I read a story on about how the iPhone app podcaster was rejected from the apps store. It was rejected because the features were close to the iTunes Desktop feature set. The difference is that you cannot currently use the iPhone to directly download podcasts. This app allowed you to directly download podcasts to the iPhone.
I know the argument is that Apple has the right to control there platform. The problem is that Apple has set rule, but they are not letting people know what the rules are.
Apple had nothing in the terms prohibiting developers from duplicating features currently available on desktop application. I followed all the guidelines and made sure everything is in the correct place. Yet Apple denies me because I allow users to download podcasts just like iTunes.
If you want app developers to be in business with you, you need to be clear about what the rules are. Apple is going to go through a lot of growing pains with iPhone apps. They have does something truly innovative with the way they are handling mobile apps. The problem is that they leave the door open for other smart phone makers if they restrict too many apps.
I read today that the iPhone ad that said the iPhone goes to "all parts of the Internet" has been banned. When I saw this ad for the first time I said "except for any page that plays flash." I like when companies are called on adds that are misleading. I know that Apple was comparing themselves to phone that can only get to mobile versions of web sites, but it is not like flash is rarely used. It is a big thing.
I wonder if anyone got fired over the launch problems of the iPhone G3. Is it wrong for me to laugh at this problem? I think it is funny that Apple got this much hype about the launch and were still not ready for it. I am not sure where they went wrong in the planning, but it is still funny to me.
In the end I do not think they really lost any customers to this. At most they treated some customers poorly, but not poorly enough for them not to want the product. Apple is very good at treating their customers poorly enough not to effect their business. It looks like they got all their problems worked out. I wonder if this will happen with the next iPhone also.
Above is why I never bought music from Microsoft. Something in the back of my head knew this was coming some day. If Microsoft did not rule the market they were going to leave the market. Microsoft is not really leaving the market, they just shifted to the Zune marketplace. All the MP3s in the Zune Marketplace are DRM free. Microsoft is not doing that bad of a thing here.
I know the people in the music industry do not see this as a problem. To them it is no different than switching from cassette to CD. The difference in the eyes of the customer was that upgrading to CD was getting value with that upgrade. Here the customer is not getting any additional value.
I think this is a good example of the music industry alienating it's customers. It is that alienation that keeps people from paying for your product. The story above is why I currently will not buy any music with DRM. It is all MP3s for me now.
George Kliavkoff, chief digital officer at NBC Universal had a great quote about pirated content and portable media:
If you look at studies about MP3 players, especially leading MP3 players and what portion of that content is pirated, and think about how that content gets onto that device, it has to go through a gatekeeping piece of software, which would be a convenient place to put some antipiracy measures," Kliavkoff said in an onstage interview at the Ad:Tech conference. "One of the big issues for NBC is piracy. We are financially harmed every day by piracy. It results in us not being able to invest as much money in the next generation of film and TV products."
Wow, this one is a little disturbing to me. This guy needs to know a little about technology. I cannot find his education listed on the web. Maybe he a lawyer and not an engineer. From this comment you can tell he has no idea what made the Apple iPod successful. It is successful because it is an open platform. I can put my content on it without having to have that content blessed by Apple. If I needed my content blessed by Apple, I would buy a different device.
I would be afraid of any antipiracy software on my portable media player. How is that player going to tell if the content it pirated? Will I be able to put my own content on my player? If I make the content will I have to have it blessed by someone? Will I not be allowed to put content from third parties on my media player?
Right now I have more than one way to get a TV show to my iPod. Being a TiVo User I can use TiVo Desktop Plus to transfer a show to my computer and from there to my iPod. Is that piracy? I am paying for the program, it has all the adds, NBC has not stopped TiVo for TiVoToGo yet.
I know this comment is not really about this generation of Portable media players. It is about the Media players like the iPod Phone and the iPod Touch. Players that are connected to the web. I know he wants to make sure those players have his approval. I know that he wants media players to be closed systems. Cell Phone companies are making people thing this is possible. I think it is a bad idea for everyone including content company. As you close off avenues to content getting to boxes, you like the reasons for people to buy your content.
A few years ago, when web 2.0 was a new term and not beaten into the ground, an Apple Engineer told me that Apple does not understand the web. His example to me was iTunes. At the time he told me that he wanted iTunes to be more like Flickr and less like a retail store.
At the time I remember him being right. As time has gone on, he has become more and more right. I feel that iTunes is a good program, but it is missing the chance to be a great program. It is missing the chance to be a true music portal. It is missing the chance to be a true media portal.
Over the past couple of months I have really be into podcasts. The problem is that I use three different computers, My laptop, my desktop, and my work computer. WIth iTunes now I have three different lists of pod cases. A different lists on each computer. iTunes is an internet system. I should be able to have a single podcast list no matter what computer I am on. Even if I do not have all the podcasts set to download on each computer.
I have an account on iTunes, but there is very little I can do with that account. Instead of creating a killer web app, Apple has create a store front. Many people might say that is all they need to created. If Apple created a killer web app they would have a way to increase their sales. It would be easy to see the benefit of sharing my iTunes collection with my friends. Being able to share information with myself would be a great tool. Now I have the same podcast on one than one machine.
I really think the web is the future. Software is going to be replace replaced by services. Hardware needs to take advantage of those services. Apple is both a hardware and a software company. They have made an incredible comeback over the last couple of year. I think they are leaving a lot on the table by not understanding the web.
This is really a game of chicken. Both Sides think the other side needs them more. Both sides think if they do not need to give in. Both of them think they are better off in control.
They are both wrong is the problem. NBC thinks it can make more money with other online providers. They want to make different bundles because they think it will bring more revenue. What NBC is missing what customers love about iTunes. not needing to buy albums, just cherry picking ones they want. If NBC wants to force customers to buy content they don't want to get what they want, they are making a mistake. They run the risk losing customers to other content.
The mistake that iTunes is making is that they are opening the door to other download providers. NBC, Sci-fi, and USA networks have been the cornerstones of the iTunes Video store. If content is king, other providers will play ball with NBC to get this content. Those providers what a chunk of what iTunes has.
The interesting thing about NBC's decision for me is how a year ago it was a big story how iTunes saved the Office. After being saved by iTunes the Office has become a hit. One of the anchors of NBC's Line up. It is funny to me how this would not be important to NBC.
My guess is that NBC has no way to figure out how many people who viewed the Office on iTunes. They think they could get that many people on their own site when they launch it. The problem is that NBC is trying to be in more control when they do not understand the world they are operating. This is a major problem.
One interesting bit was this.
In addition to the pricing issue, NBC Universal wants iTunes to stiffen anti-piracy provisions so computer users would not have easy access to illegal downloads.
What are they talking about. Do they want Apple computers not to work with bittorrent? Do they want iTunes files harder to crack? Do they want more control over the Mac platform. All three of these are bad ideas. I want to know what they want.
I guess this is what happens when you release the most anticipated, most hyped, most coveted consumer electronic device of the year. If you lock it down, people will always want it to do more. I wonder how these hacks will effect the next iPhone.
Update: I saw a lot of news stories about the iPhone that will play on any network. I have not seen any stories about the security hacks. The security hole is much more dangerous, but not as sexy of a story. I guss that is why.
It looks like iPhones Activations are lower than expected. I am not sure what this does to getting 1% of the cell phone market in the first year. I cannot expect it is good for Apple. These numbers might be a little off because it only looks at the first 24 hours of activation. While everyone knows someone who bought an iPhone, it might not be all that many people.
Here are two interesting lists of iPhonewishes. I have only played with an iPhone for a few moments. I would like the chance to use one more. I know that apple had a tight deadline to meet. I wonder how many of these had to do with tight deal lines.
I worry that other of these things for a problem I have with apple some of the times. I feel that Apple is trying to tell me that there is only one way to look at information, their way. Any other way I might want to approach it is wrong. They are giving me what they thing the best way to deal with something is. The third item on Derek Powazek's list feels like this to me. I always want more than one way to navigate. I want UI designers to see this is a good thing.
I am not saying that is a good thing. I have read before that the labels want more pricing control when it comes to music sold on the iTunes music store. The labels want to be able to charge more for the latest albums and Apple has said no (sorry I do not have a footnote for this)
This is a strange game for Universal Music to play. Apple iTunes is the top electronic music store, but it has not taken over the music world yet. Electronic sales has not grown at the rate it was expected to grow. Getting rid of 15% of sales is a big thing, but if you think you can back another player in the electronic sales space it is worth the risk.
The problem with going against apple is DRM. The iPod has something like 72% market share for digital music players. It is larger if you look at the installed base. If you want to sell electronic music to most of your customers, you have to see it in MP3 format. Your customers with iPods will not be able to play it in a non-Fair Play DRM system. I do not see Universal selling non-DRM music.
What I don't know is how the average music fan makes buying decisions. Let's say that Fall Out Boy is putting out a new album. How many sales will they lose if they are not on iTunes? Some percentage of users will choose a different album on iTunes, but how many? Is it different for different artist? Is the risk of not signing the contract with iTunes worth it?
I want to know what Universal music's plan is. I do not think at will marketing to iTunes is a good plan on its own. I think there needs to be some other plan along with it. I wonder if Universal also sees it this way. I wonder if this is a sign of weakness for iTunes?
I hope that iPhone users do not let apple off the hook for poor service by AT&T. I have seen people complain about poor service from AT&T activating the iPhone. It might just be just opening night bugs. If the problems are on going, I hope the media and iPhone users do not forget that Apple chose AT&T. Apple could have opened this phone up to run on more than one carrier. If AT&T screws iPhone users, it is Apple screwing iPhone users. There is no other way around it. I wonder if Apple fans will see it that way. My guess is that they will not.
People are taking about the data embedded in the new DRMless iTunes. People do not have to worry about DRM, but they do have to worry about their e-mail address going with the file. That means if you give your DRM free file to anyone, you have to trust that they will not share it with the world.
This will be interesting to see what happens. I wonder how well people have to protect their files. If I leave my network unprotected and my files get shared every where, will I be responsible? Lets say my computer gets stolen, can I get sued if those files end up on the net? What if someone is being vindictive and shares my files without me knowing? In none of these cases did I share the file. I did not take action with malice of forethought. What would the copyright cops do to me in those situations?
I know that including the email address along with the file is a good idea. I know that this is a reasonable thing for copyright holders to ask for. I just want to make sure that a signal song from one person is going to get out into the open. It is just going to happen. The people who own the copyrights should only go after people who do this all the time.
Fortune editor-at-large Brent Schlender wrote an interesting article about why the AppleTV is a bust. I do not have an AppleTV, I do not know anyone who has an AppleTV, I do not know anyone who is planning on getting an AppleTV. I think that lack of desire, in the prime group of first adopters is a pretty bad sign.
Before the AppleTV was released I read a lot of stories how this box could really change things. I read a couple of stories that called this a Netflix killer. I think it is far from that. Right now I am not sure AppleTV will still be alive in another year.
Using the AppleTV if feels like a Television device for people who have a disdain for television. To start with the lack of a DVD player is a big mistake. I understand that Apple thinks DVDs are going away. I know that offering a download service it a comment about the future of DVDs. But if you are trying to make my life simpler I either need a way to play the DVDs I already have or a way to get them to the AppleTV. Now I cannot use the AppleTV to replace my DVD player. I understand you are trying to keep prices down, but there should be a way to run a Mac Mini in Apple TV mode if it does not fit into your price point.
I also understand that AppleTV is a statement that broadcast and cable TV will be replaced by download. Right now that is how people get TV. The AppleTV is not a DVR replacement. You still need a DVR to record broadcast or cable TV. On top of that there is no clear path to transfer programs from a DVR to an Apple TV. It can be done, on an around the corner path.
There is one quote that really caught me:
You get the feeling that Apple didn't create this thing because it was insanely great but in order to freeze competitors out of downloadable video.
That might be why they did it, but they are doing a disservice to themselves. I know we live in a world where most consumer electronics can be upgraded via software patch, but the problems with the AppleTV are much greater than a patch can fix.
I am impressed that Apple has been able to keep such a high market share, but I am not impressed at the rate of adaption of mp3 players. I think there are a ton of opportunities that Apple was able to capitalize on. Apple did an amazing job staying on top of the heap and seeing 100 million units without the MP3 player becoming a commodity. We have to recognize that Apple has things in iPods favor that other devices do not have.
1) Fifteen Years of Sony Walkmen: - Growing up in the 80s, the walkman was the gold standard of personal electronics. Everyone wanted one and everyone had to have one. Most of my life headphones have been a part of it. No one had to convince me that a portable music player was a good way to spend my money. I was about 30 when the iPod came out. It was not a hard sell to me or anyone else under 30.
By the time the MP3 player came around I was ready to get rid of my old CD walkman. The CD walkman was too large and too hard to carry music around for. Even my Creative Nomad was a big improvement of the CD walkman.
Gadgets are in - Between Cell Phones, Game Boys, PDAs, DVD players, and game consoles, This has been a gadget decade. Gadgets are feeding America's need to buy thing. There is not two ways around it. Best Buy and Circuit City are two of the biggest retail chains in America for a reason. Apple was able to cash in on these trends.
The Price is right - In consumer electronics $300-200 is the golden range. It is the range where people can buy the product without having to ask their spouse. It is in that some one special (spouse, child parent) gift range. I think that a decade of items like the Playstation has helped set this range. Once the iPod hit this range people went right out and bought big.
Don't get me wrong. Apple did a lot of things right. I think iTunes, the iPod Mini, adding more features each release, and the iPod nano all helped Apple keep their market share. If they would have done something wrong another company would have picked up the slack. Apple worked hard to keep the killer market share. I am still not impressed how how fast 100 million MP3 players have sold.
I am thinking about finally replacing my old iBook. I replaced it once before, but that laptop was stolen and I had to go back to my old iBook. My iBook is the best laptop that I have ever owned or used. It has held up great to all my abuse. I have never had a real problem with it. When I did have problems Apple Care was there to step in and fix it.
All that being said, I am not sure I should get another apple laptop to replace this laptop. In the time since I bought this laptop the prices for windows laptops have come down a good deal. You can now find a low end laptop for about $500. An average laptop costs about $800. If I go out and buy a MacBook with Apple care it will cost me about $1500. My MacBook that was stolen cost me about $1800 after a few add-ons.
The question is, Is it worth the extra cost for me to buy a new Mac Laptop? I am not sure how to figure this out. I like using a Mac. I like how easy everything seems, but I could figure out a PC if I had to. I use a PC at work. There is more software I cannot use because of not running Windows than not using a OSX. Most of that software is video software like Amazon Unbox. I know that I can run Windows on a MacBook if I chose. That will run me another couple hundred of bucks for the copy of Windows. Is it really worth the money?
It is finally happened. It looks like one of the major record labels if finally breaking ranks. It appears that EMI will allow their music to be sold on iTunes without DRM. This is not really a surprise. People have been talking about this for months now. People have thought EMI would be the first company to break rank. They are the weakest of the major labels. People have thought that they would be the most likely to take the risk.
Will this be a typing point? This is hard to say. How to listeners, fans, and customers decide what music to buy. It has little to do with where they can buy it or what label the band it on. The number one people buy music is because they like it. If EMI does not release music that people like this will not help them. What it might help is with getting more people to pay for music they might get some other way.
This is a good start. I do not think that we are close to other companies joining EMI. I think that companies are going to resist a lot before they agree to also go without DRM. The number one thing customers can do is vote with our wallets. Lets all go and download songs from EMI when the DRM goes away.
I have been unconvinced by the iPhone from before it was announced at MacWorld. I have a lot of the same concerns that John Dvorak has. I know that Dvorak has a history of being a troll. It does not mean he does not have a good point.
Apple has a great history of beating companies that are not that good to start with. The MP3 player market was not very developed when Apple got in. Of course they made quick work of that market. Now they are entering a market with companies that sell hundreds of millions of units. Nokia, Motorola, and LG have all been around the block a few times. That makes this a whole different game.
The point that Dvorak is making is that Apple will need to be able to revise the iPhone much quicker than it has revised the iPod. Even if the first iPhone is great, they will be a long way from taking over the market at that point.
In a year's time we will be able to tell if the iPhone was successful or not. Until then Dvorak has just as much of a chance of being right as all those fanboys going crazy for a phone they have not used yet.
I know you have to believe in your product or you are not going to get anywhere. I know you need to tell analysts that you are going to conquer the world. If you do not think you can be the best you are not going to be the best. All that being said I was just shocked at some of the answers from the analyst Q&A session with Apple COO Tim Cook. Here is one of them that caught my attention.
Q: Your stated goal for calendar 2008 is to ship 10 million units, which is about 1 percent of the overall market. Given the functionality and price point of the product, it eliminates the low end of the market. How do you look at the available market for the first generation of iPhone and what kind of marketshare do you think you can take?
A: The traditional way of look at a market you look at products you are selling, you think about the price bands that are currently market, you look at price band your product is in, and you assume you can get a percentage of it. And that's how you get to the addressable market. That kind of analysis doesn't make really great products. The iPod would not have been brought to market if we would have looked at it that way. How many $399 music players were being sold at that time?
Today in the cell phone industry, a lot of people pay zero for the cell phone. Guess what? That's what it's worth! And so, if we offer something that has tremendous value and is sort of this thing that people people didn't have in their consciousness -- it was unimaginable, I think a whole bunch of people will pay $499 and $599. Our target is clearly to hit 10 million and I would guess that some of those people -- there are some of those in the audience -- who are paying zero because it's worth zero, will pay more a bit more because its worth it.
To start with you are not paying zero for a "free" phone. The price of that phone is rolled up into your plan. Cell phones are happy to give phones away to get people to sign up. That same phone when you are not signing up for a new plan is $200 to $250. Many of the people who want your phone will not be signing up for new contracts. How much will the iPhone be for them? Will it be $699 or $799. That will have to be a hell of a lot better than a free phone for that price.
Second, are you really competing with free phones? I thought you were competing with other smart phones. Most of the people I know who get the free phones, only want a phone. They do not want any of the other features. I have seen some free smart phones, but most of the time they start at $199. You are saying that you phone is more than three times better than the $199 smart phone.
Third, your partner has to sell those free phones also. It might not be so good to make the partner look bad. You cannot throw too many stones at the other companies in the same stable. It might be bad for you in the end.
I am still in the unconvinced camp. Just because apple has been able to keep the iPod line in great shape, it does not mean their phone will be great. I hope they are being more thoughtful about other phones than the COO seem.
It looks like the forces of status quo in the music world are lining up against Steve Jobs in the fight over DRM. I expect the Record Companies will not just rollover to for Steve Jobs. My guess is that think the record labels think they have the control when it comes to iTunes and Apple.
Let me be clear: we advocate the continued use of DRM in the protection of our and of our artists’ intellectual property. The notion that music does not deserve the same protections as software, television, film, video games or other intellectual property simply because there is an unprotected legacy product available in the physical world is completely without logic or merit.
But let’s not lose sight of the core issue. By far the larger issue for consumers in the music industry is interoperability. As a content company, we of course want consumers to seamlessly access our music and to use the music they have purchased on any platform and with any service, physical or digital.
The issue is obscured by asserting that DRM and interoperability is the same thing. They are not. To suggest that they cannot co-exist is simply incorrect. At Warner Music, we continue to seek a balance between appropriate protections for our intellectual property and a robust and satisfying music experience for consumers. Interoperability sure would enhance that balance, while eliminating DRM would do just the opposite.
We will not abandon DRM, nor will we disadvantage services that are successfully implementing DRM for both content and consumers.
I recognize that there are interesting music business models that only work with strong DRM. Any kind of music rental service like Rhapsody only work DRM. You have to be able to turn off the music if the customer quits paying for it. The problem with this business model is that it depends on the music companies putting DRM an the rest of their music also. It is the only way money can be made off the business model.
Bronfman makes a classic mistake in his argument above. He claims that Music deserves the same protection as Movies, Software, or Television. He is saying that Intellectual Property is Intellectual Property no matter what the form. He is making the mistake of viewing music the way he wants to view music, not the way his customers want to view music. Most of the customers I know view all these forms as different from each other. That is what is important in the end.
I think Apple has more control than the companies recognize. I am not sure if the average person could tell you what label their favorite artist is on. The average record label might say this is unimportant. The record label controls distribution. A major artist would not need to be with a able to get their album on iTunes. If they cut out the record company, they might be able to take the smaller sales that would come from not having a physical CD.
Steve Jobs has called for an End to Music Copy Protection. Steve Jobs' essay it pretty interesting. Before I read the essay I thought this was pretty surprising. After I read it I could see where he was coming from. He would rather get rid of all DRM than open up FairPlay.
I will agree that DRM systems are bad for customers. It is bad because it makes the usability of products bad. It makes it so products cannot work with each other. It makes so companies have to twist like pretzels to get those products to work. It makes it that customers are screwed when those products do not work together.
The problem with DRM is that it is a drain on the economy. It is a greater drain then piracy. If people are going to pirate music the flaw is with the business model. The flaw is how people make money off the product. The flaw is how the artist get paid. In the end if the people who own intellectual property do not realize that we will all suffer.
The risk companies run with too much DRM is the customers will turn away from their products all together. In the end that is much worse than piracy.
The only think people have been talking about over the last couple of days is the iPhone. It the SFlickr meetup last night I must have talked about the iPhone six times. Everyone just wants to get one.
I have been telling people all the reasons I will not be running out to buy one right away. Mostly I am not willing to switch my phone service to Singular to get the phone. I guess I would have to leave the United States to use it on the phone provider of my choice. If I could get it for T-mobile I might think about it.
It seems that lots of people are blogging about it. That has to be a good thing for Apple. I wonder if they will be able to keep the Buzz high from now to the release in June. For those who do not know they announced it now because it still has to go through FCC testing. There would be no way to keep it quite during FCC testing.
Here is a pretty good article about 10 myths about the iPhone. Most of what I have read so far has been about how the iPhone will either kill all other smart phones or fail out right. It seems like there is no middle point on that continuum for people who are writing about the iPhone.
Personally I want to hold and use one before I judge what it will do in the market place. I think there is a good chance that the phone will do well and still not put other smart phone makers out of business. I think they might chance the rules for how smart phones are made, but I think they will have a hard time pushing everyone else out of business.
Many people try to tell me that Apple is going to do to the cell phone market what it did to the MP3 player market. I have a hard time seeing this. Apple entered the mp3 player market in 2001. The devices had only been around since 1998. Apple brought people to the market, they did not people to switch away from other products.
The cell phone market is different than that. It is a market that has been around longer and has much higher penetration. The average person is on their 3 or 4th cell phone by now. People have ideas what they like and what they don't. Steve Jobs said at the keynote that everyone hates their cell phone. That is not correct. I love my cell phone. I have an LG VX9000. It is perfect for what I use it. The keyboard is great for sending text messages. I am not always happy with my cell phone service provider, because they charge to much for some services.
I am not going to say the iPhone is going to fail. I am not going to say that the in three years Apple, Inc will be the only companies making cell phones. I am happy that Apple is taking a chance my making a cell phone. It is still a chance. Apple still needs to do work to deliver this phone. Once they get the phone to market it is not over either. They will have to keep on going. I am looking forward to see how the market changes in the next 2-3 years.
It only took a day for Cisco to sue Apple over the trademark of the name iPhone. Apple knew that Cisco had the trademark, but went a head anyway. What are they thinking? Are they thinking that America loves the iPod so much they can win any trademark suit they want? This is just plane stupid. I hope Cisco wins after reading this story.
Apple announced their new cell phone, the iPhone. It was the big announcement at MacWorld this year. Most of the people I know are going crazy for them already. They are excited to see that Apple is entering the smart phone market. They think that apple will clobber it the same way they clobbered the MP3 player market.
I am always hesitant when people tell me something is the next big thing. I have seen a lot of next big things fail. I will hold my judgment on the iPhone until I can see and use one. I think the devil will be in the details here. Even if the UI is really good it does not mean the hardware will live up to the UI.
I am worried about the touch screen. I want to have real buttons and a real keyboard. I ma happy to give up some screen size for real buttons. I like the feedback you do not get on a touch screen. I also have fat, sweaty fingers. That is not good for a touch screen. It will be hard to keep clean and unscratched. I think I would rather have a larger device with a slider.
I wonder how long it takes for them to put out the same device without any phone features. It looks like it would be a pretty cool iPod without the phone features. I would like it for just wifi/iPod use.
I am also unconvinced because I am not about to switch my phone provider to get one. I am not about to switch to Singular. No one I know likes Singular.
I like this article about the So-called iPhone that everyone is looking forward to. I have always has questions about an Apple Cell Phone. Would it be a smart phone, like the Trio and Blackberry or would it just be a phone that also had a music player.
Much of the problem has to do with the cell providers. They make money from controlling the experience. Most people get phones from the cell providers because the providers pay for the cost of the hardware. This means that Apple would have to make a deal with some cell phone providers or they would have to make a phone so good that people are willing to pay full price for it.
I am not sure the Apple or customers would really be happy with an iPhone. I know that people want to know what Apple could do to a cell phone, but I think the issues are too large. I want to see what they can do, but I do not think the can just change the market. Cell phones are a pretty mature product, I am not sure apple can come in and just change everything.
I always remind myself that the world is usually not how I view it. I know that it is hard to get far enough away from the world to see it all. This is something I learned a long time ago. My example of this living in the San Francisco Bay Area is easy. Between my friends and what I see at coffee shops, I would think that Apple has 50% of the laptop market. I know that is not true.
That leads me to the Washing Post article, Why Everyone You Know Thinks the Same as You. I have here this referred to as circles of association in the past. The idea is that you can never know the size of a minority population from inside a population because you are either over exposed or under exposed.
I can understand how this is worse in on-line communities. They are very self selected. You can self select to a very specific level. This has been one of the very liberating to meet people like you. Before the internet people often felt that they were the only person that felt a certain way.
The problem is that it can cut you off from people who are different than you. In a real community you have to deal with people have different views, experiences, and agendas that you. The more you cut yourself off the harder it is to get along with people. People end up connecting only with their self selected community and not their real world community.
When it comes to political thought I am not surrounded people who think like me. I know lots of people who have different ideas than I do. I know that keeps me quite some of the time and other times I am holding my opinions close, only speaking up when I know I have good ground to defend myself. I know that some of my friends do the same thing.
I would say that my friends have a few baseline ideas that connect us. I think we all agree freedom of speech is important. We believe in pluralism. I think we want to stay away from people who want to force ideas on us. I know this means that I am not associating with the whole range of American society.
In the end I think all you can do it remind yourself that you cannot generalize for how everyone feels. You will never know enough people where you can know this.
I am sad to say that I live in the kind of city where a Group of men beat teen over an iPod. I know it is just a mugging like any other mugging. The idea of being mugged over an iPod just depresses me. It might be because I am always wearing my iPod. I will say if you try to beat me over my iPod it will end poorly for all of us.
Today the Mercury News is asking, Is Steve Jobs safe?. The options backdating scandal is still out there. A lot of Silicon Valley executives have already been forced out because of this scandal. The questions is, will it catch up with Steve Jobs or not.
"I don't think there is anybody who is too big, too important or too rich to go to jail. That applies to Steve Jobs as well," said Paul Hodgson Sr., a senior researcher for the Corporate Library. "If he has done something wrong, he has got to go, regardless of the situation."
I wonder if people are painting a bulls-eye on Steve Jobs. There are a lot of people out there that would like to see him go down, I am not sure if government investigators are some of those people or not.
Steve Jobs lead Apple back from the dead. He is also the CEO of Pixar and on the board at Disney. I am not sure what would happen to these companies if he went to jail or had to resign.
It appears that Steve Jobs $1 of salary was not all it was cracked up to be. It looks like Apple has been back dating options. For people who think this is a big deal, this is a fraud commited against the stock holders. That is always a big deal.
According to iPod Observer, Disney CEO Bob Iger has revealed that iTV Has a Small Hard Drive. This answers one of the questions I have. My guess is that the hard drive will be small, just large enough for network performance not to be a concern.
Bob Iger refers to the TVR experience. Wow, I think that this is a new term. My guess is that he is referring to Television recorder. Most people use the term PVR (personal video record) or DVR (digital video recorder). I wonder if we are seeing the birth of a new term.
PS, We know that Steve Jobs is running Disney when the CEO of Disney becomes Bob iGer.
But I also inserted the DVD versions of the two movies in my laptop, and the difference was stark. The DVD versions, in both cases, were noticeably sharper. The lower video quality of the downloaded movies would have been especially obvious if I'd connected my computer to a big-screen TV -- a move Apple and many others see as the next step for online video.
.....
The few dollars I'd save with Unbox or iTunes movie downloads aren't enough to compensate for all these shortcomings. With DVDs, I can easily move from players attached to my home TV sets to the DVD-ROM drives on my computers to the $89 portable player I bought to keep my 6-year-old daughter Sara amused on long car trips
.....
The transition to digital downloads won't ``happen overnight,'' Jobs told the Wall Street Journal. ``It takes years of investment,'' he said.
I'm happy to let Apple, Amazon and others make that investment, as long as they don't expect me to help that investment pay off until downloads are faster, video quality is better and prices are lower.
I am not sure how much control the download services will have on speed or price. If the price is too low the movie companies will say no. Speed is all about your internet collection. I wonder how much Apple and Amazon will be able to effect these things.
Replacing CDs with iTunes was a no brainer. The iPod and iTunes made listening to music easier for most people. It looks like the movie services make it harder than a DVD to watch movies. I think this is going to be the hard thing to overcome.
I also think that Apple and Amazon need to get companies to allow movies to be ripped into people's collections. Right now this is a major problem. Maybe they should work with rental companies to make discs that cannot be ripped and the ones I buy from the store can. I think that will be a barrier for these services to take off.
iTV - I Could swear Someone Else Owns that trademark
I looked at Apples Announcements today about the new iPods and new iTunes Movie Store. I think that Apple has done a lot get into a place where they can download video to people. I think they answered a lot of the questions I had last week.
I am happy to see that the movies and TV shows will be downloaded at 640x480 now. I think this is important. This makes it much more watchable on a larger screen. It will still look kind of crappy on a big TV. I wonder if they are working their way up to HD signals. That would take a lot more bandwidth.
I am not sure about the selection of movies. They are launching with 75 movies. That is a lot less than Amazon has right now with Unbox. Apple is only launching with movies from Disney. I wonder how long it will take Steve to get other studios on board.
I am interested in seeing the iTV hardward. I could swear that someone owns that trademark already. Maybe Apple bought it too. It has HD outputs, I wonder if HD content is coming. I wonder if that hardware will have a hard drive or not. If there is HD content without a hard drive, that will be rough on home networks. The iTV is an answer that Amazon Unbox does not currently have.
I think the iTV as shown implies that Steve Jobs has no interest in broadcast. He has said before that he was not interested in making a DVR. The iTV would lead me to believe this is true. There are no video inputs just video outputs. I wonder if it will be able to stream DVDs also.
I think the new iPod Nano without video is a good move. The Nano is already the most popular iPod ever. I see no need to ad video pay back to that product. I think it helps them create a value proposition for the regular iPods. I think they are really creating a family of products not just putting the same functions on every product.
I have been reading how everyone is guessing Steve Job's annoncement next week will be about an Apple Movie Service. For a couple years not people have been touting a download movie service as a killer app. All the time I hear how Netflix without the DVD would change the world. There is a geek elite out there that really want this.
I am not sure what will be announced, but I have a hard time seeing an Apple movie download service changing the way people watch movies. Lets say that apple starts this service on Apple only platforms. That means I would have to spend at least $600 to get a MacMini. For $600 I could get a DVD player and a few years worth of Netflix.
Second, I am not sure people are hooking computers up to their TVs. Yeah a 21 inch monitor is a big as my family's TV when I was growing up, but I am not sure people can make an iMac useful for both watch movies and using as a computer. I think the home media computer is still a rare thing. It would take a few years before something like this would really catch on.
Third, I am not sure a pricing structure could compete with renting/buying DVDs. It takes a log of bandwidth to download a movie at DVD quality. I am not sure that people will be willing to watch movies in the current 320x240 iTunes TV show resolution.
Forth, I am not sure enough people really want a movie download service. Right now Video On Demand systems are not as well used as cable companies expected. All of these systems let people play and pause the movies. Why would a movie download system have a bigger impact that Video On Demand which is already hooked up to customers TV sets.
I am not sure what Apple will announce. If they do announce a video download system people will be falling all over themselves to say this is the end of home movies as we have known it. I am just not sure Apple can be the company that can make that change.
For a while we were a table of just Mac Users. I have said that I know a lot of Mac Users here. Being the Bay Area distorts my mental map. If I went with my friends, I would think half of all home computers were Macs. My guess is that many of my mental maps are distorted by living here.
I told the people in this picture that I would get a lot of views on flickr because it was people sitting with macs in this pictures. That tuned out to be true. After only four days it has over 100 views.
Most of my pictures have between 5-25 views after three days. I will admit that views are the currency of Flickr to me. I want my photos to get as many views as they can. I always want more views for my photos. I am not sure who pictures with Macs are so popular. I guess the cult of mac is really that popular. I should keep on taking these photos so I get more views.
When I bought my iPod I but in April asked the Genius at the Apple Story what can be done about the battery. I knew it was similar to a laptop battery and people need to replace laptop batteries all the time. The Genius told me that people had not had them long enough to kill the battery yet. He said that by that time, Apple should have something in place.
It appears that some people are finding that the batteries are starting to die at 18 months. Apple wants $255+ to replace the battery. There are other place people can buy replacement batteries. I still think that a lot of customers will be really upset by this. it will be interesting to see how Apple handles this. It could really turn people off the iPod.
It looks with all the sound and fury, not many people are switching from PCs to Macs. I am one of the few people that are switching. My experence is that people will use the OS at home that they are also using at work. I think Apple needs to focus on the business world if they want to increase their market share.
I wonder if Apple would ever go back to the clone days again. I think that one or two hardware partners would really help Apple. If people could buy a Dell with OSX, I think the numbers would really increase.
I already have an iPod, but I think this is a good marketing idea. For a long time I have noticed with cross over between VW drivers and Mac owners. It would only be really cool if I could get the New Beetle in white plastic like my iBook. I am not sure, but I think I could buy a cheaper car and buy a bigger iPod.
