Posts Tagged: Google


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

10
Aug 10

Thoughts on the Mobile Web, Pt. 4: “If You Can’t Tell I’m Pissed…”

I fucking hate Verizon and Google right now.  Seriously.  Maybe it’s because I’m having a shitty week, maybe it’s because I’ve been reading some of Warren Ellis’s writing, but I don’t think so.

The reason I hate Verizon and Google is that they (and to be fair: many other mega-crops) are attempting to totally screw up net neutrality.  Verizon has always been attempting to kill net neutrality so they can make more money.  That’s their M.O.  But until recently Google has appeared, at least to me, to be committed to defending net neutrality.  I say “until recently” because Google has now teamed up with the evil cunt wasp empire that is Verizon…

(Exhibit A) After much speculation, Verizon and Google on Monday unveiled a proposal for how they believe the issue of net neutrality should be handled. It backed an open Internet for the Web, but would exempt the wireless industry from any regulation at this time. It also provided an exemption for emerging technologies.  [Source: PC Mag]

(Exhibit B) The other big news in today’s announcement was Google’s clear retreat on network neutrality when it comes to wireless networks. As Susan Crawford, professor at Cardozo Law School and an expert on all things Internet, explains: ”That’s a huge hole, given the growing popularity of wireless services and the recent suggestion by the Commission that we may not have a competitive wireless marketplace.” [Source: Salon.com]

I believe that John Gruber (of Daring Fireball fame) put it best when he said…

And who doesn’t agree that wireless is going to be to the coming decade what wired broadband was to the last?

Fucking A dude!  The fight for net neutrality is MORE important in the wireless space than it is in the wired.

Yo Google.  Change your shit up.  Rather than saying “Do no evil,” you should be saying “Do know evil.”

You get what I’m saying you Machiavellian shit birds?

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

29
Jul 10

Book Nerd! [Links]

~1~

Today I read a wonderful post over at INDX//mb.  The post states:

I have been trying to decide who I should link to when I link to books — Wikipedia? Kobo? Google? Who links where reminds me of what a powerhouse Amazon’s affiliate program is. I wonder if their first mover advantage is insurmountable? It seems so. No other retailer is even trying to build inbound links from across the web. And if a new entrant needs 10x the money and effort to unseat the incumbent, then the B&Ns, Indigos, and Borders of this world can’t afford it.

As a reader who blogs, this question resonated with me.  Most the time when I’m talking about a book I link to Amazon, and when I’m talking about a writer I link to Wikipedia.  But is there a better source of information about books / authors?  Later on in the same INDEX//mb post this appears:

Which brings me to The Open Library. There stated mission is “One web page for every book.” I am keen to link to TOL and I am eager to contribute edits where I can. The problem I have with it is the lack of a canonical page for the work rather than the book or the edition… For now, and perhaps forever, I will be linking to the best attempt at the canonical page on the net, at LibraryThing.com. (I just wish they added a TOL-style wiki.)

I spent some time poking around The Open Library site, and I’m kind of fascinated by it.

~2~

The second item I wanted to call some attention to is a post over at the O’Reilly Tools Of Change blog about something that I think is a bit of very exciting technology created by a company called Ricoh Innovations.  The post states:

How It Works
According to Jamey Graham, Distinguished Research Engineer at Ricoh, RI’s technology is similar to that of QR codes, but uses the natural patterns of an object or a page as opposed to a barcode. “Over the last few years we’ve developed algorithms for indexing & recognizing visual patterns. Using an Android or iPhone device, readers can snap a picture of a region on the page (text or images, or a combination) and they will be presented with online material just as if they’d scanned a barcode.”

With RI’s visual search system, areas of a page are mapped and linked to corresponding content. RI has developed both cloud and mobile versions of their device recognition engines, and are hoping that publishers will recognize the opportunity that their particular approach to visual search can offer to the reading experience — bridging the physical book with online media.

Ricoh recently launched their first app to accompany the soon-to-be-released novel by Matt Stewart, The French Revolution (Soft Skull). The app, dubbed the “French Rev,” links pages in the book with web-based content including videos, recipes, and music. Geo location data alerts readers to mapped locations from events in the book (set in San Francisco) such as Coit Tower, Pier 39, and the Golden Gate Bridge.

http://toc.oreilly.com/french%20rev%202.jpg

The linked nature of the web seems to be finding its way into traditional printed text.  The linking of text in books to information about real life locations and web based information is something that I think people should really be keeping an eye on.  This is the kind of locative media coming to life that William Gibson wrote about in his novel Spook Country.  Very exciting stuff.

~3~

The Penguin Blog wrote about their reissue of The Spy Who Came In From The Cold by John le Carré as a Penguin Modern Classics.  The blog states:

First published 47 years ago, and being reissued today in Penguin Modern Classics, le Carré’s ‘Spy’ still has the power to make you uncomfortably aware of the mechanics operating in the pit of your stomach. His relentless, unflinching and unforgiving vision of the world reminded me of the moral wasteland that permeates McCarthy’s scalpathon ‘Blood Meridian’ and leaves you with an overwhelming sense that no matter how good the good guys are; the bad guys will always win.

I’ve never read anything by le Carre but this discription, and the beautiful cover art (seen below) of the reissue has made me want to give him a try ASAP.

9780141194523

This cover art is really amazing.  It is simple and has a very classic look to it.  As I was scanning (rather than reading) the blog, it was this cover art that drew my attention.

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