobile handset landscape is very fragmented, and the mobile application development community mirrors it completely. I challenge any of the platform development players to open source their platform. Proprietary platforms will only result in greater fragmentation. Open platforms are the only way to create massive, lasting change, and frankly, the company that does this best could become THE standard in the industry. Billions and billions of dollars of corporate and personal wealth are at stake. Somebody please take the risk.

Palm Pre: Too Little Too Late?

2009-01-09T06:42:00.000-08:00

I was ALWAYS a huge Palm fan. I had a Palm III, IIIx, V, VII, Treo 600 & Treo 650. They completely rocked, all of them. Then Palm ran into trouble, couldn't get their OS working and with $100m from Elevation Partners, they snagged Jon Rubenstein and then went into hiding. Until yesterday...when the unleashed the Palm Pre .

Frankly, the Pre looks HOT. It has a unique "deck of cards" interface, and the OS is completely geared to connectivity, with all kinds of hooks into the internet. Threaded SMS and instant message is nice, a unified inbox is nice (are you listening Apple?), the Webkit-based browser is very nice. The hardware seems really terrific. All in all, I think this is a great-looking, potentially awesome device. If it came from RIM, or Microsoft, or even Nokia, it could be considered a "game-changer" for that company. But it is from Palm, the OS/Hardware company that gave up their own OS to run Windows Mobile. This is from a company that hasn't released a device that moves them dramatically ahead since the Treo 600 (everything else has been iterative). So is the Palm Pre too little too late, or is it exactly the bold advancement that get Palm back into smartphone prominence (after all, they created the category)?

Here is my opinion. It is too little to late. The phone will sell like hotcakes. It will rocket to the top of Sprint's bestsellers (see you later, Samsung Instinct). It will add some needed revenue and clients to both Sprint and Palm. But will it make a big enough difference? I wouldn't think so. The impact that any device that isn't a wild jump ahead of everything else of the market isn't going to change the playing field. Palm did it with the Treo, Moto did it with the RAZR, RIM did it with the Blackberry, and Apple is doing it with the iPhone. Unless the Pre is a dramatic advancement on the iPhone (which it doesn't seem to be, it seems competitive with the iPhone on a feature level), then it can't change the category. And, the category is so competitive that anything short of a game changer amounts to incremental customer acquisition. And the stakes are really high. Look what has happened with the Blackberry Storm. It is a wildly popular device that has been ridiculed by a lot of the press and has had 4 software updates since it launched a month ago. Buggy, not-well-implemented features simply aren't tolerated. The bar is set really high. Palm can certainly meet the bar, but being as good as Apple or RIM isn't good enough.

To win at this game, you need to change the paradigm. And while the Pre changes Palm's paradigm, it simply seems to get Palm competitive with the market. While that isn't a bad spot to be in, Palm's reduced visibility over the last 3 years really hurts them in the minds of consumers and businesses. (And let's not talk about developers, there are very few Palm developers in the mobile world. Few mobile platform companies and few big gaming companies even think about Palm.) So, while the WebOS and the Pre look great, and may make people respect Palm a little more, they don't change the market. And without that, I think that the competition is too tough. Better than you used to be and competitive with the market simply won't cut it. You have to be dramatically better.

Good luck Palm. You were great. And, well, I stopped buying Palm products years ago because they simply weren't getting better. And now that they have, I have moved on. I am an iPhone guy now. And, I suspect, Palm, that a lot of your audience has moved on. I will always remember you fondly. But, frankly, I just don't feel that way about you any more.

The Rise of Social Media, Mobile Style

2008-12-10T02:55:00.000-08:00

I just recently wrote about how Twitter has become my default source of conversation. My company is virtual, meaning that we are always mobile. I have a home office, or sometimes I work at the local cafe (where my wife won the local Apple Pie Bake-Off!), but I never use a desktop computer, haven't been reliant on a big corporation infrastructure since 2000, so I am always mobile. Mobility has its advantages. I can work where I wish, when I wish, and often, if I wish. But there is a drawback to not being tied to a place. There is no water cooler discussion. There are no office shenanigans (I am not sure that my kids clamoring to play games on my iPhone count as office mayhem). So, increasingly, being mobile is about creating a mesh of relationships that must be forced into existence and continually fed to grow. When you live in a town with as many dairy cows as people, the chances that you will run into a hard-charging mobile aficionado who thinks about Web 2.0 (3.0?) who can be your go-to sounding board are pretty slim. So, I must drive relationships and create remote connections that are valuable and lasting. This is different than creating friends. Friends are rare. But social networks are critical to business, information and community.

I was just reading with great interest, Charlene Li's posting on The Future of Social Media . She paints a great picture of social networks that are aware of what you do rather than what you profile. So, for instance, Facebook would be able to see that you e-mail or Tweet or IM your friend, Susan, on a daily basis. Facebook would make you two friends automatically. LinkedIn would know that you work with Bob, so you'd automatically join in each other's network. That is a fantastic notion, and, I suspect, where we are headed.

But what about today? How do mobile workers create this loose mesh of social contacts and relationships. Here are a few ways that I do, and that make my life richer. And, I use all of these from my laptop or iPhone, and I am always on the move:

Twitter : It is my constant companion. Frankly, I am a little shy about posting things like "I am headed to the Mall to return my Old Navy sweater" This seems like a bit of grinding minutiae that I don't even care about. But as a source of inspiration, news, and provocation, I have found nothing more exciting. I use TweetDeck on my laptop and Twinkle on my iPhone.
GMail Contacts: The suggested contacts feature. while not revolutionary, is really nice. It reminds me of whom I am communicating with at the moment and that spurs me to connect with them.
Facebook : Frankly, I use Facebook almost exclusively via my iPhone. I love catching up on the photos of my distant friends. Facebook, for me, is more about keeping up with my real friends, more than social network contacts. And for me, the most important part about Facebook is looking at and uploading photos. Love it.
TripIt : I travel often, and TripIt lets me see where my friends and professional colleagues (who have also opted into TripIt) are traveling. It would be infinitely cooler if this were integrated into my personal profile on Facebook, or wherever, but it keeps me in touch with others on the go.
Yelp : Like Facebook, I almost always use Yelp via mobile. It helps me decide where to eat or grab coffee when I am someplace new. I follow a few Yelpers in various cities. In this case, I am largely a lurker, not contributing to the discussion, but benefiting from the aggregate experiences. Perhaps I will get more active. I just have soooo many things to update. (And OpenTable is pretty good too)
Hulu /You Tube : While not really a social activity, traveling brings with it some missed television shows. I can almost always find them on Hulu or YouTube. You Tube, with its commenting features, is vastly superior than Hulu in a social way, but the content is better on Hulu.
Instant Messaging: There was a time, specifically when I worked in a big company, that instant messaging was all the rage. Now I use it sporadically, but Skype and GTalk are wonderful phone replacements.

These are the tools that I use, everyday, to make my world both smaller and bigger. What do you use?

How I Came To Love Twitter

2008-12-08T10:55:00.000-08:00

It was just about a year ago, in my Obligatory Year End Post that I highlighted Twitter as a service that I wish would die. Well, fast forward 50 weeks, and I am a regular tweeter (@timkilroy). I have TweetDeck on my laptop and Twinkle on my iPhone. In fact, Twitter has become a more emotionally important mobile activity than e-mail. (E-mail is usually about work, and Twitter is an active conversation. Frankly, Twitter just appeals to the AAD monkey in my head that is constantly looking for some great, interesting thing to ponder.)

Twitter, especially in its mobile component, allows me the opportunity to engage with folks in the UK, Egypt, SF, wherever. I suddenly have conversations with an incredibly diverse array of folks. I have had questions answered about Drupal , had conversations about Dustin Pedroia , and learned of a friend's major life event via Twitter. It is more real-time than Facebook, more conversational that e-mail, and more diverse than you might find on a single focus chat board (like AppleInsider or something).

I think the change for me has come from the growth in population on Twitter. There is enough of an audience for Twitter to be a tool, for Twitter to become a community, and for Twitter to take on a customizable voice. Most of the folks that I follow are talking about their interests, their professional opinions, and the exciting discoveries that they make. It has become a critical information for me. Frankly, when Twitter goes down, I am depressed. I miss the constant stream of conversation.

Twitter is definitely NOT on my list of services that ought to die. I want to add more voices to the conversation!

M-Commerce Arrives (Finally): Amazon iPhone Mobile Client

2008-12-03T11:40:00.000-08:00

Finally, there is something really exciting to talk about in mobile. Well, not finally, as I have been talking about this since 2005, but M-Commerce has arrived in a really well integrated fashion on mobile, Amazon Mobile. Let's run down the quick list of hits and misses in m-commerce, and then, let's see where Amazon Mobile points us.

Hits (Let's honest, none of these are really hits, your Mom has never heard of any of them...but I bet she's heard of Amazon):
ScanBuy: The granddaddy of mobile commerce allows the user to take a photo of a barcode and get back some results. Used to be clunky, but now is pretty useful, and the ScanBuy technology is pretty promising on a lot of fronts. 2-D barcode reading as mobile marketing device has some interesting promise, but their ScanLife m-commerce (well, not really the commerce part) comparison shopping service has been available for a long time and set the standard.

S'Lifter: S'lifter took a novel approach to m-commerce. They aggregated local stock levels of real world retailers and returned comparison shopping results in a stock and location aware fashion. Nice approach. It has some good success, available via Sprint and Virgin Mobile (and maybe others). Big issues are friction around getting inventory levels from retailers and no way to close the loop on a purchase. (How does a retailer know that you found the product via S'Lifter?) Would be terrific if integrated with a buy online pick up in store idea. (Disclaimer, I used to work for S'Lifter...I think they are terrific people that work really hard and have a good vision.)

That is about it. There are thousands of misses. Obopay, MobileLime, the list goes on and on.

So why has m-commerce not become a significant channel? Well, there are two obvious reasons carriers and retail point of sale issues. So, whatever. Carriers got in the way. They are starting to get out of the way. Eventually they will. Retail point of sale is a bigger issue. Commerce via mobile (using the mobile device as a payment channel) is a nearly intractable problem because of the infrastructure needed to support it. (Imagine every 7-11 or Macy's with an NFC terminal attached to their POS...impossible).

But, there is this in-between world of delayed fulfilment via mobile that Amazon is hitting really well. It isn't a new idea, because lots of retailers (including Amazon) have had WAP sites where you could buy goods via mobile devices for a long time. But Amazon takes things to a new level by leveraging the strengths of mobile.

Amazon has created the "Remember" function which allows you to take a picture of an item with your iPhone camera. The image is sent to Amazon, crunched, munged and played with and in a few minutes you get an e-mail with a link for to your item in the iPhone app or the web. I did it with my Jawbone headset sitting on my desk. It analyzed the photo (not a good one, mind you) and found my headset in a different color. It took about 5 minutes. Perhaps longer than I want if I want to do some comparison shopping in a store, but perfect if you see something while you are out and want to check it out later.

Perhaps, best of all, Amazon uses its One-Click checkout and automatically handles the payment and shipping. I suspect that later iterations will use your Amazon address book to let you send things to other people.

And, Amazon is now letting other merchants use their checkout...this is the start of something terrific. It has taken a few weeks, but I am jazzed about mobile again!

Nothing New in Mobile?

2008-11-17T09:22:00.000-08:00

The G1 came out. Hooray! The iPhone is the best selling phone in the US. Hooray! And, the Blackberry Storm is on its way! Hooray!

So, why do I feel like there is just nothing new in mobile? We have the rise of exciting new hardware and software environments. We are seeing the lowest common denominator in mobile capability rise exponentially. The average feature phone today is really pretty powerful. So, with all of this capability and computational power, why aren't we seeing a radical shift in our daily lives? Why, for instance, am I writing this blog on my laptop instead of my iPhone? Come to think of it, why do I even have a laptop?

The issue, more than anything, comes down to three essential items:

Ergonomics: My eyes are 41, and my iPhone screen just isn't big enough to show me all that I need to see in a document or spreadsheet. The zoom is great, but it isn't sufficient for serious working. The keyboard is the same. My typing speed on a PC is pretty poor, but on a smartphone, it is really insufficient.
Network Speed: My EDGE-based iPhone just isn't fast enough for real browsing. (It isn't fast enough on WiFi either. My Blackberry (I have an old one...) and feature phones (an LG and a RAZR) are horribly slow.
Storage: I prefer to keep things in the cloud. It just makes sense to me to have someone else worry about the hardware upkeep. On my laptop, there is ample speed to keep all of my docs in Google Docs, all of my e-mail & calendar in GMail, my Photos on Mobile Me and Flickr and my ToDos at Remember the Milk. But in a situation where access to the cloud is too slow (see #2) it means that I need to keep stuff local. My iPhone at 16G is good, but when we get to 64 or 128 it will be a lot better. The BB and phones? Forget it. There isn't enough room to keep a decent photo, never mind mail, calendar, photos, music, etc.

So those are the reasons why I feel kind of stuck and fundamentally unexcited about new hardware that is iterative and incremental. For mobile to really, truly become the informational, social, and entertainment platform it can be, we need a breakthrough in shape, speed and size. I think that a jump in speed would be great, so maybe WiMax or LTE is the breakthrough that will change it all?

But today, I am feeling like my phones (all 6 of them) aren't an adequate solution to my desire (need?) to be mobile, productive and informed.

I need passion and excitement, I need to hear about all of the exciting things you see in mobile today that get you jazzed. Maybe I am just missing it?

Microsoft to Buy RIM???

2008-10-10T10:15:00.000-07:00

OK, gang, let's not panic. Microsoft may be thinking about buying RIM if the stock slide continues. This is potentially a market changing move. (And, it may trigger some kind of anti-competitive issues, but we will let the lawyers decide that). In 2Q 2008, RIM surpassed WinMo in market share, and they doubled their market share over the previous year. With the Bold and Storm making waves, I think that the RIM market share is set to add another 50% growth in the coming year. So, what does this potential acquisition mean for Microsoft? First, it would give them a growth juggernaut, something that WinMo hasn't been in the past 12-24 months. Interestingly, the software strategies of the companies have been on a collision course. MS has been honing the mobile capabilities of Exchange to compete with Blackberry. Owning the Blackberry technology would truly put MS in the mobile e-mail drivers seat. RIM's recent push into mobile multimedia with their 88XX and beyond series, have really been making a RIM device a consumer hardware choice, too, not just an enterprise play. Microsoft, too, is pushing ahead as much as possible into the consumer space, with Zune, and other efforts. These guys are rushing for the same space. So, the strategy makes sense for MS (perhaps significantly less so for RIM, but cash is king these days). The piece of this that doesn't fit, to me, is the hardware component. RIM designed handsets and the Blackberry OS are intertwined. Microsoft isn't a handset manufacturer. In fact, becoming a handset manufacturer puts them in direct competition with their Windows Mobile licensees. The natural turn of events would be to turn the Blackberry OS into a licensable hunk of software. This seems like an unwieldy and treacherous undertaking that is likely to result in an OS that needs to make compromises in order to be successful. If the handset design falls to outsiders, I can almost guarantee that the cool, immediate, graceful integration that makes a Blackberry a Blackberry will be severely diminished. On the positive side for RIM, suddenly they would have even deeper access to Exchange which can only make their enterprise offering better. Further, I think that some of the issues that RIM has had with Blackberry service failing might be alleviated by a company that has the depth of experience in running large scale operations that Microsoft has. That could be a service boon for RIM lovers. What is your take? I, for one, hope that this never happens. RIM is an innovative company that might get lost inside of MS.

Wait, What's That? Another App Store?!?

2008-10-07T13:04:00.000-07:00

Hello Sportsfans! While the world celebrates the ascension of the Red Sox to the next round of the MLB Playoffs to face the vaunted Tampa Bay Rays, there is more mobile news worth talking about. RIM is launching an App Store for BlackBerry! That is hot on the heels of the startling news that T-Mo/Google are launching an App Store for Android! And that follows the launch of the App Store for iPhone!

So, is this anything REALLY new? I don't think so.As far as I remember, Handango has had an App Store for years. I remember how cool it was in 2004/5 when I could download a client onto my Palm Treo 600 and buy an app over the air! That was simply incredible! So futuristic, so advanced, so amazing!

What I am wondering is why it wasn't exciting to everyone then. Do any of the app stores break any new ground that Handango or even Zingy! (oops, I mean Vindigo) didn't back in the day? I'm not so sure? And, sports fans, are these app stores any better than the carrier deck? To tell you the truth, they really aren't. The interfaces are definitely better. The buying process is much smoother, but the concepts are exactly the same. Someone aggregates all the appropriate applications for your device and makes them available for sale.

What is different today is who owns the App Store. Years ago, the carrier was the gatekeeper of what could or could not be sold (and for feature phones, they still are). Then, for smartphones, Handango was the master. And today, the master is the phone manufacturer, Apple, RIM and for all intents and purposes, Google. Is this a dramatic shift? Well maybe.

In the dark days of carrier control, carriers were king makers, allowing only those applications that they blessed to be sold. There were strict guidelines regarding performance, audience size and potential revenue for that title to the carrier. Handango stretched that a bit, giving fairly good terms to the developers. But they still controlled the merchandising and had a "pay to play" mentality. Today's App Stores are run by more benevolent dictators, embracing some flavor of openness. And they view the app stores as opportunities to create better experiences on their devices. I suspect that few of the App Store owners will make significant money on their stores, regardless of how many apps they sell. And, mostly, that is because they are in the business of selling phones, not third party software.

In the future, the App Store model will start to die, just as the carrier deck has started to fade. More developers will become publishers, and more software will be made that is attractive, essential and compelling, and these developers won't have to share with the App Store.They will drive the sales themselves.

The App Store is a vibrant new(?) development that is a flash in the pan. And developers, get ready. Soon enough you are going to have to learn how to market your wares yourself. Hey, I think I just found a growth industry. Imagine that on a day Ben Bernanke says the we are in a world of hurt.

Verizon Tries No Contract Engagements

2008-09-25T07:16:00.001-07:00

In an interesting twist from Verizon, a company that has traditionally focused on being closed and in control, they have introduced no contract service plans. The general gist of this is that you pay full price for your hardware and there is no contract obligation. This is very European of them!

This is the plan that ATT and Apple should have engaged in for the original iPhone, which was purchased without carrier subsidy. But like all non-jailbroken Gen 1 iPhones, I am tied to a 2 year ATT contract.

Sure, folks like Sprint and T-Mo have had some kind of no-contract plan in place for a while, but the tend to be special plans, or have a higher monthly price that contracted plans. Verizon has taken a huge step forward in creating a fairly frictionless marketplace. (In a true frictionless marketplace, consumers could use any phone on any network and change carriers atany time without penalty.) Verizon has really mitigated its risk here because the only place one can go with a Verizon CDMA phone is to Sprint, and frankly, I haven't heard anyone clamoring to sign up with Sprint in ages. So Verizon is pretty safe.

This option does completely open the flood gates for Verizon's Any Phone program that they announced earlier in the year. For a certain group of customers who wish to have a special device, once the handset is approved for use on the Verizon network, you could buy a phone directly from a retailer or manufacturer and jump on Verizon with no contractual risk.

That is pretty sweet!

The (Un) Importance of the Android Google G1

2008-09-24T09:35:00.000-07:00

I think that the new Android-powered G1 is awesome. It is open. It has a ton of features, and it is built from the ground up to be futzed with. It is meant to be tinkered with, expanded upon, grown, shaped, morphed and transmorgrified into a powerful platform.

Who cares? Android doesn't matter. Neither does the iPhone. WinMo? Forget about it? Linux? Puh-leese.

Why don't these things matter? Well, hyping an OS or a device is like saying that your Dell laptop is better than my Sony, or that my iMac is better than your Gateway. The only things that matter are the browsers. Hardware and the OS don't really matter. The only thing that matters is how well your mobile data device can access the cloud. Opera, Webkit, Mobile Safari, Chrome Lite, and hopefully soon Firefox Mobile, these are the only things that matter.

On my PC, the only application I use is the browser. (On my PC, I like Chrome, and on my Mac I use Firefox.) On my phone (which is an iPhone) the only application I use regularly is the browser (and the Mail app, but it just pulls down GMail). All of the other apps on my phone are just interesting ways to pull down data from the cloud. Google Maps on the iPhone is just a single purpose browser for maps.google.com. My @Bat from MLB is just a single purpose browser that delivers the MLB WAP site. Facebook, Twitter, etc. they are all just tweaked browsers.

Larry Ellison and his failed NIC plan wasn't wrong, he was just early. With the rise of Netbooks and smartphones, it is all about the cloud. Locally stored data and local computing power are modestly anachronistic. In the mobile world, as long as a phone can make and receive calls, almost all other data functions are completely reliant on the connection to the cloud. Stick Opera on any phone an it immediately gets better. It gets you more access to the world. Build the data features of the phone around a great browser and your OS doesn't matter.

And that, my friends, is the (Un)Importance of the Android Google G1. (But Webkit and Chrome Lite, and Mobile Safari, and Opera, and mobile Mozilla are the most important developments in mobile history since the voice channel).

Mobile Video Rant #2

2008-08-26T14:16:00.000-07:00

OK, this isn't a huge, well thought out treatise where I clearly state my objectives, supply pure reason and rationale, but rather just a big complaint. Like the web world before it, mobile is full of fairly random "standards" that are incompatible. And, in the last few years, web video has settled on largely a de facto standard, Flash. Sure, there is plenty of QuickTime and Windows Media stuff out there, some Silverlight and a smattering of Divx and a couple of others. For the most part, however, most web browsers and PCs have all of the stuff that you need to play video that you run into...not 100% true, but for the vast majority, their computer recognizes the file type and picks the right player and the video just happens.

In the world of mobile, that almost never happens. Yes, there are some companies that do HTTP streaming of video that can play in a Java app. There are others that use RTSP, and leverage the best quality that they can. But, there needs to be some level of transcoding that happens to the videos before they are playable on the mobile device. And without a mobile version of Flash, or Silverlight, or some relatively hardware independent way of displaying mobile video that is widely accepted, mobile video will not flourish the way that it ought. And this fact frustrates me.

In mobile video, we have the typical issues of mobile life. You have content owners, distributors, developers, and carriers typically competing for a slice of the revenue stream. And, as we've mentioned before, discrete subscription for mobile video isn't likely to get to the tens or hundreds of millions in the United States. Indiscrete subscriptions, like Sprint's Everything plan are likely a better route to massive adoption. But web video (outside of, ehem, "adult" content where the subscription model is still abundant) did not take off until there was a site that did all of the transcoding, and presentation layer stuff for you: YouTube.

There is no mobile version of You Tube. There are smatterings of content that are suitable (VCast, for instance, has good, deep content, but it is subscription-based). And there will be ad-supported video on demand solutions coming soon. But there is still no mobile video tipping point. Could mobile Hulu be the solution? Could a better mobile You Tube do it? Will it be a mobile only solution that suprises us all? I am not sure.

Here is what I do know:

From a technical standpoint, mobile video software just ain't that hard
Hardware that acceptably supports mobile video is abundant
No one has the vision (or muscle) to make video central to the mobile experience
No one will make significant money through mobile video until #3 is achieved

The major reason mobile video isn't central to the experience is insufficient bandwidth. The carriers do't have big enough pipes to let everyone engage in broadband quality media engagement at the same time. There are solutions (3G, EVDO-A,WiFi, WiMax, LTE) but they haven't hit total affordable ubiquity the same way wired broadband has. So, I guess the ranting can stop until somebody spends another $3 billion in infrastructure to get everywhere wireless broadband...or, I suppose, two smart people in a garage can figure out how to tip this whole thing...I'm hoping for the garage solution.

Why doesn't anybody make money in mobile video...and how to make it better

2008-08-13T12:00:00.000-07:00

Listen, gang, mobile video is a completely terrific experience, when done well. Good examples are You Tube (their iPhone and Java examples are really good), the MLB At Bat application for iPhone, and to a lesser extent, all of the carrier versions of video are generally, maybe even universally, OK.

So, why are there so many second and third tier mobile content providers teetering on the edge of obscurity? Why can't I see Law and Order or The Simpsons on my mobile device? Why can't I get mobile Hulu?

The answer is simple: MONEY.

The economics of video are completely unfriendly to wide scale, cost-effective distribution. With revenue pressures from all of the producers and unions, and in mobile, revenue pressure from carriers, each piece of mobile video has tremendous pressure on it to monetize itself very well in order to support the proud parents that gave it birth. If you are a network, and have a significant nut to pay with every distribution, you are sure to be careful to only share your precious content with those who can pay dearly. And, that, my friends is the issue.

In the offline world, over cable and broadcast networks, there is the opportunity to monetize your content through subscription (very small base with premium content), through utility bundling (Lifetime, Oxygen and myriad other channels wouldn't exist except for the magic of the "Digital" tier of cable subscriptions) or through advertising, or some combination of the three. In the mobile world, the initial idea is to monetize the video through subscription. This isn't a bad idea, until the end consumer realizes that they typically get the content for free at home. Then that $9.99 charge for Sprint TV, or Media Flo, really starts to stick in one's craw. (As a point of interest, I do understand that the vast majority of Americans use some kind of subscription based (cable or satellite) television service, and thereby are paying a fee for the content. BUT, the ubiquity of cable/satellite is so great that it has become a utility (like gas or electric service) and it provides a better end-user experience than the free (over the air broadcast) alternative.) So, mobile video has backed itself into a corner. It is generally seeking a premium subscription (although mobile plans like Sprint's Everything Plan are making a bid to utility-ize mobile video) for content that is either received for free or perceived to be received as free. And to top it all off, the user experience is dramatically worse than cable/satellite or OTA broadcast.

So, what is one to do with the promise of mobile video? After all, it makes PERFECT sense. We are a nation of television junkies, You Tube addicts, and we lust after passive entertainment. So, why isn't a little video on the handset a complete slam dunk? Well, essentially because the screen size is so small that engaging with video on a handset requires active concentration. It is no longer a passive or engrossing experience. But to top it off, it is really expensive for the consumer. So it has all sorts of pressures against it...but it simply won't die.

So, sports fans, how do we make it better? Here are my 5 ideas:

Kill the subscription fees: These are an unneeded obstacle. Sub fees deter adoption unless those sub fees give the end user a better experience. The wireless carriers and content owners need to hook up with the cable/satellite providers and bundle the mobile video fee into their current subscriptions. Comcast, Time Warner, ATT...all you guys, get together, figure out a rev share (share ad inventory across all three screens) and make your content ubiquitous.
Make the service better: These are technical issues that are difficult to solve, and will require big 3G/4G investments, but make the delivery of mobile video easier. There are a few handsets and a few technologies that really do this well, but on your typical feature phone, mobile video is a slow, pixelated mess. Fix the service. You've made billions of dollars in investments to make a voice network that isn't awful, perhaps we could get an infrastructure worthy of carrying the video content you want to sell me a subscription for.
Standardize the ad format: Listen, this works for TV. Make all the ads 0:15 or 0:30 seconds. Run them at the same points in the shows. If broadcast, we already know the schedule. If unicast or VOD, make them at the beginning, middle and end. This is a familiar enough pattern. Stop trying to be inventive, and simply give me ads that I can actively ignore but subconsciously react to...just like on TV.
Make the content worthwhile: If you can't give me The Tudors or at least Scrubs then don't bother. If no one will watch it regularly on television or online, the chances are slim that someone will want to watch it on a handset. Let's face it, we are addicted to video, but we aren't completely without standards.
Keep track of my service: Let me bookmark where I stop on my handset, and let me pick it up again on my PC, or come back to it later, or make that show available via VOD on my TV. Listen up mobile carriers, since your network isn't perfect, cut a deal to let me have my content via my PC, too, so that I can start watching a great mobisode, or highlight clip or something and when my signal drops (as it invariably will) I can recover my entertainment investment through a more perfected network device (my PC or TV).

That's it. Make it free, better and ubiquitous (or at least hide the price somewhere else so it feels free) and mobile video will really start to make us all money.

End of rant.

2 Months With an iPhone...

2008-05-22T07:56:00.000-07:00

It was the beginning of April when I got my iPhone. This isn't my first smartphone. I have had 1 Windows mobile phone, 2 Blackberries, 3 Treos...so I know my way around the space pretty well. Even on my feature phones, I have done things like contact management, e-mail, etc. Suffice it to say, I try to get my phones to do the most that they can.

So, onto my iPhone experience. I assume that anyone in the audience is pretty familiar with the iPhone capabilities, so this won't be a blow by blow description of features. And, next month, with a software refresh, any compliments or criticisms I might levy could be moot, so I won't bore you with all of that. All of that being said, the iPhone is the best information device I have ever had. As a phone, it is as good or better than many other devices, but the phone part of the iPhone isn't the killer app.

The killer app for the iPhone: THE BROWSER.

You've seen posts by me extolling the virtues of Opera Mini (which is pretty terrific) but the mobile Safari browser is the best piece of mobile software I have every used. Even over the EDGE network, getting to REAL web pages is easy. Over WiFi, practically delicious.

I live in a multi-computer house. There is almost always a laptop within 30 feet. When I get home from the office now, my laptop stays in my bag. Mobile Safari over WiFi is so easy and fast that I don't need my laptop as much. In fact, my home usage of my laptop has declined by at least 50%. There is almost nothing that I do (in my spare time) on my computer that I can't do on my iPhone. Web browsing, You Tube (my kids LOVE watching You Tube cartoons on my iPhone...especially old Bugs Bunny!), e-mail...all well implemented, easy to use, and intuitive.

Speaking of intuitive, my 4 year old daughter grabbed my iPhone on the first day I had it. She immediately figured out the slider lock, saw the phone icon and was able to call my wife without me explaining to her how to do it. Intuitive enough that the interface is satisfying to me, and easy enough for a child to navigate. That is incredible.

So, while all my other smartphones had nice features (e-mail and keyboard on Blackberry are better), the iPhone is in a different league. The iPhone has a different mobile ambition than the average smartphone. For example, t he iPod features are also excellent (but they should enable video download over WiFi), the camera is good, but the photo display is excellent! My iPhone is where I keep my important music, video and photos, along side my important e-mails, contacts, and calendar.Smartphones are tools to get things done. My iPhone is my companion that helps me live my life. Nice job, Apple.

iPhone in My Hands

2008-05-13T09:05:00.001-07:00

The day before I was headed to CTIA, an amazing thing happened. I dropped my Blackberry into the toilet. ( Embarrassing!) I did not have a backup handset, and Sprint was less than helpful in helping me get a replacement sent to my hotel, so I decided to bail on Sprint. Sorry guys! (I was one of those million + defectors last quarter.) So, during a stopover in Philadelphia, I hopped in a cab, went to an ATT store and got a 16 Gig iPhone. (And, I feel compelled to point out that shopping in an ATT store is pretty rotten. The clerk wouldn't let me leave without getting a credit approval (and since I was in Philadelphia it had some kind of location code attached to it) and when I went to activate through iTunes, it wouldn't let me port in my Boston number. WTF? So, after 2 hours on a payphone at the Philadelphia airport, and getting nowhere with ATT, I just tried activate it like I had purchased it at the Apple store. I didn't use the credit approval code and ported in my number like a charm! Now, after a little investigation, it seems like my erstwhile ATT store rep was trying to earn a little commission on my activation by demanding that I get a credit approval. I hate that stuff. He wasted my time, and I am glad that he got not credit for my activation. Long story short, if you want an iPhone, go to the Apple store.

2 months with an iPhone in my next post.

2 Months...and No Posts Ugggh

2008-05-13T09:04:00.000-07:00

So, I am back blogging. Thanks for your patience. Laziness got the best of me.

Mo-Mo Mobile Music

2008-03-06T09:21:00.000-08:00

The music industry is collapsing under its own weight. The days of physical distribution are dwindling, and digital has yet to replace that revenue. Well, digital does not need to replace physical distribution (i.e., shipments of CDs to stores), but rather the physical distribution eco-system needs to rapidly compress to keep costs in line with revenue and profits from that channel. But anyhow, the music industry is in trouble. And MOBILE is a place where the opportunity seems to be enormous.

So, there are tons of mobile music options, like Pandora, IPhone/iTunes, Napster, XM and any other of a thousand options. The interesting thing that has yet to happen is the emergence of a free music product. There is no free mobile radio. (NPR has done an interesting thing, making some of their local broadcasts available via the voice channel, but that isn't spot on to this discussion). Most services are either subscription based, or per song based.

Now, I love music. And I think that music is a key element in discovering one's essential humanity. BUT, there is no way that I am going to pay for something that I can get free on the radio. Well, there are a few more options to most paid services, like custom playlists, samples, artist discovery, information value added services, etc. But fundamentally, am I going to want to pay $3.99, $4.99 or, heaven forbid $9.99 per month to access these services through my mobile device on top of my data plan? I don't think so.

Here is where I would love to see the industry head:

Music Industry: Figure out a way to make streaming your music so cheap that there will be 10,000 mobile radio channels playing all the time. This is a sticky wicket, I understand that. You have the costs of developing and producing the music that we want to hear, and that takes oodles of cash. But face it, the physical world is over for music. Grow your revenues by providing even more services to artists, like show promotion, merchandising, rights sales, etc. Either add value to the artists and become a marketing hub that drives profits for you and the artists or get out of the way. I, frankly don't have the answers, but I am continually impressed with the creativity and intelligence, passion and drive of all I know in the music industry. The answer is there, somewhere, but restricting access to your content by charging users $6.99 a month (and then asking them to pay again to have access to the music on other devices) is not the right approach.
Mobile Carriers: Face it, people already pay for voice and data. Cut them some slack and load up the basic service tier with lots of compelling content. The cable guys have been brilliant at this. (The only reason you pay $32.99 for basic cable is that it offers you a ton of value in increased content and reception improvements) So, give me 25 FREE radio stations with my data plan, and you will get significantly higher data plan uptakes, especially in the under 25 crowd...and they have the highest lifetime value of any customer...

Mobile music is a HUGE opportunity, and I believe that mobile will be the dominant growth area for music over the next decade. It just needs to be free.

Unlimited Voice Plans Ahoy!

2008-02-19T12:33:00.000-08:00

In the latest bit of "Oh yeah, me too" marketing, it seems like the top 3 mobile carriers and an MVNO all have (or will have soon) flat fee plans that have unlimited voice, messaging , and data. As a nice geture of inclusivity for smartphones, apparently the ATT plan includes iPhone users. (No word on the Blackberry crowd, yet)

Cool stuff. Soon enough, tethering or card access will join. Hooray!

ATT Plans (unlimited will be up on 2/22, I think)
Verizon Plans
Sprint Plans
Helio Plans
and T-Mo is in the game, too!

As a side note, Sprint plans seem to be limited to certain markets.

This is good stuff. Look for these prices to compress even further in 2009.

Verizon to Join In on Unlimited Plans on 12/19/08?

2008-02-18T08:16:00.000-08:00

I've heard this from a number of folks, but Engadet Mobile is where I read it first. It seems like Verizon will be offering unlimited voice and data plans as soon as tomorrow. This is a good deal, but at the top end of the plans, the price seems a little steep. No mention of if this includes tethering or BB data. Stay tuned.

$100 - Nationwide Unlimited (voice)
$120 - Nationwide Select Unlimited (voice, SMS, MMS)
$140 - Nationwide Premium (voice, SMS, MMS, VZNav, VCAST, email)
$150 - Nationwide Email and Messaging (voice, SMS, MMS, and data)
$170 - Nationwide Global Email and Messaging (voice, SMS, MMS, and international data)
$200 - Family plan with two lines, $100 per additional line.