This morning I was contemplating the browser war, which has started again. IE vs. Firefox vs. Chrome vs. Safari. Nice fight to watch, something that takes me back to memory lane when Mosaic was my browser, when the fight was Netscape vs. Microsoft. You know, the browser is the center of our Internet experience. Everything goes around the browser. Google is built around the browser. Microsoft and Yahoo just agreed on a search deal around the browser. The browser is everything.
Then I got an epiphany.
The browser is going to disappear.
Whhhaaaaat? Are you crazy?
Ok, ok. Let me try to explain ;-) I saw the birth of the browser. I attended the third World Wide Web conference. I started the first web company in Italy. Once Tim Berners-Lee came up with the hypertext concept and created the idea of the web, I even thought about building a browser. I did. I still have some Tcl/Tk code somewhere. Others were much better and faster... The browser was the perfect visualizer for the web on a desktop. The hypertext meant links. Links need to be clicked. We had the mouse. We had big screens. We had a chair and a desk. Great match. Boom, the Internet was born.
Then came mobile.
I haven't seen one single implementation of a browser on a mobile device that actually makes the experience good (not great). Do not tell me you like the iPhone browser. It is horrible. It is probably the best you can do on a small screen, with no mouse. Clicking is a pain. Zooming and panning is a super-pain. You click when you want to scroll. You yell.
If you can choose between browsing on your PC or on your iPhone, what would you choose?
Exactly.
Now let's talk about Mobile Apps. They are built for interaction without a mouse. With one finger (the other hand holding the device). They are quick, immediate, intuitive, interactive.
If I have to choose between checking the weather on my PC or on my iPhone, what do I choose? The iPhone. One click. Done. I do not have to sit, open the browser, click and re-click and maybe even type my zip code. It is there when I need it.
Think about it. Mobile Apps can deliver a better experience then those on PC. Granted, I am excluding the productivity tools where you need a lot of typing. But those are few and you will need a keyboard, a desk and a chair. When you do not have to do a lot of typing, a mobile app becomes preferable.
Where is the world going? To mobile. The new Apple Tablet will blur the line even more. But it will be a mobile device for sure. An e-book reader + video player + music player + weather viewer + news viewer.... All with your fingers. All with little apps. All with no mouse. All with an App Store where you can find everything you need. The world is all going to mobile. We will spend more time without the mouse than with it.
This is the Internet era all over again. Back then, we had hundreds of small companies that started with the goal to build web sites. Now, every company wants an iPhone app. You can deliver more value with an app, than you can with a web site. More interactive, more personal, 24/7, in the hands of your customer, with push capabilities.
The result is that every company will have a mobile app, and hundreds of small companies will be created to support it. That you will "navigate" between companies moving from an app to another. That the search engine will not be on a browser, but in the app store (or in the search engine of the app stores, which someone should start developing fast...).
This is going to change the world as we know it. If the browser loses its centrality, ads will go somewhere else. The search engine will be way different. Someone has to invent a platform to link apps one to the other, of course, but the infrastructure is there. It is the engine of the browser itself, with its HTML, AJAX, CSS.
The browser will be swallowed inside the apps. We will have a world without the browser. The future is all of a sudden clear to me. Well, the browser fight looks kind of moot now...
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Hard to be a dumb pipe, AT&T?
I have been saying for a while that the carriers need to move quickly to deliver mobile cloud services (in particular on the most important mobile user generated content), or they will become a pipe before they know it.
AT&T has been playing with the devil for a while. They have launched the iPhone with Apple, which clearly makes them a pipe (how can you tell the difference between the AT&T iPhone and any other carrier iPhone?), and have reaped short-term huge benefits from it. However, that should be a given when you sell your soul... The real problems start appearing after a while.
And when the problems start appearing, the walled garden moves up. Just to be teared down a few months later. It simply does not last. History has proven it.
Think about it: they stopped Skype over 3G, same for Sling. Today the news is that Apple blocked the approval of the Google Voice app on the App Store (after removing all the Google Voice-like apps yesterday).
Some are claiming it is Apple doing it. Yeah, right... Like Apple would stop Google. For what?
I have been a GrandCentral user for a while, now a happy Google Voice user. Google Voice is a spectacular service. I have way too many phones and I keep switching between them. Google Voice routes calls to any of my phones, and it routes SMSs too. So far, no problems with AT&T. It was only generating more revenues for them.
Then on July 15th they launched Google Voice apps for Android and BlackBerry. I use the app on my BB. The idea is that you can call someone from the app, over IP, completely bypassing the AT&T network. I can't say that feature works for me, but the other two do work well: I can listen to my Google Voice messages over IP (but I was able to do it before, but now it is more convenient) and I can send/receive SMSs for free (this is new).
That means I am not paying a dime to AT&T for texting anymore. Zero. Gone. It was a small amount of money, probably a few dollars a month (because I text only when I am in Europe ;-) But you multiply for every user they have and it piles up fast. A drop of a few dollars on ARPU per user would be a big hit. In particular, if the power users start adopting it.
If you add voice to texting, you can see the future. The carrier is a pipe for data. Voice is a data type (revenues: gone). SMS are a data type (revenues: gone). A data pipe... with no value-added services. It has to be hard to swallow, Mr. AT&T... Hey, you signed the pact with the devil, not me!
Om Malik has questioned why are people blaming AT&T over Apple. The argument is "if they did not prevent their BlackBerry users to download the app, then why would they prevent the iPhone users?". Because they can... Because Apple built a fortress around the App Store. You just need to click on a link in a website (Google) to download the BlackBerry app. There is no way for AT&T of stopping it, unless they lock the entire phone, which RIM will never allow (and it is too late, anyway). On the iPhone, you have to go through the App Store. The gate is controlled by Apple that has to listen to AT&T (for now).
Apple built a fortress, AT&T controls the gate. The combination is the worst possible... Openness is ages away.
How does this stop? When Apple pulls its trigger. When the exclusivity of AT&T in the US ends. When another carrier comes on board (or two). When the Apple Tablet comes out with Verizon. When the market opens up a bit. It will happen for sure in 2010, and it could even happen in 2009. It is not far away.
At that point, boom. Walled garden gone. Only the fortress will be there. Apple will still be able to control the gate and decide what goes in and out. AT&T will be just a dumb pipe with no say.
For now, they are still a dumb pipe with some power. Unless they decide to start creating value-added mobile cloud services, and go around Apple and every other device manufacturer. It is not too late, but the clock is ticking.
AT&T has been playing with the devil for a while. They have launched the iPhone with Apple, which clearly makes them a pipe (how can you tell the difference between the AT&T iPhone and any other carrier iPhone?), and have reaped short-term huge benefits from it. However, that should be a given when you sell your soul... The real problems start appearing after a while.
And when the problems start appearing, the walled garden moves up. Just to be teared down a few months later. It simply does not last. History has proven it.
Think about it: they stopped Skype over 3G, same for Sling. Today the news is that Apple blocked the approval of the Google Voice app on the App Store (after removing all the Google Voice-like apps yesterday).
Some are claiming it is Apple doing it. Yeah, right... Like Apple would stop Google. For what?
I have been a GrandCentral user for a while, now a happy Google Voice user. Google Voice is a spectacular service. I have way too many phones and I keep switching between them. Google Voice routes calls to any of my phones, and it routes SMSs too. So far, no problems with AT&T. It was only generating more revenues for them.
Then on July 15th they launched Google Voice apps for Android and BlackBerry. I use the app on my BB. The idea is that you can call someone from the app, over IP, completely bypassing the AT&T network. I can't say that feature works for me, but the other two do work well: I can listen to my Google Voice messages over IP (but I was able to do it before, but now it is more convenient) and I can send/receive SMSs for free (this is new).
That means I am not paying a dime to AT&T for texting anymore. Zero. Gone. It was a small amount of money, probably a few dollars a month (because I text only when I am in Europe ;-) But you multiply for every user they have and it piles up fast. A drop of a few dollars on ARPU per user would be a big hit. In particular, if the power users start adopting it.
If you add voice to texting, you can see the future. The carrier is a pipe for data. Voice is a data type (revenues: gone). SMS are a data type (revenues: gone). A data pipe... with no value-added services. It has to be hard to swallow, Mr. AT&T... Hey, you signed the pact with the devil, not me!
Om Malik has questioned why are people blaming AT&T over Apple. The argument is "if they did not prevent their BlackBerry users to download the app, then why would they prevent the iPhone users?". Because they can... Because Apple built a fortress around the App Store. You just need to click on a link in a website (Google) to download the BlackBerry app. There is no way for AT&T of stopping it, unless they lock the entire phone, which RIM will never allow (and it is too late, anyway). On the iPhone, you have to go through the App Store. The gate is controlled by Apple that has to listen to AT&T (for now).
Apple built a fortress, AT&T controls the gate. The combination is the worst possible... Openness is ages away.
How does this stop? When Apple pulls its trigger. When the exclusivity of AT&T in the US ends. When another carrier comes on board (or two). When the Apple Tablet comes out with Verizon. When the market opens up a bit. It will happen for sure in 2010, and it could even happen in 2009. It is not far away.
At that point, boom. Walled garden gone. Only the fortress will be there. Apple will still be able to control the gate and decide what goes in and out. AT&T will be just a dumb pipe with no say.
For now, they are still a dumb pipe with some power. Unless they decide to start creating value-added mobile cloud services, and go around Apple and every other device manufacturer. It is not too late, but the clock is ticking.
Friday, July 24, 2009
About open sync, the Pre and iTunes
Oohh, this is hitting so close to home that I have to comment. I am referring to the battle between Palm and Apple around iTunes. A battle of open mobile sync (or something like that ;-)
Let me give a recap, for those in the dark (mostly in Europe, where the Pre has not started shipping yet). The Palm Pre supported sync with iTunes, when it was launched. Palm made the Pre "look like" an iPod to iTunes, and iTunes was happily syncing with it. A few days ago, Apple released an update of iTunes (8.2.1) shutting down the Pre. Official word from Apple: "Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players". Ok, but you shut them out, that's different ;-)
Yesterday, Palm announced WebOS 1.1 and in the official Palm blog they wrote "Oh, and one more thing: Palm webOS 1.1 re-enables Palm media sync".
The "Oh, and one more thing" is obviously a jab at Steve Jobs... You may debate whether the comment was funny or not, but the clear message is "bring it on Apple, we are here to fight". It is getting interesting...
The beauty of the Palm update is that is OTA (over-the-air), so everyone is going to get it and everything will return to work magically.
The bad for Apple is that I have a feeling they have little ground to sue Palm. When you spend some time reading material about reverse engineering, you see it is clearly a black art. Palm is not damaging Apple software, they have not done anything bad or stole any code, it is "just" that the Pre is claiming to be an iPod... Borderline, but still within limits.
What changed in WebOS 1.1? In the previous version, the Pre was claiming to iTunes to be an iPod built by Palm. That is what Apple shut down in 8.2.1 (anything claiming not to be built by Apple). Now the Pre is saying it is an iPod built by Apple ;-) Uuuhhh, very very close to the line here. However, apparently the device still presents the root USB node (IOUSBDevice) as a Palm Pre. Therefore, Apple could shut them down with 8.2.3 in a whiff.
Will Apple shut the Pre down? I believe so. Palm left the door open to be shut by not changing the root USB node and they are happy to make Apple look like the bad guys. It is going to be a cat and mouse game for a while. Apple has the right to do whatever they want with their product. Unless someone forces them to an open sync protocol.
Who could do it? The Europeans, of course. Wait until the Pre ships in Europe. One second after Apple shuts down the door, Palm will file a claim with the European Commission. And they will win (ooh, another good reason to love Europe ;-)
Look at Palm last comment: they are just getting ready for it, starting with some standard body...
iTunes is a great product and closing it to the outside world to protect the iPhone is not going to work. Eventually, Apple will have to suck it up and accept that the data must move freely (BTW, it is MY MUSIC...). One day, they might even switch to an open protocol, such as SyncML. It is usually the first step before open source comes in. At that point, Apple will become an unbeatable force in the market. For now, they just like to play the big fat cat.
And, as usual, I am rooting for the mouse (who BTW is selling above my expectations, at 350,000 devices). Stay iTuned, it is going to be a fun ride.
Let me give a recap, for those in the dark (mostly in Europe, where the Pre has not started shipping yet). The Palm Pre supported sync with iTunes, when it was launched. Palm made the Pre "look like" an iPod to iTunes, and iTunes was happily syncing with it. A few days ago, Apple released an update of iTunes (8.2.1) shutting down the Pre. Official word from Apple: "Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players". Ok, but you shut them out, that's different ;-)
Yesterday, Palm announced WebOS 1.1 and in the official Palm blog they wrote "Oh, and one more thing: Palm webOS 1.1 re-enables Palm media sync".
The "Oh, and one more thing" is obviously a jab at Steve Jobs... You may debate whether the comment was funny or not, but the clear message is "bring it on Apple, we are here to fight". It is getting interesting...
The beauty of the Palm update is that is OTA (over-the-air), so everyone is going to get it and everything will return to work magically.
The bad for Apple is that I have a feeling they have little ground to sue Palm. When you spend some time reading material about reverse engineering, you see it is clearly a black art. Palm is not damaging Apple software, they have not done anything bad or stole any code, it is "just" that the Pre is claiming to be an iPod... Borderline, but still within limits.
What changed in WebOS 1.1? In the previous version, the Pre was claiming to iTunes to be an iPod built by Palm. That is what Apple shut down in 8.2.1 (anything claiming not to be built by Apple). Now the Pre is saying it is an iPod built by Apple ;-) Uuuhhh, very very close to the line here. However, apparently the device still presents the root USB node (IOUSBDevice) as a Palm Pre. Therefore, Apple could shut them down with 8.2.3 in a whiff.
Will Apple shut the Pre down? I believe so. Palm left the door open to be shut by not changing the root USB node and they are happy to make Apple look like the bad guys. It is going to be a cat and mouse game for a while. Apple has the right to do whatever they want with their product. Unless someone forces them to an open sync protocol.
Who could do it? The Europeans, of course. Wait until the Pre ships in Europe. One second after Apple shuts down the door, Palm will file a claim with the European Commission. And they will win (ooh, another good reason to love Europe ;-)
Look at Palm last comment: they are just getting ready for it, starting with some standard body...
Palm believes that openness and interoperability offer better experiences for users by allowing them the freedom to use the content they own without interference across devices and services, so on behalf of consumers, we have notified the USB Implementers Forum of what we believe is improper use of the Vendor ID number by another member.Open protocol and open sync is the way to go, I have no doubts about it. It will happen no matter what. All the forces in the market are pushing towards it. There is no way back from open.
iTunes is a great product and closing it to the outside world to protect the iPhone is not going to work. Eventually, Apple will have to suck it up and accept that the data must move freely (BTW, it is MY MUSIC...). One day, they might even switch to an open protocol, such as SyncML. It is usually the first step before open source comes in. At that point, Apple will become an unbeatable force in the market. For now, they just like to play the big fat cat.
And, as usual, I am rooting for the mouse (who BTW is selling above my expectations, at 350,000 devices). Stay iTuned, it is going to be a fun ride.
Monday, July 20, 2009
In mobile... always follow fashion
When someone in your organization asks you "are you abandoning your blog?", you realize it is time to post something... I have many excuses, from traveling abroad, losing some important piece of equipment (thanks Malpensa people for taking advantage of an idiot) and being under a significant pressure... But that's my normal workload, so I should not complain ;-) I will definitely post more in the next weeks.
I was looking at a graph about iPhone 3G buyers from Nielsen's Q2 2009 Mobile Insights Survey, and I realized many people noticed different things. Here it is. It shows what phone did the users have before buying the iPhone. What stands out for you?
The figure that looks disproportionate to me is the Motorola number. Yes, Motorola has a shrinking market share but it has never been that big to justify the largest share.
Why are RAZR users flocking to the iPhone? It is a huge jump, from the most basic device to the most featured. The RAZR has the worst possible user interface, while the iPhone has the best one. It is somehow counter-intuitive... You would expect people with advanced feature phones to upgrade to the iPhone.
I believe the answer is fashion. The iPhone looks good. It is the coolest device in town.
If you go back in memory and think about all the people that bought that pink RAZR, you realize the driver was exactly the same. The RAZR looked good. It was the slimmest device in town. Nobody cared about the crappy user interface. The RAZR was a show-me-ohh-cool device.
Same for the iPhone.
The Google Tmobile G1 phone could have all the features in the world, the best screen, the best UI, the best Google integration. But if you take it out of your pocket and people say "What's that, a garage door opener?", you won't feel much cool (unless you are a geek and you start going on for an hour talking about multi-threading and the like, but please remember that you are part of a tiny percentage of the population).
When you look at the market in mobile, never forget fashion. Your mobile phone is an essential component of your image. It speaks about who you are, what you like, and tells the world if you are cool or not.
Same as your latest pair of shoes. Who cares if they are comfortable or not? I do, but I am a geek.
I was looking at a graph about iPhone 3G buyers from Nielsen's Q2 2009 Mobile Insights Survey, and I realized many people noticed different things. Here it is. It shows what phone did the users have before buying the iPhone. What stands out for you?
The figure that looks disproportionate to me is the Motorola number. Yes, Motorola has a shrinking market share but it has never been that big to justify the largest share.
Why are RAZR users flocking to the iPhone? It is a huge jump, from the most basic device to the most featured. The RAZR has the worst possible user interface, while the iPhone has the best one. It is somehow counter-intuitive... You would expect people with advanced feature phones to upgrade to the iPhone.
I believe the answer is fashion. The iPhone looks good. It is the coolest device in town.
If you go back in memory and think about all the people that bought that pink RAZR, you realize the driver was exactly the same. The RAZR looked good. It was the slimmest device in town. Nobody cared about the crappy user interface. The RAZR was a show-me-ohh-cool device.
Same for the iPhone.
The Google Tmobile G1 phone could have all the features in the world, the best screen, the best UI, the best Google integration. But if you take it out of your pocket and people say "What's that, a garage door opener?", you won't feel much cool (unless you are a geek and you start going on for an hour talking about multi-threading and the like, but please remember that you are part of a tiny percentage of the population).
When you look at the market in mobile, never forget fashion. Your mobile phone is an essential component of your image. It speaks about who you are, what you like, and tells the world if you are cool or not.
Same as your latest pair of shoes. Who cares if they are comfortable or not? I do, but I am a geek.
Monday, June 22, 2009
S is the new bar
While traveling, I have been playing with the devices in my bag: an iPhone 3G, a BlackBerry Curve, a Palm Pre, a Palm Windows Mobile and a G1 Android (I know, my bag is heavy and the guy at the security looking at the X-ray always smiles...).
What I was paying attention to was speed. Not really speed in the network (not always dependent on the device, but mostly up to the carrier), just speed in launching an app, moving from one app to another, going through a long list of emails and the like.
Speed as in making-my-life-easier-while-on-the-move speed.
I always felt my Windows Mobile was slow, and it is. In particular, when you open a bunch of apps. But at least you can kill them (it requires geek skills).
The Curve is ok, although it stops once in a while for no reason. Pretty good on email, I have to say, but beyond it... it starts coughing. And I am never sure if I actually closed an app or not.
I have to say I forgot that Android was fast. It is, faster than anything else I tried. Much faster than the iPhone 3G I have, even if the iPhone does not support multitasking (mono-tasking should make it a lot faster than anything multitasking).
Lastly, the Pre is not up to par. The apps start slowly, the email client has problems handling my vast IMAP server content. It works, the GUI is beautiful, but it is not fast. It is like the first iPhone, but now with multitasking (big difference). I would say the Palm Pre is a very good start on speed, but it is just a start.
Introducing the iPhone 3G S... where S stands for speed. Apple is trailing Palm on the UI now, so they switched the focus on something else. They built a device that is super snappy. Not supporting multitasking makes it much easier, but the user might not notice it. You will sit close to your friend, he will take a picture in a second, you will be still waiting for your camera to show up. Same for calendar, email and so on.
It is very smart marketing. The iPhone 3.0 is a catch-up operating system (yes, I have seen cut and paste and MMS in other phones before...). The iPhone 3G S is a catch-up phone (yes, I have seen 3 megapixel camera on phones before...) but it is fast. Faster than anything else. Faster than the Pre.
It is the new bar set by Apple. You can catch us on features (and maybe pass us) but look at our speed. We are faster. Now catch up with us on that, while we innovate on something else ;-)
What I was paying attention to was speed. Not really speed in the network (not always dependent on the device, but mostly up to the carrier), just speed in launching an app, moving from one app to another, going through a long list of emails and the like.
Speed as in making-my-life-easier-while-on-the-move speed.
I always felt my Windows Mobile was slow, and it is. In particular, when you open a bunch of apps. But at least you can kill them (it requires geek skills).
The Curve is ok, although it stops once in a while for no reason. Pretty good on email, I have to say, but beyond it... it starts coughing. And I am never sure if I actually closed an app or not.
I have to say I forgot that Android was fast. It is, faster than anything else I tried. Much faster than the iPhone 3G I have, even if the iPhone does not support multitasking (mono-tasking should make it a lot faster than anything multitasking).
Lastly, the Pre is not up to par. The apps start slowly, the email client has problems handling my vast IMAP server content. It works, the GUI is beautiful, but it is not fast. It is like the first iPhone, but now with multitasking (big difference). I would say the Palm Pre is a very good start on speed, but it is just a start.
Introducing the iPhone 3G S... where S stands for speed. Apple is trailing Palm on the UI now, so they switched the focus on something else. They built a device that is super snappy. Not supporting multitasking makes it much easier, but the user might not notice it. You will sit close to your friend, he will take a picture in a second, you will be still waiting for your camera to show up. Same for calendar, email and so on.
It is very smart marketing. The iPhone 3.0 is a catch-up operating system (yes, I have seen cut and paste and MMS in other phones before...). The iPhone 3G S is a catch-up phone (yes, I have seen 3 megapixel camera on phones before...) but it is fast. Faster than anything else. Faster than the Pre.
It is the new bar set by Apple. You can catch us on features (and maybe pass us) but look at our speed. We are faster. Now catch up with us on that, while we innovate on something else ;-)
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Inside the Pre
Last night, someone discovered a file, which includes the ROM of the Pre. This morning, there are instructions all over the web on how to get access to the Pre as root. In a few hours, the first Hello World app has been developed (without access to the Mojo SDK...).
Once again, this is quite amazing. Every time these things happen, I have a feeling the device manufacturer did it on purpose. I just can't believe they let it happen by mistake. Three steps and you are root with read and write access. You can see everything inside the phone, including comments in the config files. However, some are a bit embarrassing, so I do not know what to think anymore...
For example, getting access to the device requires you to type upupdowndownleftrightleftrightbastart on the device (I swear). This is clearly a punch at the iPhone because doing the same with the virtual keyboard would take you an hour, while with the Pre keyboard it is a breeze ;-)
When you look inside, you find a lot of very interesting things. First, it is a Linux machine 2.6.24 (check, yet another mobile open source based operating system). It has a Java Virtual Machine (1.5 Standard Edition). It already has settings to connect to the AT&T and T-Mobile network (which make sense, reading rumors about a GSM version coming soon). Moreover, there are hints of the rumored Palm EOS device (the one at $99) which in the OS is called pixie (the Pre is castle) and even a third one coming (zepfloyd, which seems to support wifi as the Pre, while the EOS won't).
There are also funny comments left by Palm developers inside the phone, like the TODO list. E.g.: "TODO FIXME: we ought not call this, eh?". Or this one: "On the offchance that the user hits the 'minimize' before we finished capture ... slimy bastard users"...
In general, it is very easy to modify things, for example someone quickly modified the camera to no longer make the shutter noise even with all system sounds enabled (not that I know what the use case behind it could be...). Tethering your laptop via wifi is just a matter of changing a couple of config files. There are also things I cannot talk about, but others are (for example here and here).
Bottom line: it took a few days and WebOS is naked. The world is looking at it. From what I have seen (ehm, read on the blogs, I would never do this and risk to void my warranty ;-), it looks like a very nicely developed OS (with the three stacks, Linux and Java and Javascript/HTML/CSS). Even if Palm hasn't leaked it out on purpose, the feedback from the hackers community is two thumbs up, which is another good sign for Palm.
Once again, this is quite amazing. Every time these things happen, I have a feeling the device manufacturer did it on purpose. I just can't believe they let it happen by mistake. Three steps and you are root with read and write access. You can see everything inside the phone, including comments in the config files. However, some are a bit embarrassing, so I do not know what to think anymore...
For example, getting access to the device requires you to type upupdowndownleftrightleftrightbastart on the device (I swear). This is clearly a punch at the iPhone because doing the same with the virtual keyboard would take you an hour, while with the Pre keyboard it is a breeze ;-)
When you look inside, you find a lot of very interesting things. First, it is a Linux machine 2.6.24 (check, yet another mobile open source based operating system). It has a Java Virtual Machine (1.5 Standard Edition). It already has settings to connect to the AT&T and T-Mobile network (which make sense, reading rumors about a GSM version coming soon). Moreover, there are hints of the rumored Palm EOS device (the one at $99) which in the OS is called pixie (the Pre is castle) and even a third one coming (zepfloyd, which seems to support wifi as the Pre, while the EOS won't).
There are also funny comments left by Palm developers inside the phone, like the TODO list. E.g.: "TODO FIXME: we ought not call this, eh?". Or this one: "On the offchance that the user hits the 'minimize' before we finished capture ... slimy bastard users"...
In general, it is very easy to modify things, for example someone quickly modified the camera to no longer make the shutter noise even with all system sounds enabled (not that I know what the use case behind it could be...). Tethering your laptop via wifi is just a matter of changing a couple of config files. There are also things I cannot talk about, but others are (for example here and here).
Bottom line: it took a few days and WebOS is naked. The world is looking at it. From what I have seen (ehm, read on the blogs, I would never do this and risk to void my warranty ;-), it looks like a very nicely developed OS (with the three stacks, Linux and Java and Javascript/HTML/CSS). Even if Palm hasn't leaked it out on purpose, the feedback from the hackers community is two thumbs up, which is another good sign for Palm.
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Palm Synergy is awesome
Let me start with the end: the Palm Pre is really a great device.
I have played with a lot of cool gadgets, forcing Rose many times to wait in line at 5 am with some weirdos (thanks Rose, you are awesome!), but I have been rarely impressed. The one that shocked me was the iPhone. I could not believe how good it was. The other one was the G1. I could not believe how ugly it looked (although the software was nice).
The Palm Pre first reaction is similar to the one I had with the iPhone: good hardware, great software, I want to play with it.
It also passed my wife's three-seconds taste test (her first reaction to the G1 was "it is a garage door opener?"). She said "it is better than the iPhone". Wow. I guess the mirror they put behind the sliding keyboard (pure genius, ladies will dig it) impressed her.
The device feels nice in the hand. The screen is gorgeous. The touch system works great. I have to say the keyboard is not that good, but I can live with it (better than trying to type on an iPhone, but probably not as good as my BlackBerry). The button to turn the device on and off is strange. The little thing that hides the mini-USB port took me a minute to open. Obviously, they want you to buy the Touchstone wireless charger...
Pictures are way better than the iPhone. Video looks ok. Calendar is missing the Agenda view (a killer for me). The App Store has few apps but useful and the download+install procedure is a snap: I downloaded the Weather, Linkedin and Twitter one. All absolutely great apps, which is a very good sign for the Palm SDK. I have to say the browser did not impress me, but maybe I am picky (however, they did not put it in the list of the top apps at the bottom, so they might agree with me).
I upgraded the operating system to WebOS 1.0.2 and it was a breeze. All over the air. No cables, no iTunes, no waiting for Tmobile to decide when the upgrade would be available for me (a thing I really hate about the Android OS upgrades).
The UI navigation is a pleasure. The deck metaphor is easy to understand. Swiping to erase is just one movement. Throwing away apps makes you feel good. How to move back using the hidden bar was not that intuitive, but once you try it one time, you are good to go. I have to say I still have to understand how to paste without using the menu, but maybe I am just dense. Beside that, this is the iPhone UI with benefits. The ability to have more than one app at a time is such an improvement (for a geek, at least). You can copy something from an email, put it in a contact, come back and the app is still there waiting for you... Oohh...
All nice, but the killer app is Synergy. I know I am biased, but this is the best implementation of synchronization I have seen so far. I started adding a Gmail account. Immediately, my contacts and calendar and email from Google appeared on the device. I have two different calendars in Google, both showed up, and with different colors (and I could see only one if I want). Anything I changed on the device appeared later in Google, anything I changed on Google appeared on the device. Two way sync. Transparent as it should be.
Ok, you might say this is exactly as the G1 works. But then I added my Facebook account and the magic started. My friends appeared on my contact list with pictures. Where possible, the app merged my Facebook and Gmail contacts (I guess using their email or cell phone or name). Visually, it reminds you if a contact is merged, because you see the contact picture in a deck (easy to see than to explain). You can remove the link, or add a link to connect two contacts that are the same but do not share any common info: for example, my wife that has no email address in Facebook so it could not be linked, but now I have her picture on my phone and it will change if she changes her profile in Facebook. When you edit a contact, it shows you where every field came from. Some can't be modified (you can't change any of your friends info from Facebook, they do). It even merged two contacts I had duplicated in Gmail by mistake... Awesome. Sync nirvana. Finally.
I do not know if the Pre will be a big hit. There are many factors in play, starting with the carrier they launched it with. With Verizon and AT&T saying "we'll have a Pre too" (true or not that is, marketing is everything...), many are questioning if they should switch. Most won't do it.
However, I am sure it is a fantastic device. It will be a hit, and Palm does not need for it too be that big. An ok hit is what they need.
And the sync is awesome. Awesome. Awesome. Every carrier in the world should have the same capabilities. They should not leave it to a device manufacturer to make their services sticky. They should not allow others to make them a pipe. They should just give me a call :-)
Oh, the Pre is also capable of functioning as a phone and calling people. But who cares about it?
I have played with a lot of cool gadgets, forcing Rose many times to wait in line at 5 am with some weirdos (thanks Rose, you are awesome!), but I have been rarely impressed. The one that shocked me was the iPhone. I could not believe how good it was. The other one was the G1. I could not believe how ugly it looked (although the software was nice).
The Palm Pre first reaction is similar to the one I had with the iPhone: good hardware, great software, I want to play with it.
It also passed my wife's three-seconds taste test (her first reaction to the G1 was "it is a garage door opener?"). She said "it is better than the iPhone". Wow. I guess the mirror they put behind the sliding keyboard (pure genius, ladies will dig it) impressed her.
The device feels nice in the hand. The screen is gorgeous. The touch system works great. I have to say the keyboard is not that good, but I can live with it (better than trying to type on an iPhone, but probably not as good as my BlackBerry). The button to turn the device on and off is strange. The little thing that hides the mini-USB port took me a minute to open. Obviously, they want you to buy the Touchstone wireless charger...
Pictures are way better than the iPhone. Video looks ok. Calendar is missing the Agenda view (a killer for me). The App Store has few apps but useful and the download+install procedure is a snap: I downloaded the Weather, Linkedin and Twitter one. All absolutely great apps, which is a very good sign for the Palm SDK. I have to say the browser did not impress me, but maybe I am picky (however, they did not put it in the list of the top apps at the bottom, so they might agree with me).
I upgraded the operating system to WebOS 1.0.2 and it was a breeze. All over the air. No cables, no iTunes, no waiting for Tmobile to decide when the upgrade would be available for me (a thing I really hate about the Android OS upgrades).
The UI navigation is a pleasure. The deck metaphor is easy to understand. Swiping to erase is just one movement. Throwing away apps makes you feel good. How to move back using the hidden bar was not that intuitive, but once you try it one time, you are good to go. I have to say I still have to understand how to paste without using the menu, but maybe I am just dense. Beside that, this is the iPhone UI with benefits. The ability to have more than one app at a time is such an improvement (for a geek, at least). You can copy something from an email, put it in a contact, come back and the app is still there waiting for you... Oohh...
All nice, but the killer app is Synergy. I know I am biased, but this is the best implementation of synchronization I have seen so far. I started adding a Gmail account. Immediately, my contacts and calendar and email from Google appeared on the device. I have two different calendars in Google, both showed up, and with different colors (and I could see only one if I want). Anything I changed on the device appeared later in Google, anything I changed on Google appeared on the device. Two way sync. Transparent as it should be.
Ok, you might say this is exactly as the G1 works. But then I added my Facebook account and the magic started. My friends appeared on my contact list with pictures. Where possible, the app merged my Facebook and Gmail contacts (I guess using their email or cell phone or name). Visually, it reminds you if a contact is merged, because you see the contact picture in a deck (easy to see than to explain). You can remove the link, or add a link to connect two contacts that are the same but do not share any common info: for example, my wife that has no email address in Facebook so it could not be linked, but now I have her picture on my phone and it will change if she changes her profile in Facebook. When you edit a contact, it shows you where every field came from. Some can't be modified (you can't change any of your friends info from Facebook, they do). It even merged two contacts I had duplicated in Gmail by mistake... Awesome. Sync nirvana. Finally.
I do not know if the Pre will be a big hit. There are many factors in play, starting with the carrier they launched it with. With Verizon and AT&T saying "we'll have a Pre too" (true or not that is, marketing is everything...), many are questioning if they should switch. Most won't do it.
However, I am sure it is a fantastic device. It will be a hit, and Palm does not need for it too be that big. An ok hit is what they need.
And the sync is awesome. Awesome. Awesome. Every carrier in the world should have the same capabilities. They should not leave it to a device manufacturer to make their services sticky. They should not allow others to make them a pipe. They should just give me a call :-)
Oh, the Pre is also capable of functioning as a phone and calling people. But who cares about it?
Friday, June 05, 2009
Apple WWDC predictions
Tomorrow is Palm day and I will celebrate it. There is nothing secret about the Pre. We know everything about it and I liked what I saw so far. I am definitely hopeful it will be a big hit, although I know Palm actually needs a reasonable hit to be happy.
Monday is Apple day. WWDC. Usually, Steve Jobs gets on stage and presents something cool. And, usually, I write a bunch of predictions on what he will present. Strangely enough, I have been doing pretty good on the predictions, missing only on the things I really wanted (like the Calendar API they never delivered). It is the same with fantasy football: you should never ever think about the team you cheer for, or you will screw up your fantasy team predictions. Luckily, there is nothing I am expecting that I need or want from Apple this time, so I can go easy on predictions ;-)
MOST PROBABLE
I hope not, I like sparks ;-)
Monday is Apple day. WWDC. Usually, Steve Jobs gets on stage and presents something cool. And, usually, I write a bunch of predictions on what he will present. Strangely enough, I have been doing pretty good on the predictions, missing only on the things I really wanted (like the Calendar API they never delivered). It is the same with fantasy football: you should never ever think about the team you cheer for, or you will screw up your fantasy team predictions. Luckily, there is nothing I am expecting that I need or want from Apple this time, so I can go easy on predictions ;-)
MOST PROBABLE
- A new iPhone with a similar case (so much that you won't have to change your pink cover) maybe multi-color, with more memory, space, a faster CPU, video support (download and upload) and better camera (with a dedicated button for it). Yawn...
- A compass, with some clever app by a partner to use it. Yawn...
- Flash support for the iPhone (chasing Palm)
- A clever way of powering the iPhone wirelessly (chasing Palm)
- A mini iPhone or, at least, an iPhone for $99 (killing Palm)
- A tablet iPhone, also known as a smartbook (kinda like a netbook but with no keyboard, I guess). Or maybe really a netbook, at a $549 price, enough for Steve Jobs to save his face about "not being able to create a netbook for $500 that does not suck"
- Steve Jobs on stage, something you will see only if #3 or #4 happen.
I hope not, I like sparks ;-)
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Apple will buy Palm
Will Apple buy Palm? Probably not ;-) but let me explain why it could make sense.
It seems that Palm is doing everything they can to piss off Apple these days. Not only they have multitouch, they are "copying" features from the iPhone and they are launching their phone two days before Apple WWDC.
Moreover, they recently announced support for iTunes. The only way to do it is to have access to the protocol the iPhone uses to talk to iTunes. To make the Palm Pre look like an iPhone... Reverse-engineering it is probably illegal, although you can always go with the story of "Clean Room Design". Clean like a pig in the mud, considering how many former Apple employees Palm has, starting with Jon Rubinstein (the guy who built the iPod for Steve Jobs).
You would guess Palm is looking for a lawsuit. Apple should have sued them already. But they haven't. Strange. Unless Palm has legal access to the API, which makes sense only if there are ties between the two companies that go beyond a partnership...
Clearly, the Palm Pre is ahead of what Apple has, starting with multitasking (not an easy one). I know, the new iPhone will catch up a bit, but it will still be behind. And when Palm will launch the EOS (a cheaper Pre), it will be trouble for Apple and its iPhone pricing.
The DNA of Palm is the DNA of Apple. They share it. Putting together the two teams would be easy. And the two offices are in the same area.
Lastly, it will be quite convenient for Apple to get rid of the only real competitor they have in the space. It is cheap, brings technology and innovation, it is easy to swallow.
Aren't you wondering why Apple has not sued Palm yet? I am... Maybe they are threatening a lawsuit while they negotiate a price for an acquisition (and what if this is what Elevation was targeting from day one?)
What if Monday at WWDC Steve Jobs gets on stage and shows a Palm? That would be fun :-)) Or it might happen later, after Apple actually sues Palm, lowers their price a bit and then buys them.
Bottom line, it sounds crazy, but it might not be.
It seems that Palm is doing everything they can to piss off Apple these days. Not only they have multitouch, they are "copying" features from the iPhone and they are launching their phone two days before Apple WWDC.
Moreover, they recently announced support for iTunes. The only way to do it is to have access to the protocol the iPhone uses to talk to iTunes. To make the Palm Pre look like an iPhone... Reverse-engineering it is probably illegal, although you can always go with the story of "Clean Room Design". Clean like a pig in the mud, considering how many former Apple employees Palm has, starting with Jon Rubinstein (the guy who built the iPod for Steve Jobs).
You would guess Palm is looking for a lawsuit. Apple should have sued them already. But they haven't. Strange. Unless Palm has legal access to the API, which makes sense only if there are ties between the two companies that go beyond a partnership...
Clearly, the Palm Pre is ahead of what Apple has, starting with multitasking (not an easy one). I know, the new iPhone will catch up a bit, but it will still be behind. And when Palm will launch the EOS (a cheaper Pre), it will be trouble for Apple and its iPhone pricing.
The DNA of Palm is the DNA of Apple. They share it. Putting together the two teams would be easy. And the two offices are in the same area.
Lastly, it will be quite convenient for Apple to get rid of the only real competitor they have in the space. It is cheap, brings technology and innovation, it is easy to swallow.
Aren't you wondering why Apple has not sued Palm yet? I am... Maybe they are threatening a lawsuit while they negotiate a price for an acquisition (and what if this is what Elevation was targeting from day one?)
What if Monday at WWDC Steve Jobs gets on stage and shows a Palm? That would be fun :-)) Or it might happen later, after Apple actually sues Palm, lowers their price a bit and then buys them.
Bottom line, it sounds crazy, but it might not be.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Why mobile apps fail
The other day, a tweet from a competitor (for whom I have great respect) triggered some thinking about mobile apps. He was questioning (I believe) the existence of our Symbian Sync Client, that you can download from the Ovi Store. His tweet was: "who needs a symbian syncml client when it ships with a built-in one that works just fine...".
It is a good question. All Symbian devices come with a SyncML client pre-installed. Once it is configured properly, you just launch it and it syncs well. Why would you need an app on the device to do the same thing?
Because it is easy to discover, configure, launch and use. In a word: because user actually end up using it.
That thought lead to a more generic analysis about why mobile apps fail. I have seen so many fail in my market that I lost count. Here you have my reasons in categories.
1. Discovery
Discovering an app has been the #1 issue for a long time. How do people find out they have a SyncML client on their device? They don't... It is buried under a million clicks. They do not even know they have it. The same for many apps that were developed and had a few users. You have to make it easy for people to discover your app. It was almost impossible.
Then it came the App Store. It changed everything. Finding an app is now easy. You have a need ("I want to sync my contacts with my Outlook"), you search the app store, you click and boom. Here it is, your app, ready to go. Visible in the area where you would expect it to be (the Home Page, in an iPhone).
Discovery has always been a problem, but it is gone. And gone is the fear that the app might screw up my phone. If it is in the App Store, it must be good. I can download it. And use it.
Yes, you can configure a SyncML client remotely over the air (we do it), but that leads to the next item.
2. Configuration
Most app that interact with the network need a configuration. You have to put in login and password somewhere. In the worst cases, you have to select an APN as well and even a URL.
Forcing a user to type a URL is a guarantee of losing 90% of your users. Finding a slash on a numeric keyboard is a task for the fittest. And only the fittest survive. The others give up. Unfortunately, only 10% of the population goes to the gym daily to exercise...
The beauty of the App Store is that you can send an app with all the parameters you need, ready to ask you for additional info when it starts. You have the app on your device, just downloaded, you click, put the additional info in and you are good to go.
If you send a binary SMS (WAP push), you have to hope the users saves the information (not an easy task, I am ready to bet you lose 30% of the users right there), then goes to the sync parameters on the phone (where??? another 30% of the people will give up before getting there), then open the configuration and change the data there. And then they have to go and actually launch the application. It is a two-step process, you just do not start the app, configure and go.
If you want your app to be used, work on the configuration. Make it as simple as possible. Minimize parameters. Make sure they pop up as soon as you launch the app for the first time (do not present a "sorry, app not configured, go into Settings, configure it, then launch it again"). You do not want to lose users just because you are lazy... I know you can guess if the app has never been launched before...
3. Launch
Ok, this seems easy: finding the app and launching it. Anybody can do it.
Wrong.
Apps end up in the wrong places. Apple perfected it, others have to work harder on it. They are hard to find on the phone.
Even worst if they app is preinstalled, like the SyncML client. It is put in an ungodly location on the phone. I am a pro, and every time I get a phone in my hands, it takes me 20 clicks to discover where in the world the client is. Nokia has been moving it around for years...
If you can't find the app, you can't launch it. If you do not launch it, you won't use it. Another 30% of users lost. You really have to want it hard to make it.
There is not much you can do about this, if you are a developer. Make sure the instructions are clear and hope for the best. Device manufacturers are improving fast (thanks as usual, Steve!) so this issue is about to disappear (at least, for apps that are installed from the App Store, I am not that confident about the pre-installed ones).
4. Use
Ok, you made it, you have the application up and running, properly configured (congrats!). Now you use it... and the UI sucks. 30 seconds later you give up. You remove it from the device or leave it there thinking "I might use it later" and you never go back doing it.
Most mobile apps have a very bad user interface. I mean, something that yells "did you ever read a book on usability???". I have been insisting on the topic many times, due to my background on usability. I do not want to be boring, so I will stop here. But if you want your app to be used, make it usable.
Guess which apps are often horrible to use? The ones preinstalled by the vendors... It sounds incredible, but that is often the case. The pre-installed sync client on Symbian is ugly. It does not support client push and has a clumsy way to do server push. It somehow looks like an app slapped on the phone by someone, just to check a box on an RFP ("do you support SyncML?").
Bottom line: if you sum up how many users you might have lost along the way, developing an app that is hard to discover, configure, launch and use... you are probably at 99%. There is no mercy out there. You have to be perfect on every aspect of the experience, and the most important element is making sure the app actually runs... I believe we spent more time architecting and developing the set up process than the app itself. It seems crazy, but it is not.
The statement "who needs a symbian syncml client when it ships with a built-in one that works just fine..." has an embedded flaw: when you get to the "works just fine" part of the experience, you will have 10% of the users that started the process. The rest will not make it. The set-up will kill the experience.
Believe me, mobile users have a limited time doing anything. If you do not get them up and running in 10 seconds, they will give up. They are mobile, they are on the go. They do not have time to wait for you. Do not make them wait. Or your beautiful mobile app will fail.
It is a good question. All Symbian devices come with a SyncML client pre-installed. Once it is configured properly, you just launch it and it syncs well. Why would you need an app on the device to do the same thing?
Because it is easy to discover, configure, launch and use. In a word: because user actually end up using it.
That thought lead to a more generic analysis about why mobile apps fail. I have seen so many fail in my market that I lost count. Here you have my reasons in categories.
1. Discovery
Discovering an app has been the #1 issue for a long time. How do people find out they have a SyncML client on their device? They don't... It is buried under a million clicks. They do not even know they have it. The same for many apps that were developed and had a few users. You have to make it easy for people to discover your app. It was almost impossible.
Then it came the App Store. It changed everything. Finding an app is now easy. You have a need ("I want to sync my contacts with my Outlook"), you search the app store, you click and boom. Here it is, your app, ready to go. Visible in the area where you would expect it to be (the Home Page, in an iPhone).
Discovery has always been a problem, but it is gone. And gone is the fear that the app might screw up my phone. If it is in the App Store, it must be good. I can download it. And use it.
Yes, you can configure a SyncML client remotely over the air (we do it), but that leads to the next item.
2. Configuration
Most app that interact with the network need a configuration. You have to put in login and password somewhere. In the worst cases, you have to select an APN as well and even a URL.
Forcing a user to type a URL is a guarantee of losing 90% of your users. Finding a slash on a numeric keyboard is a task for the fittest. And only the fittest survive. The others give up. Unfortunately, only 10% of the population goes to the gym daily to exercise...
The beauty of the App Store is that you can send an app with all the parameters you need, ready to ask you for additional info when it starts. You have the app on your device, just downloaded, you click, put the additional info in and you are good to go.
If you send a binary SMS (WAP push), you have to hope the users saves the information (not an easy task, I am ready to bet you lose 30% of the users right there), then goes to the sync parameters on the phone (where??? another 30% of the people will give up before getting there), then open the configuration and change the data there. And then they have to go and actually launch the application. It is a two-step process, you just do not start the app, configure and go.
If you want your app to be used, work on the configuration. Make it as simple as possible. Minimize parameters. Make sure they pop up as soon as you launch the app for the first time (do not present a "sorry, app not configured, go into Settings, configure it, then launch it again"). You do not want to lose users just because you are lazy... I know you can guess if the app has never been launched before...
3. Launch
Ok, this seems easy: finding the app and launching it. Anybody can do it.
Wrong.
Apps end up in the wrong places. Apple perfected it, others have to work harder on it. They are hard to find on the phone.
Even worst if they app is preinstalled, like the SyncML client. It is put in an ungodly location on the phone. I am a pro, and every time I get a phone in my hands, it takes me 20 clicks to discover where in the world the client is. Nokia has been moving it around for years...
If you can't find the app, you can't launch it. If you do not launch it, you won't use it. Another 30% of users lost. You really have to want it hard to make it.
There is not much you can do about this, if you are a developer. Make sure the instructions are clear and hope for the best. Device manufacturers are improving fast (thanks as usual, Steve!) so this issue is about to disappear (at least, for apps that are installed from the App Store, I am not that confident about the pre-installed ones).
4. Use
Ok, you made it, you have the application up and running, properly configured (congrats!). Now you use it... and the UI sucks. 30 seconds later you give up. You remove it from the device or leave it there thinking "I might use it later" and you never go back doing it.
Most mobile apps have a very bad user interface. I mean, something that yells "did you ever read a book on usability???". I have been insisting on the topic many times, due to my background on usability. I do not want to be boring, so I will stop here. But if you want your app to be used, make it usable.
Guess which apps are often horrible to use? The ones preinstalled by the vendors... It sounds incredible, but that is often the case. The pre-installed sync client on Symbian is ugly. It does not support client push and has a clumsy way to do server push. It somehow looks like an app slapped on the phone by someone, just to check a box on an RFP ("do you support SyncML?").
Bottom line: if you sum up how many users you might have lost along the way, developing an app that is hard to discover, configure, launch and use... you are probably at 99%. There is no mercy out there. You have to be perfect on every aspect of the experience, and the most important element is making sure the app actually runs... I believe we spent more time architecting and developing the set up process than the app itself. It seems crazy, but it is not.
The statement "who needs a symbian syncml client when it ships with a built-in one that works just fine..." has an embedded flaw: when you get to the "works just fine" part of the experience, you will have 10% of the users that started the process. The rest will not make it. The set-up will kill the experience.
Believe me, mobile users have a limited time doing anything. If you do not get them up and running in 10 seconds, they will give up. They are mobile, they are on the go. They do not have time to wait for you. Do not make them wait. Or your beautiful mobile app will fail.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Can Nokia pull it off?
Today marked the day of the launch of the Ovi Store, the Nokia answer to the Apple AppStore. Symbian has been around for years and years, and so have the Symbian apps. However, it took a year after Apple announced its store, for Nokia to realize they needed one...
Being second is not always a bad thing. You can learn from the first one (or second one, since Android Marketplace has been live for a few months) and make adjustments.
Or you can screw it completely...
TechCrunch has been pretty quick to call the launch "A complete disaster". Maybe they were even too quick and too harsh (I could get to the Funambol app on the store pretty easily), but the initial meltdown highlights one thing, a key one: maybe Nokia is not good at running services...
Or better: maybe they have never done it, they are trying (Ovi has been up and running for a while now) but they do not know how to manage a peak of interest. They are learning.
This is the tough part: they are a hardware company. They have always been (although they were selling very different hardware in the years before mobile telephony, like galoshes...) and they have decided to morph into a cloud services company. They have to. But it is not easy.
The question is: can they pull it off? Can a company change its DNA, and reposition itself as a software and services battleship?
Apple was started as a software company with a superbly engineered hardware around it. The difference was the UI, although they have been innovative on the HW side as well. And they still are. The iPhone is a superb piece of good looking hardware but the difference is inside. So much that everyone is catching up on the HW part, but nobody has matched them on the SW (Palm excluded, I think they surpassed them, actually). Apple knows software and they translated it pretty easily to services, starting with iTunes and playing with .Mac for years before going into MobileMe.
RIM was started as a software company with a very usable HW. The core, though, is the push email mechanism and the service behind it. The HW has been good looking enough (ugly, in most cases ;-) but very reliable. They know services.
Nokia is different. They are a hardware company. They bought software companies and they destroyed them (Intellisync being the last one coming to mind). They have to make a huge effort to turn the boat around. But they have to.
If I have to bet, knowing the resilience of the guys in Helsinki, I would say they will make it. It will be painful, they will need to get more help outside of the company (you do not change your DNA, you get some new from the outside and you recombine it) but eventually they will pull it off. It will just take a long time.
The worry is that they might not have that much time because the competition is moving extremely fast and they are out to kill them... We'll see.
Being second is not always a bad thing. You can learn from the first one (or second one, since Android Marketplace has been live for a few months) and make adjustments.
Or you can screw it completely...
TechCrunch has been pretty quick to call the launch "A complete disaster". Maybe they were even too quick and too harsh (I could get to the Funambol app on the store pretty easily), but the initial meltdown highlights one thing, a key one: maybe Nokia is not good at running services...
Or better: maybe they have never done it, they are trying (Ovi has been up and running for a while now) but they do not know how to manage a peak of interest. They are learning.
This is the tough part: they are a hardware company. They have always been (although they were selling very different hardware in the years before mobile telephony, like galoshes...) and they have decided to morph into a cloud services company. They have to. But it is not easy.
The question is: can they pull it off? Can a company change its DNA, and reposition itself as a software and services battleship?
Apple was started as a software company with a superbly engineered hardware around it. The difference was the UI, although they have been innovative on the HW side as well. And they still are. The iPhone is a superb piece of good looking hardware but the difference is inside. So much that everyone is catching up on the HW part, but nobody has matched them on the SW (Palm excluded, I think they surpassed them, actually). Apple knows software and they translated it pretty easily to services, starting with iTunes and playing with .Mac for years before going into MobileMe.
RIM was started as a software company with a very usable HW. The core, though, is the push email mechanism and the service behind it. The HW has been good looking enough (ugly, in most cases ;-) but very reliable. They know services.
Nokia is different. They are a hardware company. They bought software companies and they destroyed them (Intellisync being the last one coming to mind). They have to make a huge effort to turn the boat around. But they have to.
If I have to bet, knowing the resilience of the guys in Helsinki, I would say they will make it. It will be painful, they will need to get more help outside of the company (you do not change your DNA, you get some new from the outside and you recombine it) but eventually they will pull it off. It will just take a long time.
The worry is that they might not have that much time because the competition is moving extremely fast and they are out to kill them... We'll see.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
The Palm gamble
I am a big Palm fan. I have always been and I will always be. Or so I hope, if they do not let me down. They did not let me down with the Pre. It is a fantastic device, beautifully engineered, sporting the best synchronization engine on the planet, really (and for the first time) giving iPhone a run for its money.
Now it is official: it will be out on June 6th and it will cost $199. Both numbers are interesting.
Why is $199 interesting? Because it is the right price to be competitive with the current iPhone.
Why is June 6th interesting? Because it is two days (two) before Apple WWDC, the developer conference when Apple is expected to announce a new lineup of iPhones (rumors abound: from new colored iPhones, to an iPhone mini, to an iPhone tablet, to new pricing, to....).
It is a huge gamble. Palm is announcing their make-it-or-break-it device two days before Apple is announcing something. They always do. Hard to believe they won't do it this time.
In any case, Palm will benefit from two days of huge marketing, pumped up by the expectation of the new iPhone two days later (expect the press to go berserk).
If Apple has something spectacular in store, though, the wind will be gone. Two days and Palm will be history in the press. Everybody will talk about how Apple did it again, how they killed the competition and so on...
If Apple disappoints, though, Palm is going to be on a trajectory towards the moon. The company that challenged Apple, the company that is ahead of Apple, the company that will kill the iPhone, and so on...
If Apple comes out in the middle, then Palm will be in the news anyway. They will have a big marketing push for free, lifted by the Apple marketing machine. They will be the challenger anyway, at least because they put themselves in front of the guns. They do not need to sell 10 millions devices in a month, they need to do ok to survive and grow.
It is a gamble. But a smart one. One I would have taken. The probability of Apple hitting out of the park are there, but the probability of something in the middle is higher (also, I have a feeling Palm knows more about Apple than we do...).
If they get it right, this might be remembered as one of the best marketing stunt in the history of mankind...
Now it is official: it will be out on June 6th and it will cost $199. Both numbers are interesting.
Why is $199 interesting? Because it is the right price to be competitive with the current iPhone.Why is June 6th interesting? Because it is two days (two) before Apple WWDC, the developer conference when Apple is expected to announce a new lineup of iPhones (rumors abound: from new colored iPhones, to an iPhone mini, to an iPhone tablet, to new pricing, to....).
It is a huge gamble. Palm is announcing their make-it-or-break-it device two days before Apple is announcing something. They always do. Hard to believe they won't do it this time.
In any case, Palm will benefit from two days of huge marketing, pumped up by the expectation of the new iPhone two days later (expect the press to go berserk).
If Apple has something spectacular in store, though, the wind will be gone. Two days and Palm will be history in the press. Everybody will talk about how Apple did it again, how they killed the competition and so on...
If Apple disappoints, though, Palm is going to be on a trajectory towards the moon. The company that challenged Apple, the company that is ahead of Apple, the company that will kill the iPhone, and so on...
If Apple comes out in the middle, then Palm will be in the news anyway. They will have a big marketing push for free, lifted by the Apple marketing machine. They will be the challenger anyway, at least because they put themselves in front of the guns. They do not need to sell 10 millions devices in a month, they need to do ok to survive and grow.
It is a gamble. But a smart one. One I would have taken. The probability of Apple hitting out of the park are there, but the probability of something in the middle is higher (also, I have a feeling Palm knows more about Apple than we do...).
If they get it right, this might be remembered as one of the best marketing stunt in the history of mankind...
Monday, May 18, 2009
Do we really need another OSS mobile stack?
There is one reason Linux has been successful as a mainstream server OS: RedHat. It is not the company behind it that made it good, it is the fact that one company made the Linux enterprise distribution. There are few more distros, but one is mainstream. The rest is noise.
The market does not like noise, it likes mainstream. Early adopters are a nice bunch of people, but they are not that many... You need the Early Majority and the Late Majority to step in, to make something mainstream. Crossing the chasm happens when there is a clear leader.
Now look at Mobile Linux today. It is a mess. And I am upset about it because I am one of the big supporters of mobile open source, as you might have noticed. And if I am confused, imagine the rest of the world...
We have Android (open source dictatorship), LiMo (open source oligarchy) and Symbian (open source to be). Then you have Maemo (a Nokia effort for the tablets, which somehow clashes with the acquisition of Trolltech) and Moblin (an Intel effort for MIDs, Mobile Internet Devices, which seems not be going anywhere).
Too many initiatives?
Nope, now we have a new one. Nokia and Intel (wow) announced oFono today. I do not think it is an OS, probably more of a stack. But it is meant to do all the things an OS does on a mobile device (telephony, for once).
The description of the project is a geek dream and a journalist nightmare:
Anyway, it is just another confusing effort in the mobile open source space. I do understand this is a hot market and everyone is jumping on it, but I think we are trying to do too much and it is not helping anyone.
Or maybe I should just look at it and celebrate yet another success of mobile open source, which attracts the bigger players, committed to make it the mobile platform of the future.
If I just could understand what they do, maybe I could make up my mind...
The market does not like noise, it likes mainstream. Early adopters are a nice bunch of people, but they are not that many... You need the Early Majority and the Late Majority to step in, to make something mainstream. Crossing the chasm happens when there is a clear leader.
Now look at Mobile Linux today. It is a mess. And I am upset about it because I am one of the big supporters of mobile open source, as you might have noticed. And if I am confused, imagine the rest of the world...
We have Android (open source dictatorship), LiMo (open source oligarchy) and Symbian (open source to be). Then you have Maemo (a Nokia effort for the tablets, which somehow clashes with the acquisition of Trolltech) and Moblin (an Intel effort for MIDs, Mobile Internet Devices, which seems not be going anywhere).
Too many initiatives?
Nope, now we have a new one. Nokia and Intel (wow) announced oFono today. I do not think it is an OS, probably more of a stack. But it is meant to do all the things an OS does on a mobile device (telephony, for once).
The description of the project is a geek dream and a journalist nightmare:
oFono.org is a place to bring developers together around designing an infrastructure for building mobile telephony (GSM/UMTS) applications. oFono.org is licensed under GPLv2, and it includes a high-level D-Bus API for use by telephony applications of any license. oFono.org also includes a low-level plug-in API for integrating with open source as well as third party telephony stacks, cellular modems and storage back-ends. The plug-in API functionality is modeled on public standards, in particular 3GPP TS 27.007 "AT command set for User Equipment (UE)."I mean, the answer to "what is oFono?" is "A plug-in API functionality modeled on 3GPP TS 27.007"... Aahhh, now it is clear ;-)
Anyway, it is just another confusing effort in the mobile open source space. I do understand this is a hot market and everyone is jumping on it, but I think we are trying to do too much and it is not helping anyone.
Or maybe I should just look at it and celebrate yet another success of mobile open source, which attracts the bigger players, committed to make it the mobile platform of the future.
If I just could understand what they do, maybe I could make up my mind...
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
I am an art dealer
Yesterday I attended the third Venice Sessions event. It is an event promoted by Telecom Italia and held at their Future Centre in Venice. Spectacular location. The invitation by Telecom Italia to attend the event was the main reason for my last European trip, although as usual I packed the trip with a million of other things...
The topic was "Technology and modern art". Very interesting, because if there is something Italians are famous for, that is art (ok, ok, for the Garfields out there... pizza is a close second). In particular when you are talking about that topic inside that building inside that city... Art is everywhere, even overwhelming at times.
At first, I was a bit puzzled. Why was I there? Why did they invite me? I sell software for mobile phones, I had little in common with most of the speakers, beside personal interest. When the museum people were talking about paintings, exhibitions, modern art, I was just listening in awe. They were speaking a language I barely understood. I felt way out of my league.
And then, along the day, someone started talking about creativity.
Boom, lights on.
I always talk about Italy as the perfect spot for high tech innovation, software in particular. My usual argument is that software is pure creativity, a fine product of the brain. That Italians are masters of creativity, from paintings to sculptures to fashion to design to clothing to furniture to food. That software is just another representation of creativity, that is in the country DNA (in kilos). It is what made Italy a success worldwide, for centuries. Italians are meant to build great software.
I then realized, with the microphone in my hand, that software is actually a form of modern art. I realized that software developers are modern artists.
I always insisted to call my guys software designers, instead of developers, because they deserve to be considered at the same level of clothes designers, or architects: people that are known to be cool. Software design has not been considered cool in Italy. But it should, because it is a form of art. Artists are cool. And software developers are artists.
And now that makes me an art dealer, I guess.
Looks what happens when you listen to smart people in a beautiful place: you walk in as a software salesman, you walk out with a sense a coolness.
The topic was "Technology and modern art". Very interesting, because if there is something Italians are famous for, that is art (ok, ok, for the Garfields out there... pizza is a close second). In particular when you are talking about that topic inside that building inside that city... Art is everywhere, even overwhelming at times.
At first, I was a bit puzzled. Why was I there? Why did they invite me? I sell software for mobile phones, I had little in common with most of the speakers, beside personal interest. When the museum people were talking about paintings, exhibitions, modern art, I was just listening in awe. They were speaking a language I barely understood. I felt way out of my league.
And then, along the day, someone started talking about creativity.
Boom, lights on.
I always talk about Italy as the perfect spot for high tech innovation, software in particular. My usual argument is that software is pure creativity, a fine product of the brain. That Italians are masters of creativity, from paintings to sculptures to fashion to design to clothing to furniture to food. That software is just another representation of creativity, that is in the country DNA (in kilos). It is what made Italy a success worldwide, for centuries. Italians are meant to build great software.
I then realized, with the microphone in my hand, that software is actually a form of modern art. I realized that software developers are modern artists.
I always insisted to call my guys software designers, instead of developers, because they deserve to be considered at the same level of clothes designers, or architects: people that are known to be cool. Software design has not been considered cool in Italy. But it should, because it is a form of art. Artists are cool. And software developers are artists.
And now that makes me an art dealer, I guess.
Looks what happens when you listen to smart people in a beautiful place: you walk in as a software salesman, you walk out with a sense a coolness.
Monday, May 04, 2009
The content trap
In a world where mash-up is the buzzword (or was it? Web 2.0 is not that cool anymore...), you would assume content is freely available to anyone. That you can take some data from Google, mash it up with something coming out of Facebook, Yahoo and so on.
That is true, up to a certain point.
The trick is that who owns the content (even the User Generated Content...) owns the content. It is as simple as that. If you do not own the content, you have to get it from somewhere else. The company that owns it can shut you down whenever they want. They do not even have to ask for your permission... You might have the APIs to technically access their content, but that is not nearly enough.
One example is what happened today at Facebook. They shut down an application that was simply creating an RSS feed of your stream. Granted, the app was overstepping some boundaries on Facebook privacy rules, but they could have just changed the rules, had they not like it.
This is exactly what happened in the Instant Messaging world (at least in mobile). Do you know any mobile IM company that made it? I don't... You can easily build a Yahoo Messenger integration, but when you go and sell it to a mobile operator they will ask you "do you have permission from Yahoo?". Nope? Go ask them and they will charge you. Everyone will do the same. The economics will never work when you are trying to sell a free app and you have to pay hard dollars to the content owner.
I could go on and on with examples. If you do not own the content and you are trying to build an application accessing it, you are putting your foot in a trap. As soon as you are successful, you sell it to someone or you get a lot of users, be sure the content owner will knock at your door asking for money. They will say you use too much of their bandwidth for free or that they changed their privacy rules or whatever. Bottom line: they will ask for money (rightly so, they own the content after all) and you will be screwed.
If you are a mobile operator and you do not own the content, you are also screwed... It is exactly the same thing as above. Build an integration and they will come after you. Your only option is to actually be the content owner. Take the user generated content first (it is easy and it is free, with no copyright issues), then you can add more. But be very careful on avoiding the content trap. The Internet Portals are just waiting for you to put your foot in the trap...
That is true, up to a certain point.
The trick is that who owns the content (even the User Generated Content...) owns the content. It is as simple as that. If you do not own the content, you have to get it from somewhere else. The company that owns it can shut you down whenever they want. They do not even have to ask for your permission... You might have the APIs to technically access their content, but that is not nearly enough.
One example is what happened today at Facebook. They shut down an application that was simply creating an RSS feed of your stream. Granted, the app was overstepping some boundaries on Facebook privacy rules, but they could have just changed the rules, had they not like it.
This is exactly what happened in the Instant Messaging world (at least in mobile). Do you know any mobile IM company that made it? I don't... You can easily build a Yahoo Messenger integration, but when you go and sell it to a mobile operator they will ask you "do you have permission from Yahoo?". Nope? Go ask them and they will charge you. Everyone will do the same. The economics will never work when you are trying to sell a free app and you have to pay hard dollars to the content owner.
I could go on and on with examples. If you do not own the content and you are trying to build an application accessing it, you are putting your foot in a trap. As soon as you are successful, you sell it to someone or you get a lot of users, be sure the content owner will knock at your door asking for money. They will say you use too much of their bandwidth for free or that they changed their privacy rules or whatever. Bottom line: they will ask for money (rightly so, they own the content after all) and you will be screwed.
If you are a mobile operator and you do not own the content, you are also screwed... It is exactly the same thing as above. Build an integration and they will come after you. Your only option is to actually be the content owner. Take the user generated content first (it is easy and it is free, with no copyright issues), then you can add more. But be very careful on avoiding the content trap. The Internet Portals are just waiting for you to put your foot in the trap...
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Apple made AT&T a pipe
There is a war the device manufacturers are waging against the carriers. A scary one for the mobile operators, in particular because they are attacked by Internet Portals as well, at the same time...
It all started with RIM. They took over the relationship with the customer. The carrier disappeared. The only thing that reminds me of AT&T on my BlackBerry is a plastic sticker on the front. Nothing else. While I am roaming around the world, the BlackBerry still works and I do not even remember which carrier I am using. My email is synced with the BlackBerry Internet Service, AT&T is just a pipe.
RIM was not a big problem for carriers. They could manage it. It was a niche in the enterprise, and a very lucrative one (BlackBerry users do not mind paying big bucks). Then RIM started moving into the consumer market... Now they have more BIS users than BES users (70-30 ratio), so more consumers than enterprises. They are eating in the carriers plate.
Still, the carriers can take it. RIM is a small threat. Still a niche.
What is scary is Nokia with Ovi, in particular in Europe and Asia. In some countries, they have 50% and more of market share. They are just coming in and taking over. The operators are fighting back, but some are tempted by the shortcut ("I can make some money fast, let's launch Nokia Messaging and we'll see what happens later") and will commit suicide. The smart ones are resisting and looking at alternatives (I know one...). They still can fight.
Overall, Nokia is a risk, a very big one. But it has not materialized yet. They have not proved they can create data services that people use. As of now, they are just a device manufacturers. They do not know how to deal with services. Exactly as the carriers. They are a scary player to deal with, but not right now right here.
Then there is Apple. Same game as above, but a lot worst. They know services. They own music, the app store, MobileMe and more. They have proven they can do it, with one billion apps downloaded.
On my iPhone, AT&T is not even a sticker. Not even a physical object... It is a bunch of pixels on the top left. So virtual it can disappear in a second.
Want some proof?
Check the leak about Verizon and Apple talking. Who do you think leaked the news? I have my ideas... They did not leak it to a technology magazine, they went all the way, to a consumer outlet like USA Today!
It just puts an enormous pressure on AT&T, who needs to renew the contract with Apple. Best way to get a good deal? Work with the competition and let everyone know it.
The sad story: AT&T needs Apple way more than Apple needs AT&T. The Verizon leak is a living proof. They can walk away when they want. Why?
Because Apple OWNS their customers. They own the AT&T consumers...
Guess what? They have already made AT&T a pipe...
It all started with RIM. They took over the relationship with the customer. The carrier disappeared. The only thing that reminds me of AT&T on my BlackBerry is a plastic sticker on the front. Nothing else. While I am roaming around the world, the BlackBerry still works and I do not even remember which carrier I am using. My email is synced with the BlackBerry Internet Service, AT&T is just a pipe.
RIM was not a big problem for carriers. They could manage it. It was a niche in the enterprise, and a very lucrative one (BlackBerry users do not mind paying big bucks). Then RIM started moving into the consumer market... Now they have more BIS users than BES users (70-30 ratio), so more consumers than enterprises. They are eating in the carriers plate.
Still, the carriers can take it. RIM is a small threat. Still a niche.
What is scary is Nokia with Ovi, in particular in Europe and Asia. In some countries, they have 50% and more of market share. They are just coming in and taking over. The operators are fighting back, but some are tempted by the shortcut ("I can make some money fast, let's launch Nokia Messaging and we'll see what happens later") and will commit suicide. The smart ones are resisting and looking at alternatives (I know one...). They still can fight.
Overall, Nokia is a risk, a very big one. But it has not materialized yet. They have not proved they can create data services that people use. As of now, they are just a device manufacturers. They do not know how to deal with services. Exactly as the carriers. They are a scary player to deal with, but not right now right here.
Then there is Apple. Same game as above, but a lot worst. They know services. They own music, the app store, MobileMe and more. They have proven they can do it, with one billion apps downloaded.
On my iPhone, AT&T is not even a sticker. Not even a physical object... It is a bunch of pixels on the top left. So virtual it can disappear in a second.
Want some proof?
Check the leak about Verizon and Apple talking. Who do you think leaked the news? I have my ideas... They did not leak it to a technology magazine, they went all the way, to a consumer outlet like USA Today!
It just puts an enormous pressure on AT&T, who needs to renew the contract with Apple. Best way to get a good deal? Work with the competition and let everyone know it.
The sad story: AT&T needs Apple way more than Apple needs AT&T. The Verizon leak is a living proof. They can walk away when they want. Why?
Because Apple OWNS their customers. They own the AT&T consumers...
Guess what? They have already made AT&T a pipe...
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Oracle + Sun and mobile
I have read quite a lot of comments on the acquisition of Sun by Oracle.
Most have focused the analysis on MySQL, since it is actually a cool story: Oracle is taking off the market the #1 long-term competitor, one they wanted to acquire some time ago (for $850M, some say) before Sun got it for $1B. In a way, Oracle now bought the entire pie, getting the icing for free. Sweet.
Some are focusing on Java, simply because Oracle said that is the main reason for the acquisition. The focus goes quickly on Weblogic, the heavy reliance of Oracle on Java and so on. It makes sense.
However, there is a point nobody is discussing: what about the #1 money generator for Sun on the software side? I mean, JavaME, Java on mobile... Sun has made zero dollars (or so) on Java, outside mobile. It is a little secret, but Sun has made a ton of money of JavaME. Ton for my standards, of course. Some might object they could have made more. But they made a lot.
Moreover, Sun is the de-facto standard development platform on feature phones today. JavaME is on every phone. Yes, you might argue it is a mess (every phone is different) and that they are at risk of losing the battle on the smartphone front. But the smartphone world has way too many operating systems to keep going as it is. Developers are going nuts. The mobile market needs ONE platform.
Sun has been working on it for a while. The JavaFX effort is going in the right direction. They have a foothold in the mobile operators and device manufacturers. They are moving towards smartphones, unifying desktop, mobile and TV.
Yes, the future could be a full web development environment, as I wrote in the past. But, as there is room for Flash on desktops (it is not all Ajax), there is room for JavaFX on mobile. With the market penetration of JavaME, Sun is the company best positioned to make it. And let me remind you that mobile is the future of everything ;-)
Bottom line: acquiring Sun means for Oracle controlling a piece of the future of mobile. They have not been that active on it, beside some Service Delivery Platform offering. They now control a gem, on the client side. They have a critical presence around the future of computing.
I am expecting Oracle not to screw this up, actually the opposite. I believe when they say "We bought Sun for Java" they actually mean more "We bought Sun for JavaFX, and mobile in particular". They will invest in it, even more than Sun has done so far.
I would. Wouldn't you?
Most have focused the analysis on MySQL, since it is actually a cool story: Oracle is taking off the market the #1 long-term competitor, one they wanted to acquire some time ago (for $850M, some say) before Sun got it for $1B. In a way, Oracle now bought the entire pie, getting the icing for free. Sweet.
Some are focusing on Java, simply because Oracle said that is the main reason for the acquisition. The focus goes quickly on Weblogic, the heavy reliance of Oracle on Java and so on. It makes sense.
However, there is a point nobody is discussing: what about the #1 money generator for Sun on the software side? I mean, JavaME, Java on mobile... Sun has made zero dollars (or so) on Java, outside mobile. It is a little secret, but Sun has made a ton of money of JavaME. Ton for my standards, of course. Some might object they could have made more. But they made a lot.
Moreover, Sun is the de-facto standard development platform on feature phones today. JavaME is on every phone. Yes, you might argue it is a mess (every phone is different) and that they are at risk of losing the battle on the smartphone front. But the smartphone world has way too many operating systems to keep going as it is. Developers are going nuts. The mobile market needs ONE platform.
Sun has been working on it for a while. The JavaFX effort is going in the right direction. They have a foothold in the mobile operators and device manufacturers. They are moving towards smartphones, unifying desktop, mobile and TV.
Yes, the future could be a full web development environment, as I wrote in the past. But, as there is room for Flash on desktops (it is not all Ajax), there is room for JavaFX on mobile. With the market penetration of JavaME, Sun is the company best positioned to make it. And let me remind you that mobile is the future of everything ;-)
Bottom line: acquiring Sun means for Oracle controlling a piece of the future of mobile. They have not been that active on it, beside some Service Delivery Platform offering. They now control a gem, on the client side. They have a critical presence around the future of computing.
I am expecting Oracle not to screw this up, actually the opposite. I believe when they say "We bought Sun for Java" they actually mean more "We bought Sun for JavaFX, and mobile in particular". They will invest in it, even more than Sun has done so far.
I would. Wouldn't you?
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Momentum momentum momentum
You keep working and working. You keep signing customers. You keep working and working. You get them live. After they go live, their user base starts growing fast. You are happy.
What do you do next?
You tell the world you did it, so you won't celebrate alone :-)
In technical terms, it is called a momentum release. In layman terms, it is a "hey, look at us, we are growing like crazy! Join the fray...".
So, here it is our momentum release of today, focused on the non-carrier world:
What do you do next?
You tell the world you did it, so you won't celebrate alone :-)
In technical terms, it is called a momentum release. In layman terms, it is a "hey, look at us, we are growing like crazy! Join the fray...".
So, here it is our momentum release of today, focused on the non-carrier world:
Funambol Open Source Cloud Sync and Push Email Powers Innovative Mobile Services for Tens of Millions of UsersWho are these companies? Some are shy and did not give us permission to use their name (and, as always, they are the largest deployments ;-) :
Includes smart self-updating address book, free unlimited text messaging, free national directory, virtual digital content organizer and next-gen voice services
- a smart self-updating address book with 13 million users
- free unlimited text messages to any mobile phone; mjoy by Venista, www.mjoy.com
- free integrated national address book; tacty by telegate:118000, www.tacty.com
- next-gen telephony for consumers and businesses, JAJAH www.jajah.com
- virtual digital content organizer, ZangbeZang by Key Criteria, www.zangbezang.com
- leading digital phone service provider with millions of subscribers
- best-selling customer management solution with millions of users
- innovative internet services provider, Solcon by Qaleido, www.qaleido.com
- email hosting provider for businesses and resellers, www.fusemail.com
Friday, April 10, 2009
Skype on the iPhone, fences, and pipes
The only interesting news of CTIA was Skype on the iPhone (and soon on the BlackBerry). The floor was full of people playing around with it and saying "oooohhh, it works!".
It does. It works very well. Over wi-fi, the quality of calls resembles the one of your PC (that is, not perfect but ok, and the price is right).
The limitation? Voice does not work on 3G on AT&T (but chat does, which is nice) and the app cannot be used at all in Germany with Deutsche Telekom (they even said they will cancel your contract if they find you cheating around with Skype, which is doable for the tech savvy).
The debate is on. Can carriers really limit the use of applications by their own users? Does it even make sense? Will it be supportable long-term?
The answer is no (sorry). If you are a carrier, you can limit the usage of your network (e.g. charge for data over a certain threshold, and voice is quite data intensive) but you can't limit single applications. It is not practical. It is not going to work in the long term.
The world is too open now, there is no way back. There are no walled gardens anymore. Maybe you can still put on a fence, but people will go around it. It is just a matter of time.
So, what if you are a carrier? Well, you are still making a ton of money, not a bad situation to be in. If VOIP takes off, your voice revenues are at risk, but they will be compensated by data revenues. Maybe just partially. But it is not like your revenues will disappear.
The world is going towards data. Voice is a data type. Period. Everything will go through the same pipe. You control the pipe, you make money. The risk? Become the pipe and nothing else.
How do you get out of becoming just a pipe? Not with fences. Build a playground, make people happy to stay with you, give them services, make sure they are so happy with you they won't go anywhere else (or, at least, lock their most important data like an evil Google).
Mobile cloud services. There is no other answer. That's the long term game. The rest is just happening, it is a snowball transforming in an avalanche. You can't stop it.
It does. It works very well. Over wi-fi, the quality of calls resembles the one of your PC (that is, not perfect but ok, and the price is right).
The limitation? Voice does not work on 3G on AT&T (but chat does, which is nice) and the app cannot be used at all in Germany with Deutsche Telekom (they even said they will cancel your contract if they find you cheating around with Skype, which is doable for the tech savvy).
The debate is on. Can carriers really limit the use of applications by their own users? Does it even make sense? Will it be supportable long-term?
The answer is no (sorry). If you are a carrier, you can limit the usage of your network (e.g. charge for data over a certain threshold, and voice is quite data intensive) but you can't limit single applications. It is not practical. It is not going to work in the long term.
The world is too open now, there is no way back. There are no walled gardens anymore. Maybe you can still put on a fence, but people will go around it. It is just a matter of time.
So, what if you are a carrier? Well, you are still making a ton of money, not a bad situation to be in. If VOIP takes off, your voice revenues are at risk, but they will be compensated by data revenues. Maybe just partially. But it is not like your revenues will disappear.
The world is going towards data. Voice is a data type. Period. Everything will go through the same pipe. You control the pipe, you make money. The risk? Become the pipe and nothing else.
How do you get out of becoming just a pipe? Not with fences. Build a playground, make people happy to stay with you, give them services, make sure they are so happy with you they won't go anywhere else (or, at least, lock their most important data like an evil Google).
Mobile cloud services. There is no other answer. That's the long term game. The rest is just happening, it is a snowball transforming in an avalanche. You can't stop it.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
GPL is the new BSD
I know, I know, I promised I would not write about open source licenses anymore. The debate is over: AGPL is the license to use, let's move on. However, I still feel there is so much more education needed... So many people pick GPL without knowing what AGPL is, thus screwing the future of their projects in the cloud computing world ahead of us... It is sad to watch and sometimes I want to yell ;-)
Today I read a very nice (long) post by Jeremy Allison (of Samba fame).
The message is exactly my usual one: "GPL is the new BSD". GPL in a cloud computing world loses copyleft, and everything great that came with that (arguably, the entire free software and open source movements).
Jeremy wrotes:
Today I read a very nice (long) post by Jeremy Allison (of Samba fame).
The message is exactly my usual one: "GPL is the new BSD". GPL in a cloud computing world loses copyleft, and everything great that came with that (arguably, the entire free software and open source movements).
Jeremy wrotes:
Well said. GPL is going to be the new BSD. Google (his employer) will exploit it as long as possible. People should wake up and "give it an A". C'mon, AGPL is the way to go, just get over it and adopt it, so I can win my bet with Mark...For network services running in a cloud, [AGPL] brings back the fairness provision that the original GPL intended, and returns the freedom that Free Software promises to all users and developers.
Currently the AGPL is a minority license as compared to the GPL. Not much Free Software is currently written directly to serve cloud computing network services.
But cloud computing is going to change the industry in as profound a way as client server did in the late 1980s and 1990s. The ability to easily provision and scale up software services based on the Free Software LAMP stack (Linux / Apache / MySQL /PHP or Perl or Python) or more modern fare such as the open source Java software framework Hadoop is going to massively change the way software is developed. Of course at my day job, it already has for many of the engineers.
Even old fogies like me are going to have to learn some new tricks in this world. Free Software is going to have to adopt as well. I still have lots of Samba code to write first (no, Samba isn’t a finished product yet), but if I ever work on cloud computing code, I’d like to see it under the AGPL, in order to preserve the freedoms I’ve been able to enjoy in conventional software development these many years. Without the AGPL, our freedoms will depend on the kindness of strangers donating their modifications to our code back to us, as they did in the days before the GPL license and the FSF was born
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)