It would be tough for Palm CEO Jon Rubenstein to have nightmares scarier than his everyday reality. Under-budgeted and under-technologied, he must do battle with iPhone, BlackBerry and the League of Android.

Yet the show must go on. So the ad agency is tasked with somehow stirring up interest for the Palm Pre Plus, making enough noise to give this little fella a fighting chance. What would you do? Rhetorical question. But I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be the above.

This ad, creatively entitled Features, is exactly that: a fairly dry list of features. This wisp of an idea is actually more of prayer: maybe, possibly, if we list enough distinguishing features, people will start lining up to buy this thing.

Sorry Palm, it doesn’t work that way. First, if these really are your best features, you might as well hang it up right now. Signature styling? Smart notifications? Integrated calendar view? An app that turns your phone into a mobile hot spot? Oh. Well that last one’s actually pretty cool. But a single shiny thing is hardly going to steal your quarry from the clutches of iPhone or Android. Second, creativity is your friend. At least it should be. You just made a movie with an email-sized idea.

This spot is further proof of something that hardly needs more proving: most companies do not take risks at times of crisis — even if that might be their best chance for recovery. They operate on logic. They play it safe when, more than anything, they need to capture people’s imaginations. There is no imagination-capturing going on here. Spots like this are born of rooms filled with nervous people.

Only a creative idea can command attention and change perceptions. Or, I should say, a creative idea with a budget that lets you play with the big boys. The more Palm churns out harmless ads like this, the farther into the hole they sink.

iPad may not be shipping for another three weeks, but the commercial made a sooner-than-expected debut on the Oscars last night. After the mixed reactions to the product itself, it was interesting to see how Apple plans to present iPad to the masses.

First reaction here: not exactly shocked.

A little background first. Most who don’t see the big deal in iPad criticize it for being “just a bigger iPhone.” My personal opinion is that iPad is going to be a very big deal — because it’s “just a bigger iPhone.” The iPhone OS, multitouch and the App Store are the key ingredients for revolution. iPad delivers what was missing: a bigger screen and better processor. By doing this, it will liberate developers, revitalize the publishing industry and, for a great many people, make everyday uses of a computer happier.

So back to the commercial. I find it interesting that iPad’s commercial is, well … a bigger version of an iPhone commercial.

It’s basically the same shtick, amped up. We get more screens, more content, more uses, more fingers, all set to the same kind of soundtrack. Instead of being cradled by Mr. Hand, iPad is nestled in Mr. Lap.

It happens fast, so you need to watch it a few times to get the full range of what iPad can do. The truly curious may do this, but for most the message is simple: iPad can do a whole lot of cool stuff. That may well be enough, since the buzz is what’s going to sell this thing in big numbers — as soon as the influencers start getting it in their hands.

As a believer, though, this spot leaves me with the same lament I had after the iPad launch. I love the product, but Apple’s telling of the tale doesn’t feel big enough yet. I was hoping this commercial would breathe some fire into it. Maybe that’s in the next one.

Don’t get me wrong, I still believe iPad is another revolutionary device, on the same level with iPod and iPhone. I still believe the critics will end up feeling a bit foolish. For the moment, though, this revolution remains fairly well disguised.

Sony-Ericsson is about to ship their newest entry into the smartphone market — a Symbian-based little fella.

Not sure about the phone yet, but clearly S-E senses a pending attack by the world’s copyright infringement community. That moniker is sporting as horsey a TM as I’ve ever seen in my life.

Hint to Sony: there’s no legal requirement that your TM be visible from across the room. And with a name like Vivaz … well, I think it’s safe to go on low-alert with this one.

Apple to Android: may we have your attention please

They grow up so fast, don’t they?

It was just three years ago that Apple introduced iPhone. That was when, in one little aside, Steve Jobs gleefully noted that this new bundle of joy was patented out the wazoo.

Well, yesterday those patents got their first good workout. Apple filed a lawsuit against HTC claiming 20 violations. In doing so, Apple has stepped over an interesting line. That scrappy young revolutionary is now officially playing with the big boys — adding a little aggression to their arsenal of tricks.

I’m not saying this is a bad thing. In a global market worth countless billions, it’s bound to get a bit rough. Companies will try anything they can to gain an advantage or strip away the other guy’s advantage. Give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.

Obviously Apple believes they have a case against HTC. But just as obvious, there’s a far, far greater goal here. Apple wants the whole unruly gang of Androiders to think long and hard before they borrow/steal even a glimmer of the technology that sets iPhone apart. That includes hardware, software and philosophy. The message is: don’t even think about it.

Apple is demonstrating that they have the brains and brawn to fight in any arena, whether consumers be the judge or judges be the judge.

Yes, I do get a little wispy whenever another piece of the original, lovable Apple falls by the wayside. But the kid needs to grow up sometime, and it’s hard to be cute when you need to be intimidating.

Unlike some, I really don’t worry about Apple turning into the kind of company they’ve always fought against. Their moral compass remains one of the biggest reasons for their success.

The industry prepares for Palm's next announcement

Last week, Palm CEO Jon Rubenstein wrote a companywide email to the troops following his announcement of Palm’s preliminary results for this quarter. Sales weren’t exactly booming.

This announcement wasn’t mandatory. It’s a strategy. It’s what a company does when they smell a really bad news day in the making, and they’d love nothing more than to diffuse it. Rather than shock us with bad results at quarterly report time, Palm went for the “preemptive let-down.”

I actually have a fond place in my heart for Palm. I was once a total Pilot guy, filling my device with “apps” (well, maybe three) and showing the thing off with iPhone-like fervor. Then again, I used to love WordPerfect too.

Point is, things change. It’s going to take one hell of an effort, and possibly divine intervention, to right Palm’s ship.

In a weird way, I enjoy reading memos like Rubenstein’s. It’s interesting to see how different leaders rise to the occasion. His mission is to paint a rosy picture in the face of obvious challenges. Ours is to read the true meaning into the words he chose:

Softer than expected performance. Mini-disaster. Excellent potential to become maxi-disaster.

Slower than expected customer adoption of our products. Make that “slower than dreamed.”

We expect to exit the quarter with $500 million in cash on our balance sheet. Paychecks won’t bounce for a while yet.

The entire executive team has been working extremely hard to improve product performance. About time.

…and have implemented a number of initiatives to increase awareness and drive sales. On a budget that’s a fraction of our competitors’.

Verizon Wireless… acknowledged that their execution … was below expectations. Thank God we have a scapegoat.

To accelerate sales, we initiated Project JumpStart nearly three weeks ago. Oh my.

Nearly two hundred Palm Brand Ambassadors… have been training Verizon sales reps across the US. Should work as well as the Apple-trained CompUSA sales force.

… a growing number of Palm ads on billboards, bus shelters, buses, and subway stations, all getting the word out. The ad guys will save us.

I am still confident that our talented team has what it takes to get the job done. The trading season is pretty much over. We got what we got.

Go team!!! Ah, motivation. The Book Of Management, Chapter 12.

Of course it’s never over till it’s over. But with Palm stuck in the shadow of iPhone, Droid, Nexus One and the whole gang of them, and app developers going where the customers are, Palm truly will require a miracle comeback.

Now now, Google - play nice

Back when Google launched its Nexus One phone, I thought it was odd that Google had chosen to compete with its own partners.

It’s interesting that after the Droid (the best Android phone) came the Nexus One (the best Android phone), and now, just announced at the Mobile World Congress, we have HTC’s Desire (the best Android phone). And yes, that’s the same HTC that builds Google’s Nexus One.

Of course on one level this is a silly thing to point out. After all, hundreds of PCs run Windows, and the fact is some PCs are better than others for a hundred different reasons. That’s called choice. The only difference is that Microsoft does not manufacture PCs. They don’t serve up the “best” version of the same product they’re asking their partners to make. That’s called evil.

Absolutely, competition is good. Customers benefit as the various Android-makers try to outdo each other with new reasons to buy their own devices. But for all of Google’s “partners,” there is something extremely unholy about competing with the guy who controls the OS your product depends on, and knows every new feature that’s on the drawing board.

It hurts a little to see Google move in this direction. We were all rooting for them for so long. The brainiest, coolest company out there. This is starting to feel like the end of the movie, when we find out that the least likely person in the room turns out to be the serial killer.

Some companies have sub-brands that are as just as powerful as the master brand. For example, iPod is as big a deal for customers as Apple. While Vostro is but a distant echo of Dell.

There are endless ways to build a brand or sub-brand. One old favorite is to stick the word right in your customer’s face. Put it on the product where people have to stare at it every day. Interesting to note, though, that some of the stronger sub-brands don’t even bother.

iMac is a good example. For all of Apple’s design elegance, this baby had long touted the super-sized “iMac” on its backside, big enough to be seen from a block away. Now it’s gone altogether. All we get is an Apple logo under the front bezel. Still fairly jumbo, but no iMac word. Yet no one overlooks the fact that Apple sells iMacs.

In fact, you don’t see a product name on any of Apple’s desktop computers, from Mac mini to Mac Pro. Just a logo. Is that because Apple is actively shifting us to think of Apple first, and the sub-brand second? Or simply because the sub-brand has become so powerful, it doesn’t need to be so flagrant anymore? Once you figure that out, you can start wondering why MacBook, iPod and iPhone are clearly labeled by both product name and Apple logo.

Obviously, the way you adorn your products reflects an overall strategy. It says something about how you wish your customers to think of you — but it also demonstrates how you think of your customers. If you respect them enough, you’ll treat them to a little simplicity.

Shocker. Sometime, somehow, under cover of night, Dell has put a new logo on its homepage. Out with the grim logo of darkness, in with a happy blue Dell-in-a-circle.

Who knows what this means for Dell’s long-term logo plans. But this kind of logo-shifting is a living reminder of one of Dell’s uglier problems. In fact it’s ugly enough that it could easily become one of the longer nails in the coffin.

I’m talking about Dell’s longstanding inability to create a consistent, compelling brand. Rather than invest in raising the value of their brand, they’ve chosen to compete with the Acers of the world to see who can make the cheapest PC (a fight they’re losing). They need to stand for something beyond candy-factory colors and me-too phones. Something that might make a customer feel smart for paying a little more for that Dell logo — whichever logo they settle on.

What are Dell’s chances of getting there?

Well, I wouldn’t hold my breath. Plenty of companies struggle to build their brand. But I’ve never seen a company that can’t even figure out how to use a single logo across all of its divisions. For years, Dell has used one logo on the business side and another on the consumer side. Any first-year marketing major can see the absurdity in that. Dell acts as if those who work in an office have no computer at home, and vice versa. Just… plain… ridiculous.

The problem is, Dell focuses so intensely on making this quarter’s numbers, there’s little left for something as esoteric as brand building. If immediate returns can’t be proven on a spreadsheet, it doesn’t make the cut. And then, of course, one division couldn’t care less how another is doing.

The sad part is, this is one of those things Michael Dell could fix with a snap of his fingers. But he’s too busy focusing on this quarter’s numbers too. He’s sticking with the business model that changed the world — even though the world around him has long since changed.

You know, it’s been three years since Michael returned to the CEO role at Dell, and things have not gone well. If I were him, I might start fearing the Ides of March. I know it’s tough to fire the guy who started the company — but hey, Apple did it.

The biggest deal coming out of the 2010 Congress was “App Planet.” The idea was to lay out a vision for unified standards that would make life better for developers and customers. The official website says: By pulling all the key players together in one place at one time, we will make App Planet the new Centre of the Apps Universe for the four days of Mobile World Congress.

Only problem: key player #1 — Apple — did not attend the conference. So it seems that the real point of Planet Of The Apps was to do collectively what no one has been able to do alone: create a credible challenge to Apple’s world-leading app platform. If nothing else, it allowed 200 companies to take some time off from brutalizing each other in the normal course of business.

Given the importance of App Planet to this gathering, it surprised many when Steve Jobs was named recipient of the Congress’s Mobile Personality of the Year Award. Yes, the same Steve Jobs who will never in a million years support the global app standards being developed by this brotherly group. I guess they just like his personality.

It’s not like they didn’t have the chance to honor one of their own. The nominees beaten by Steve Jobs were the bigshots of the planetary app movement: Eric Schmidt (CEO, Google), Mike Lazaridis (co-CEO, Research In Motion) and Pete Chou (CEO, HTC). Apple sent no one to collect the award, indicating their respect for this particular honor.

I really don’t have anything against technology companies banding together to move things forward. I just think it’s safe to say that if any of the participating companies were in Apple’s position today, they’d be as far away from this Congress as possible — even if it meant not being on hand to pick up the Mobile Personality of the Year award.

Quantity again stalks its old nemesis, quality

Hard to believe iPhone ever existed without apps, isn’t it? Especially since apps have become the biggest differentiator between Apple and its competitors. At last count, iPhone boasted about 150,000 apps to Android’s 20,000.

(Ironic that Apple should wield such a lopsided advantage here, since it was stuck on the pathetic side of the app equation in the early days of the PC wars.)

So what do you do if your mission in life is to get Android’s numbers closer to iPhone’s? Well, one quick fix is to simply lower your standards. Even better, you can nix your standards altogether.

Sensing opportunity when critics started attacking Apple for its flawed app approval process, Android simply did away with those pesky approvals. You develop ’em, they’ll sell ’em. Power to the people.

Once the giddiness subsides, however, reality sinks in. If you think Apple’s huge library of apps contains a few clunkers, wait till you see what qualifies for sale in the Android Market. Without a vetting process, they’re not just welcoming bad apps. They’re welcoming nasty apps. Even outright dangerous apps. But they sure are pumping up the numbers.

Maybe Apple isn’t so big-brotherly after all? Maybe there’s something to be said for that quaint idea of quality control — for letting customers buy with a degree of confidence.

The fact is, the App Store is not perfect. No one’s ever sold software on this scale before, and surely Apple will make some mistakes along the way. I do hope they invent ways to make the approvals process more fair — but I’m grateful they have an approvals process in the first place.