Technology & Gadgets


18
Aug 10

Thoughts on the Mobile Web, Pt. 4

Via Johan Larsson's photostream.

The two major players in this battle thus far are Apple and Google.  Each player has some clear advantages and disadvantages.

(1) Apple Has The Initiative:

The largest advantage that Apple enjoys is… They were the first company to get it right. The iPhone gave people a REAL BROWSER and was a huge success right off the bat. This gave Apple the early initiative in the battle. Apple seems to currently enjoy the largest marketshare of the mobile web.

(2) Apple’s Product has Been Rock Solid: (current antenna issues withstanding)

The second advantage is the Apple makes both the software and the hardware. Just like with their computers apps that are made to work on the iPhone or iPad just work.

Both Google and Microsoft making software and telling hardware manufacturers “To run our software you need to do X,Y, and Z.” How the hardware manufactures do X,Y, and Z is up to them… as a result there are several different configurations as opposed to Apple’s one (rock solid) configuration.

The fact that Microsoft is getting into the battle for the mobile web late is interesting… Maybe they just wanted to see what Apple and Google did, and how customers responded before launching their own prodeuct.  Maybe.  But I don’t think so, my guess is that they just missed the bus.

However, if Microsoft’s product has a good price point, and the device / softwear combo is solid than they have a shoot at being a real player. If their price point sucks and/or their product is anything less than solid (see Windows Vista) they will have spent lots of time and money to fail.

(3) Apple’s Closed “Control Freak” System:

Apple’s product being so solid is largly a result of the fact that they make the hardware and the software, but it is also the result of something that I personally see as a negative of their approach: that they are a closed system.  i.e., All apps must pass through the Apple gatekeeper to be “approved” to be in the app store.

This limits their developers and, unless their iPhone had been “jail broken“, their customer’s choices.

I was going to count this as one of the advantages that Android had going for it, but after reviewing the information I see that Apple’s app store still has more choices in it than the Android app stores (notice Apple’s singular “store” and Android plural “stores).  And I believe that, in addition to having just more apps, Apple also has more high quality apps than the Android stores.

(4) Android is Open: (Softwear, Hardware, and Carrier).

This is huge.  Open systems might have a hard time getting going, but they have a way of catching up to and eventually surpassing closed systems.  It is the wisdom of the crowd.

Android is not only open from a development prespective, it is also open from a hardware prespective.  Thus Android’s ability to be run on so many different devices on more than one carrier will provide it with larger and larger market share as time goes on.

As I stated earlier: If Microsoft gets its act together with Windows Phone 7 , Google might have something to worry about.  However, Google’s lead in the mobile web arena is going to be at least as difficult for Microsoft to catch up to as it has been for Android to catch up with Apple’s lead.

(5) Summing It All Up:

Apple has the lead, at least for now due to the fact that they got into this game first and went above and beyond what anyone had done thus far when they introduced the iPhone.  In effect, they set the bar, and everyone has been trying to clear that bar, which has forced the other companies to play catch up.

Android is an open system that Apple needs to be afraid of.  True, it might be a bit jankie as of this writing, but it gets more and more solid with every new build that comes out.

In addition to this, Android keeps gaining marketshare as it becomes an option for customers on more and more hardware and more carriers, while Apple’s iOS remains only on one device (the iPhone) on one (really shitty) carrier (AT&T).

For Apple to keep their lead they will need to push inovation, and not make any (more) mistakes.

Microsoft has yet to show us what they can do.  As a company, Microsoft has a ton riding on Windows Phone 7, so if they bone this (and for the record I hope they don’t), they will take a major hit.  If Microsoft really knocks this one out of the park it could be the start of a huge comeback for the company.  (Yes it would be a “comeback” because they have been getting their asses kicked by Apple and Google for a few years now).

Share this with other foolish humans:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Slashdot
  • email

6
Aug 10

Thoughts on the Mobile Web, Pt. 3: “More apps”

John Gruber (of Daring Fireball fame) had a great post that caught my attention.  It talks about the number of apps that are out there for iOS and Android.

… this “how many apps are in the respective app stores” metric is being given too much weight… I’ve said this before, but by this metric, we’d all be using Windows, not the Mac. Which platform has the most apps is interesting, but which platform has the best apps is more important.

This should be obvious.  Is it no obvious?

(FYI: Gruber states that he believes that iOS has more good apps than Android.  For what ever it might be worth, at the moment I agree.  However I also believe if a powerful Android powered iPad-ish device(s) comes out anytime soon that things will change.)

Share this with other foolish humans:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Slashdot
  • email

5
Aug 10

Thoughts on the Mobile Web, Pt. 2: “Unlocked” Phones

I’ve been reading lots of people’s thoughts on why the Nexus One not being as widely adopted as other phones like the iPhone is a failure for unlocked phones.

My reaction to that: Bullshit.

Defining “Unlocked” phone:

The Nexus One is a damn fine bit of hardware, and while you can buy it with out locking into a contract it is not really unlocked.

Why do I say that? Simple, the way that I choose to define “unlocked phone” is:

An expensive communication device paid for in full by the customer.  The fact that the customer has paid 100% of the cost of this device out of his/her pocket would prevent said customer from being locked into one carrier’s set of plans for any length of time and would also prevent said customer from being locked into using any one carrier’s wireless infrastructure because this expensive device would be equipped with a radio that allowed it to acces all carriers’ wireless infrastructures.

In essence, what I’m saying is that I believe a truly unlocked phone would allow the customer to go to any carrier and say, “I bought this phone with out any help from you, but I’m willing to pay you [insert price here] dollars a month for this device to have access to your wireless infrastructure.  If I’m ever dissatisfied with the service of your company or the performance of your company’s wireless infrastructure I’ll stop paying you and take my phone and pay a different carrier I think will perform better than you do.”

A Partially Locked Phone:

Back to the Nexus One.  It’s true that this device could be bought with out a contact to use a carrier’s wireless infrastructure for a period of time, meaning the customer could ditch the carrier at any point without paying any sort of early “early termination” fees, which tend to be rather high.  However, the lack of termination fees does not really matter because the Nexus One’s radio would only work with one carrier’s wireless infrastructure.  So even though the customer did avoid a contract and the “early termination” fees that went along with those contracts, the phone (and the customer) were locked in because they could not take the phone to another carrier.

i.e. A person could spend around $500.00 to get a phone that would only work with one carrier’s wireless infrastructure, and opting out of using said carrier would also mean opting out of using the device.  Full stop.

That is a partially locked phone.  Not an unlocked phone.

A real unlocked phone will prevent a customer from being locked in to a contract, and also prevent the customer from being locked into a carrier.

So while the partially locked Nexus One being sold directly by Google might not have worked out the way that Google wanted and could be seen as a failure for Google, it could also be seen as a failure for the sale of partially locked phones. I don’t think it can be seen as a failure for unlocked phones.

A Comparison:

I want smart phones, in the way they access the mobile web, to be like computers and the way they access the internet.

A person would buy the hardware (computer) then take it to whatever internet service provider he or she wants to.

That makes sense right?

Share this with other foolish humans:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Slashdot
  • email

22
Jul 10

Thoughts on the Mobile Web, Pt. 1: Assumptions

Nexus One & Evernote: via Johan Larsson's photostream.

Recently I’ve been spending lots (I mean LOTS) of time thinking about what many web-heads call “the mobile web“, and the battle that is taking place among companies to get the largest market share of customers to adopt various goods and services in the mobile web’s early days.

I first started to think about this around the time that the Nexus One (AKA the Google phone) hit the market, and Tim O’Rielly wrote a post on O’Reilly Radar about how the Nexus One stacked up against the iPhone in what O’Reilly called “the war for the [mobile] web“.

A short time later I read another post by web superstarCory Doctorow. Doctorow’s writing focused on how the Nexus One, and the mobile web made his life easier / better during a book tour for his most recent novel For The Win.

Both Doctorow and O’Reilly have become powerhouses in / on the web because they have the uncanny ability to see and articulate trends of importance, i.e. when they are on both publicly thinking about a topic, I think it is a good idea to pause, take note, and start thinking about it as well.

To help me organize my own thoughts I want to write a series of posts about the mobile web. This is the first post in that series, and it has to do with the assumptions I’m working from as I think (and now blog about) the mobile web. Those assumptions are…

1. The mobile web is different from the regular web. As evidenced by: many sites creating “mobile” versions of themselves to display their content and the growing number of users of “mobile” based applications which rely on the web (Example: FourSquare).

a. The Mobile web is accessed ON THE GO more often than not via “smartphones” (as opposed to “dumbphones“).
b. The Mobile Web is slower than the regular web. This is why the mobile versions of sites are more “light weight” than the full version that people would normally access from their desktop, laptop, or other more traditional computer.
c. Non-phone mobile devices (like the iPad) have started to pop up, and they are built around giving customers access to the mobile web in ways that a small smartphone device can’t. I believe these devices, like their smartphone counterparts, will become more prevalent as time goes on.
d. As smartphones and other devices that are built around providing access to the mobile web become more prevalent the mobile web will become more imporant.

2. There are two major players in the hardware and software battles for the mobile web, and a third major player may be poised to emerge soon. Those players are…

a. Apple has joined in the hardware (iPhone and iPad) and software (iOS) battle for the mobile web. As a company Apple attempts to exert as much control over the ways in which their customers interact with the mobile web.
b. Google has joined in the software battle (Android), but their experiment with hardware (Nexus One) must not have worked out because Google will no longer be selling hardware. (Which is a shame… being able to buy an unlocked Android phone was something that I think gave lots of power to consumers, so I’m sorry to see that it will soon come to an end).
c. Microsoft is about to enter the software battle with Windows Phone 7 (Engadget has a in depth review so does Gizmodo).

3. Providing customers with the mobile web is a collaboration between companies that make hardware (Apple / HTC / Motorola / etc), companies that make software (Apple / Google / Microsoft), and companies that provide telecommunications infrastructure (in the United States Verizon / AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint).

a. The creators of hardware, software have very different goals / business plans than the telecommunications infrastructure providers do.
b. However, despite these different goals / business plans these companies (at least for now) need to work in concert in order to provide the mobile web to their shared customer bases.
c. Be that as it may, these companies don’t always like the fact that they have to be bedfellows.

Share this with other foolish humans:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Slashdot
  • email

19
Jul 10

Commercial Space Flight… It’s Getting Closer!

The VSS Enterprise (AKA Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo) looks like it is moving along, so comercial space flight looks like it may become a reality some time with in the next year or two!

The craft recently completed its first flight with a crew on board on July 15th.

I cannot even say how awesome this is. If only I could afford to buy a ticket on one of these things, I would.

Link 1: Engadget post.
Link 2: Wired Article.
Link 3: Wikipedia Article.

Share this with other foolish humans:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Slashdot
  • email