Carpadium Consulting

Simplifying Complexity

Archive for the ‘applications’ Category

Could there be any starker difference in message?

leave a comment

I was reading a piece linked from DaringFireball yesterday and something really leapt out at me. Check out these two quotes pulled from the linked article, one from Tim Cook, Apple’s COO, and the other from Steve Ballmer, Microsoft’s CEO.

Here’s Cook’s quote:

“Windows 7, from our point of view, is just another opportunity to remind everyone to switch to a Mac,” said Apple Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook. “People are sick of all the headaches that go along with Windows.”

And here’s Ballmer’s quote:

“Let’s face it, the Internet was designed for the PC. The Internet is not designed for the iPhone,” Ballmer said. “That’s why they’ve got 75,000 applications — they’re all trying to make the Internet look decent on the iPhone.”

I really don’t understand Ballmer’s point. Leaving aside for a moment that there are 2 errors of fact and an irrelevance in the space of 3 sentences – what is he trying to say? It just does not make any sense. It even has an air of the Chewbacca Defence about it. Just what is their message? I have noticed this coming up again and again in recent Microsoft comments and not just from Ballmer. I guess if the message is confused at the highest levels, it’s difficult to see how it can get any clearer down the chain.

On the other hand, the message from Cook could not be clearer. And not only is it clear, but it’s said in a completely positive way. It’s a brilliant piece of communications that uses Microsoft’s own weight against it. It’s 31 words without a skerrick of weasel. It’s a piece of PR jujitsu.

M@

Written by matts

October 24th, 2009 at 11:05 am

Safari 4 (beta) is damn quick

leave a comment

I’ve just finished giving the new Safari 4 beta a spin, and there’s one thing that you notice straight up: it’s damn quick. I ran this test on my MacPro under FireFox 3 and it came back with a number just over 2,300. I ran the same test with he beta of Safari 4 and got a number just over 600. That’s a big improvement.

Written by matts

February 27th, 2009 at 8:06 pm

Can this really be called a “subscription”?

leave a comment

Apple and EMI have released the iTunes Pass. You can find a press release form EMI here, and the usual Apple commentary here and here.

This is being referred to as a subscription service in a few quarters, and on the surface it would go someway to disproving my comments from the other day where I thought it unlike that Apple would ever release a subscription service.

However, I’m not so sure this is a subscription, at least in the sense that subscription services like Ruckus work for electronic goods. With Ruckus, the idea was that you paid a regular subscription fee, and it gave a license the use the music, but you did not actually own it in the same way that you own a regular CD if you go down to the store and bought it with cash.

As far as I can tell from the iTunes Pass page in the iTunes Music Store, this service is more like a pre-payment that gives you a discount or special access to otherwise unavailable items for a period of time, but you still get to actually own the items you buy. From the EMI press release:

With iTunes Pass, music fans can get new and exclusive singles, remixes, video and other content from their favorite artists over a set period of time, delivered to their libraries as soon as they’re available

Nowhere in any of the publicly available material is there any suggestion that you lose access to the material when the “subscription” to iTunes pass runs out. This makes it very much like a subscription to a traditional paper-based magazine: while you keep your subscription up-to-date, the magazines keep arriving, but if you stop paying, then the magazine stops coming.

And I think that’s a really intersting differnce. The other music subscription services that I have seen give you access while your subscription is valid, but by virtue of some often draconian DRM, you lose access when the subscription runs out.

So I guess the answer to the question in the title is “yes”, which means that my earlier prediction wasn’t quite right. But in this case, I’m happy to be wrong. I think this is actually a useful idea, and a good way to get access to premium content that might not otherwise be available. However, it does have the obvious downside that I am effectively paying in advance without knowing what it is that I am going to get.

M@

Update: this is a great comment on iTunes Pass from the 9to5mac blog. That might just explain the underlying motivation.

Written by matts

February 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pm

iPhone features I’d like to see #1

leave a comment

There’s something that really bothers me about the iPhone mail application.

I have a number of different e-mail accounts, as I’m sure do many people. However, the iPhone mail applications makes me chose which accoint to view. In fact, to get to the inbox, I’ve got to pick the account, and then pick the inbox folder. It’s not only two taps to get into the new mail items, it’s two more taps to get back out to the top level, and then another two to get back into the inbox of another account. All up, there’s 6 taps to review new items in 2 different mail accounts. That’s 6 too many in my book.

There would appear to be an obvious solution to this because the same problem has been solved in the Calendar application on the phone, as well as in Mail and Calendar in Mac OS X.

The solution in the iPhone calendar app is pretty much what I want for iPhone Mail. There’s an “All” selection that allows me to view all events for all synced calendars.

It would be very easy to have the same feature in iPhone mail so that I could just click the Mail icon from the home screen, and go straight into my “All” inbox. If I wanted to see only items from a particular account, I could then jump out and select a specific mailbox from a “Mailboxes” button on the top left hand side of the screen. This is precisely the same functionality that makes viewing all events across a range of calendars very easy.

M@

Written by matts

February 22nd, 2009 at 3:31 pm

Competing from 3rd Place

4 comments

In an earlier post, I was pondering where Microsoft was going with the Windows Mobile platform. As I mentioned in that article, it appears that they are now, at best, 3rd in the smartphone market which is somewhere they are not used to playing.

I find this fascinating, because it highlights a really interesting schism in Microsoft. On the one hand, you have the outrageously successful Windows and Office franchises, not to mention their development and tools platforms, where Microsoft’s ability to generate cash is well documented. Then on the other hand, you have the XBox, Zune and Windows Mobile.

You have to ask: what is the difference between Windows / Office / Tools, and these other products?

The answer is lock-in.

Regardless of the mechanism by which it was established, Windows has a huge lock-in factor with the vast number of hardware OEMs that build Windows compatible PCs and peripherals, and an equally huge (if not bigger) lock-in factor with all of the ISVs writing applications, using Microsoft’s portfolio of developer tools.

Office has lock-in too, but of a slightly different form. With Office, lock-in comes from the vast array of documents, spreadsheets and presentations that exist in businesses who use Word, Excel and PowerPoint for everyday business productivity. Even if someone could build a better word processor, spreadsheet or presentation application, users are still faced with the daunting task of porting existing documents to the new applications.

By way of example, I worked at a bank a couple of years ago that was contemplating an upgrade from  Office 97 to Office 2000. The total real cost for this project included an amount for document conversion that dwarfed the software licensing and upgrade costs by a factor of 5. That’s a big hurdle for any business, and this just was an upgrade to a new version. The costs for changing to a new application would almost certainly have been prohibitive.

Don’t get me wrong – I am not suggesting that lock-in is a bad thing. If a business manages to build a product platform that can generate even a modest degree of lock-in, then they are on the way making a successful product. Look at the iTunes Music store and the iPhone AppStore if you need any clearer example of a great piece of lock-in!

The point here is that Microsoft is not successful competing when it is not dominating. In fact, the evidence of the Zune and the XBox suggests that when they try it, they end up loosing a whole lot of coin. Arguably so much coin that you would need to be extracting supernormal profits from something else to afford to sustain them. But that’s a whole other story …

Apple is a little different. Although they are certainly dominant with music players, Mac market share only pushes around 10% for desktop PCs, and although they do very well in laptop sales, they are not dominant to the same extent that Microsoft is with desktop operating systems.

The only time I have ever seen Microsoft succeed is when they only have daylight behind them. But I’ve seen Apple (and others: Porsche?) do very well when they are far from the front, at least on the measure of marketshare.

Which leads me to wonder about the future of these products, so I’ll go ahead and make some predictions:

1. I think the Zune will be the first to go because it really hasn’t worked at all. I wouldn’t be surprised to see that happen in the first half of this year.

2. The XBox is a little trickier. I don’t think anyone would have predicted the success of the Nintendo Wii, which turned what looked like a 2-horse race between Sony and Microsoft into something altogether different. I would expect Microsoft to keep hard at the games market, even if it is losing a lot of money doing so. A wildcard alternative scenario here is for Microsoft to divest from the XBox altogether. I don’t know who would buy it (Sony?), but I could see it doing better out on its own.

3. Unless something remarkable happens with Windows Mobile, I think it will continue to languish. However, I don’t see Microsoft giving up this franchise lightly because thre is just too much at stake in the mobile platform market. The only outcome I see for Windows Mobile is that it is forced into price competion against Linux. Good luck competing with $0.

Microsoft has entered these other markets largely, I believe, because of its subconscious desire to dominate. It’s in the DNA of the organisation and it seems like they don’t know how to operate any other way.

It’s possible that the current economic climate could bring about a change at the top. Things haven’t exactly gone swimmingly well for Balmer recently. I’m sure that a different CEO would see things differently, particularly if they came from outside the organisation, and these divisions would end up being not long for this world.

M@

PS: A confession: the reference above to iWork is a little cheeky on my part, because I still use Word, Excel and Powerpoint for pretty much everything I do. I am a proud owner of iWork, and I have even recently upgraded to iWork’09. However, I am an example of precisely the lock-in that I’m talking about. I have so many documents and templates, that it would take me a couple of weeks to port everything over from Office to iWork. Even though iWork opens and reads Office format documents, it doesn’t get them quite right, and when it comes down to it, I’m a bit of a pedant with document presentation, so I’d be forced to rebuild my templates in an iWork-like fashion before I really made the switch. And who has time to do that? Now, if the file formats were open and public, then the balance would be entirely different …

Written by matts

February 17th, 2009 at 3:27 pm