Mourning in the Google Graveyard

Time for one last outburst of wailing and gnashing of teeth for the pending demise of Google Reader before I can put it behind me, and some retrospect for all the other failed products Reader will be joining in obscurity.

A recent article from Slate (courtesy of the best/most entertaining news aggregator online Fark) pays homage to the surprising number of discontinued services Google has spawned over the years. Quite a few (like Jaiku, Google Talk Chatback, and Google One Pass) I’d never heard of. Others such as Google Video were created to compete with a popular service, only to be retired when the competition (YouTube) was brought into the Google fold. So what gives- do so many failed ventures mean Google is on shaky innovative ground? Do they even know what they are doing?

Thankfully, the answer is of course they do. Google’s business strategy and corporate culture are both to blame for the many discontinued services and the fantastic innovation that has brought us the host of nearly invaluable services they offer. Creative chaos can be a powerful tool, and Google has long been celebrated for the working environment they have fostered for their staff. Unlike traditional business models, Google encourages staff to use productive company hours for “pet” projects, and doesn’t shy away from releasing beta projects to the public without extensive research, polishing, and planning. Much as Samsung has done with their handset lineup, Google often takes the ‘throw it all against the wall and see what sticks’ approach to services. While it sounds inelegant, it does provide a nurturing setting for creativity that other business models lack. They remain the web’s biggest provider of search and are a core component of almost everyone’s web experience, so you can hardly argue against such a successful track record.

Sadly, as Google matures they do have to make hard business decisions, and the end of Reader looms. Google hasn’t made public the factors behind the move; it could be an effort to funnel interest into Google Plus, their (to date not all that successful) Facebook competitor. It may very well be because usage of Reader has fallen, although from the public outcry I sincerely doubt it. Perhaps they just weren’t generating revenue from the platform and wanted to spend the resources devoted to it on other projects. Regardless of the true reason, I do admire Google for being able to offer so much to their user base for my favorite price- FREE.

Read Full Post »

Google officially closing Reader

Alas, Google; you wound me. I’m a big fan of keeping up with important news and favorite sources via RSS, and Google Reader has been the focal point of my RSS diet for a long time now. It offered the perfect cloud solution for my habit- the web page is a bit spartan but works well, and the service integrates perfectly with so many RSS clients (including my current iOS choice Mr Reader). The search function was the clincher: no matter what topic you might want to add to your feeds, the ever present Google search bar on the Reader page could quickly find the perfect feed.

While Google hasn’t been shy about discontinuing products that never caught on (such as the much maligned Buzz), the pending elimination of Reader was surprising and unwelcome news. I’m not the only one that feels this way; Reader has always been a fairly popular RSS solution for those in the know. The majority of RSS clients listed in the iTunes App Store boast of their ability to work seamlessly with Reader. Some sources have stated that Reader isn’t being completely discarded, it’s just being absorbed by the less popular (to me at least) Google +, but even if it doesn’t lose much of its current functionality I loathe the idea of forcibly merging what is usually quality me time (enjoying RSS feeds) with a social networking platform.

So now what? I’m at a slight loss, to be honest. There are plenty of RSS readers for both OSX and iOS, but I’m looking for a cloud-based solution that offers the same sort of device agnostic support that I’ve grown accustomed to. My needs aren’t that great; I don’t want to merge my social network reading (especially Facebook, but I’d like to keep Twitter and G+ separate as well), I just want my feeds to sync across all the devices I use to access them and the ability to easily share the articles that I find interesting/entertaining with those I think will enjoy them too.

I’ve already checked out some suggested alternatives. NewsBlur looks like it would fit the bill, but their free service is intentionally limited and currently I feel too spoiled by my free Reader experience to quickly opt for their $1/month subscription service. Netvibes is a powerful service and offers just about everything I’d want, but the interface isn’t appealing at the moment and it may be a bit TOO powerful. Their homepage tout its usefulness for professional data mining and limitless configuration/personalization. While impressive, my needs are too simplistic to go that route right now.

My choice as of now is Feedly. It has simple cross platform support (including a Safari plugin for web use), a clean and easy to navigate interface, and some of the same sharing functionality that Reader supported. With luck I’ll be able to make a fairly painless transition.

While I can’t rule out Google as my source for RSS, integration into Google + does seem to be a deal breaker at this time. For those of you like me, we do have some time- Reader’s end as a standalone product won’t be until July.

Read Full Post »

Love for Google inside the world of iOS

The big debate/argument/fanboy spat in the world of mobile devices is (and has been almost as long as there have been legitimate smart mobile devices) who has the better platform- Android or iOS. As I’ve opined before, there really is no universal right answer; most of the argument is the result of overzealous brand loyalty and/or dislike of the competing company.  Since Android is one of the many products of Google, logic would dictate that they and Apple should be blood enemies, no? Apple has made it no secret that they have been working to scour Google’s presence from their devices; Google Maps and the built-in YouTube App have been obvious examples of the corporate rivalry.

I’ve been a fan of many Google services longer than I’ve been an Apple covert. Their raison d’être- internet search- has been my go to resource for almost as long as I’ve been aware of the internet. Gmail is easily the best free email available, Picasa is a fantastic cross-platform answer for casual photographers, and the list just goes on and on. So if you’re an iOS devotee is the (real or imagined) conflict between Apple and Google limiting your access to Google’s services? Does Google keep their quality in house, as Microsoft does with Office versus Office for Mac?

The short answer is definitely not. While Google’s products aren’t a part of the default (and undelete-able) apps in iOS, the services you may have come to love and rely on are still there; often in a form that rivals (and in a couple instances surpasses) what Google has built into Android. After a short hiatus Google Maps is available in something other than web app form. Within moments of appearing in the iTunes App Store Google Maps almost immediately became one of the top free downloads and remains extremely popular thanks to the bad press that Apple’s in-house Maps App has received.

What of Google’s other services, though? Well, the flagship of internet search is still the default of iOS (and Google isn’t shy about paying an impressive sum to remain so). Gmail, Google Calendar, and your contacts are easy to sync to your iPhone (even with the recently-resolved issues iOS has had with Exchange). Not a fan of iOS’ default Mail App? No worries- Gmail has it’s own app for iOS that offers functionality that syncing alone lacks. While there’s no Picasa app for iOS (although there are third party apps to access your online library) Google+ does provide photo uploads similar to Photostream. Speaking of Google+, if you’re a user of Google’s answer to Facebook the iOS app is a great interface, offering Flipboard-like functionality that surpasses the dated feel of Facebook’s iOS app.

Almost every Google offering has an iOS app available- YouTube, the Google Play store, Latitude, Local, Translate, even Google Voice. Some have argued that the iOS version of Chrome is superior to the default Safari, even though they share the same webkit origins. Even Google’s DropBox competitor Google Drive is just a few clicks away.

If anything, Google has a strong incentive to duplicate their Android offerings on iOS. Reports have revealed that Google actually makes significantly more revenue from iOS users than their (much larger) Android user base. Google’s unstated market strategy doesn’t tie their efforts to their in-house mobile OS, either- they use Android as a loss leader to funnel users to their actual revenue engine: advertising and data mining.

So buck up, all you Google lovers out there. You can have the best of both worlds should you desire it: all of Google’s fantastic free services neatly wrapped in the warm embrace of iOS.

 

Read Full Post »

You never miss it til it’s gone

While it may be very old school, perusing my RSS feeds is a big part of my internet interaction. The format has been around almost as long as the consumer-based internet, and the ease of collection and sorting RSS provides is far better than any competitor I’ve tried on any device, be it a full fledged PC, tablet, or smartphone. While I’ve changed RSS clients more than once, it’s remained my go to resource for amusement, education, and news. 

So it’s with no slight amount of consternation that I read about the misfiring of my RSS solution of choice, Google Reader. Much like Gmail, Google Reader was the RSS portal to rule them all- regardless of how I accessed it, be it the internet or a dedicated app, Reader worked perfectly as a cloud repository. I started using Google Reader as an alternative to the RSS function built into Firefox years ago, and still use the web version on my iMac. My primary use is via Mr Reader on the iPad; the touch controls work great and the sharing/social features are easy and provide everything I’d need from an RSS app.

While the ‘outage’ didn’t dramatically affect me (I just had a handful of posts reappear after they had been marked read), some lost subscriptions and others reported long-deleted subscriptions reappearing. Google was able to correct the glitch fairly quickly, but reports of the lapse in service brought more distressing rumors from pundits. Some claim that the lapse was brought on by a lack of focus on lesser-used services like Reader, and this lack of utilization has caused Google to consider phasing the RSS service out (as they’ve ended other less successful services like Buzz and Answers). While it wouldn’t kill the format, it would put a dent in my habits. Google Reader is more than just a way to easily consolidate and access feeds from multiple devices, it provides a top-notch search function to find and add new content. I wasn’t sad to see RSS removed from Apple’s Mail App; much as other built-in RSS readers it was functional but hardly feature-packed.

It may be an old format, but sometimes things hang around because they work, not from sheer nostalgia and stubbornness. Whether it’s old school traditional readers for your desktop/laptop or newer, flashier solutions like Flipboard (particularly good on the iPhone) or Google’s own app solution Currents (which I prefer on the iPad over Flipboard) RSS is a perfect way to easily obtain and enjoy your go-to internet sources. Here’s to hoping that Google agrees with me.

Read Full Post »

A discount iPhone?

We are in the dark period between hardware releases for Apple, so rumors abound as to what’s to be released in the near future. The speculation has been fanned by Apple’s recent financial reports- although Apple is awash in cash and has generated an astounding $13.07 billion in revenue in just the first quarter of the fiscal year, the sales figures didn’t match what financial pundits had predicted based on Apple’s meteoric rise in sales and revenue over the past few years. Consequently Apple’s stock price took a tumble (that was soon reversed) thanks to the pessimism. What’s a consumer to think? Has Apple really run out of mojo? Is this just a return to reality for a company that’s feasted off of meteoric sales fueled by practically creating two new product categories?

There are multiple factors in play concerning, and most are not readily evident. While the iPhone still reigns supreme in the US, it isn’t the industry leader around the world- Android has the lion’s portion of market share thanks to its breadth of pricing, handsets, and the slow release of the iPhone around the world. Apple has had some significant success in China, the world’s largest market for handsets, but they currently rank 6th in market share.

The iPhone won’t likely retain its market dominance in the US forever as competitors flood the market; Android has evolved at a blistering pace, and Microsoft is pushing their new mobile version of Windows 8 just as new names like Ubuntu and Firefox have been linked to mobile devices. What some don’t realize is that Apple has never been focused on market share- they place far more value on margin. Organizations like Amazon and Google sell their devices with almost no profit (and sometimes at a loss) to steer customers to their real profit centers- advertising and data mining for Google, the various Amazon stores for that entity. While Apple does generate a tidy profit from their media and app stores, they have never embraced the strategy of employing a loss leader (something that generates no or negative profit that brings more customers to the things that do).

The breadth of Android devices has been recognized as one if the reasons the platform has such a commanding portion of the handset market; devices range from iPhone equivalents like the Samsung Galaxy line to bargain models from makers like Huawei. While Apple does keep older models of iPhone in production to offer a broader range of prices, they have never sold a handset that was designed to appeal to bargain hunters (or a device that deviated from the established form factor). Some (including former Apple CEO John Sculley) have called for Apple to deviate from their business model to compete in the inexpensive handset demographic, even going so far as to insist that a cheaper version of the iPhone must be pending (with no actual evidence to support the claim). Others report on a rumored handset dubbed the iPhone Math that sports a 4.8 inch screen similar to some of Samsung’s phone/tablet (“phablet”?) hybrids.

Not only is such action not likely to happen, it would border on foolishness for Apple to do so. They have managed to generate more profit than all of their competitors combined by not focusing on market share and ceding certain segments of the market. While the sales figures from this past fiscal year weren’t explosive, they were still greater than the GDP of many countries- and this was in a quarter that was one week shorter than usual. Apple has only developed products to that offer significant value in each category, not devices solely to compete for money in that category. The Mac Mini is more than a cheaper version of the iMac; it has a different form factor and possible uses. The iPad Mini is less expensive than the full sized iPad, but the primary focus hasn’t been the price, it has been the utility offered by the smaller size of the device. The same can be said for the Shuffle, Apple’s cheapest iPod; it has a significantly different form (diminutive and lacking a screen) but is tailored for specific uses, not just to generate sales in those that can’t afford an iPod Nano or Touch. Creating an underpowered or under spec-ed device just to compete in a market segment they have never pursued for little more than market share is nonsense unless there were some way they could keep the profit margins they count on, and to date none of their competitors have been able to do so with far more time and emphasis on that demographic.

As for the super sized iPhone Math, the waters are less clear but still doubtful. I have no doubt there is a larger sized iPhone in product research (just perusing the research models revealed during the Apple v Samsung trials recently shows how broad the scope can be) but Apple tends to control every aspect of their consumer product line. The screen resolution of a larger device would pose problems for apps; it would either have to sport a non-retina display (unlikely considering the flack generated over the lack of retina in the iPad Mini) or would have to have a custom resolution- very unlikely given Apple’s insistence on uniformity in App Store apps. Another facet is Apple’s own in-house research; they have reported more than once that the screen of the iPhone and iPod Touch was specifically designed to allow one handed operation. The iPhone 5 allegedly is the largest factor that can still adhere to this purpose according to their engineers, any larger and Apple would have to ignore their own stated strategy. Then there’s the question of product identity; a massive iPhone becomes a potential competitor to the iPad Mini (which has allegedly already cannibalized sales from its full sized sibling).

While I’m far too low on the technosphere’s food chain to have precise insight on Apple’s product development, I’d still wager a week’s pay that a majority of the hand wringing and speculation on what they will (or should) do is just so much noise. The next big thing won’t be a big iPhone, it will likely be an entirely new category of device.

 

Read Full Post »

They aren’t sports teams

As I’ve stated before I used to revel in the role of electronic tinkerer. Building new PC towers was an easy and inexpensive way to gain a better, more powerful system while satisfying my craving for learning something new. I picked up a good deal of tricks from a high school friend and augmented it by devouring all the PC magazines and online articles I could get my hands on. My deep integration into all things PC naturally evolved into a sentimental attachment to my creations and the core of their electronic life- Windows. That’s right, I used to be an Apple hater. In hindsight I think it was just a subconscious way to justify the effort I put into each system (beyond the satisfaction of bringing a new PC to life by myself)- I was able to build something more powerful, with a faster processor, heftier graphics card; just pick your benchmark or component. Competitors by their very nature had to be inferior!

Since that time I was lured into the Apple fold bit by bit, gateway iPod to iPhone to Mac without a moment of regret. While I’ll admit to being an apologist on occasion (although to be honest the iPhone 4′s antenna and Apple Map’s oft discussed problems never impacted me) I’ve reflected often on the natural tendency for people to form cliques. What used to be a Mac versus PC argument (which still exists, albeit a bit more subdued than it used to be) has now become more of an iOS versus Android tussle.

Again, a caveat- I’ve teased a coworker or two about their Android handsets. It wasn’t maliciously done, but I can debate/argue with the best of them when I put my mind to it. That being said, it seems almost bizarre to me how we naturally form mental groups based on such personal choices as what kind of gadgets we prefer. I was an early adopter of the iPhone, and was already comfortably in the Apple fold by the time Android was a viable smartphone choice. Both handset operating systems had their growing pains, but both have matured into impressively powerful platforms with unique values to offer. Had I not opted for an iPhone I would have been just as enthusiastic about my first Nexus (and this blog may have had a different name).

Android truly does offer value that iOS never will. It’s open architecture provides flexibility and configurability so far unmatched (although new platforms from Ubuntu and Firefox may challenge that). Android offers unparalleled user control over its structure; users can change just about every aspect of the operating system’s interface. Google’s market strategy of seeking profit by supporting their core business of advertising and data mining allow them to give the OS away to handset manufacturers who can configure it to a massive range of different devices. iOS only recently became available on more than one type of device, but Android phones vary so much they could be broken down into subcategories, each providing unique value like low price, removable batteries, a physical keyboard, or pseudo-tablet size screen. Android owners have multiple app sources as well; legitimate (Google Play and Amazon’s app store) as well as not-so-legitimate. Then there’s one of the hidden facets of Android that some customers flock to- it simply isn’t Apple.

With all those selling points, why would anyone buy an iOS device? Glad you asked. iOS benefits from some of the very things it’s been criticized for, such as its “closed” architecture. Apple controls the product line from start to finish, and this affords them far greater influence over the quality of their operating system, components, and end user experience (just do a quick search for Android fragmentation if you’d like to see why unity is important). The physical construction has always been high quality, with more research on ergonomics and optimal functionality than the average consumer will ever be aware of. Rather than build a wide range of devices for all budgets, Apple keeps previous models of iPhone in production, selling the older model at a discount (yet still making a respectable profit margin thanks to existing production lines) allowing them to insure that no matter what your budget, you’ll get a quality device.

Thanks in part to the curated nature of the app store and part to the customer base Apple has cultivated the iOS App Store reigns supreme. iOS users are far more likely to purchase apps (dirty secret- Google makes more revenue from iOS users than it does out of the more numerous Android users!), and this cash flow influences development, feeding the store’s massive number of apps. Then there’s the rest of the iTunes Store, both free content and paid. Music, audiobooks, podcasts (both video and audio), movies, television shows, even education- nothing matches iTunes’ scope of media. Both operating systems can tie into third party providers like Netflix and Spotify, but iOS users have a much broader selection at their fingertips- you can even access Google Play (or any of Google’s products) if you really want to.

Then there is the staggering array of third party accessories. Literally any category you can think of, from the beautiful to the absurd, is out there for iOS devices. Third party developers have created new ways of using your device and better ways of doing what you were already using it for, spurred on by the unity of the platform. It’s far more profitable (not to mention easier) to develop for a product line that changes in slow increments rather than one that has almost countless forms simultaneously.

The unity of hardware and software have allowed Apple to develop a wide ranging product line, from iPod Touch to full sized iPad, offering stability  and interoperability that no competitor can match. iOS also acts as a valuable part of their product ecosystem; users can get far more utility from their devices if they use Apple products solely. As time passes iOS and OSX will cross pollinate and the defining line between them will blur (unlike Window’s clumsy attempt to force immediate integration of mobile and desktop operating systems via Windows 8). Google has no ecosystem to leverage; they began as system agnostic and even though they ventured into hardware with Android and the overlooked Chromebook they largely remain that way.

Given time I could probably provide countless more reasons why iOS was the perfect choice for me. The stability, clean and simple interface, quality of devices, interoperability, and breadth of support both software and hardware made my choice a simple one. My requirements won’t make everyone happy; those that haven’t lost their love of tinkering with the internals of their devices in particular (most of my Android-loving friends mention the modifications they’ve made to their handsets as one of the primary reasons they love them). Just bear in mind if someone wants to influence your choice of device, it’s not like choosing a sports team to follow; pick what best suits your needs.

Read Full Post »

Apple’s not-so-hidden advantage

As I recently mentioned, I’ve traded in my aging Mac Mini media center PC for a third generation Apple TV. The timing was right, and after some careful consideration I came to the conclusion that the Apple TV performed almost all the functions I asked of the Mac Mini. What few things it couldn’t perform were available via a somewhat overlooked feature built into both iOS and OSX devices- Airplay Mirroring. With this feature I can still display Safari-rendered web pages, ESPN3 content, and a host of other media that isn’t available yet on the Apple TV. In addition, the ability to push games from my iOS device to the television has made some games far more enjoyable. The newly released Need For Speed Most Wanted (easily my favorite PC racing game) benefits from the larger screen and better speakers, and I haven’t had the chance to try out some of the apps specifically designed for Airplay that take advantage of the dual screens that your device and TV afford.

Airplay isn’t perfected yet; my iPhone 5‘s screen dimensions require excessive letterboxing (even more than the iPad does) but the technology has added a great deal of enjoyment to an already well designed device. While the content afforded isn’t broad enough for the majority of households yet, my experience with the Apple TV has reaffirmed my choice to cut the cord and eschew all paid TV.

While composing my first impressions of Airplay the tight integration between the Apple TV and iOS I had a feeling of deja vu. I had discussed just this focus on integration between products in Apple’s ecosphere a few months ago when someone asked me about my opinions of smartphones. While all of the flavors of handsets have something to offer consumers, I’ve enjoyed the extra benefit of integration between my iPhone and all my other Apple devices. Messages, iCloud, Photostream, and Airplay are features that I use regularly that I would have to either cobble together via third party solutions or miss out on entirely had I chosen a different smartphone.

While Microsoft leap with both feet into the concept of a single operating system for both mobile and traditional devices, Apple has played it a bit more reserved. Microsoft’s once-named Metro interface is lynchpin of their integration strategy; they seek to offer an identical user interface on every device. Apple has chosen to build two distinct platforms and slowly allow them to grow together. I obviously prefer the second approach; the iPhone and iPad offer significantly different user inputs and experiences than a desktop or traditional laptop. The slow osmosis of successful facets of each OS and cross-platform cooperation has provided a more enjoyable user experience so far compared to my limited use of Windows 8 (best described in polite company as a hot mess).

Android is a powerful mobile operating system, and Google’s free product offerings are enticing- I use quite a few of them every day. Google has recently even begun attempts to copy Apple’s Airplay concept, but it will likely be much more difficult for Google to replicate due to the lack of a comprehensive hardware lineup. Google-enabled TVs  and set top boxes are out there, but they are have a long way to go before they even approach the levels of market penetration of Apple’s “hobby” device, much less the entire OSX line. I completely understand the perspective of my friends that swear by their Android devices, but for me the end point is more than just the handset itself. My choice is influenced by the entire product lineup and its integration. The synergy of my various devices has provided me much more utility than the sum of what competitors offer.

Read Full Post »

Is Apple DOOMED?

The guys at Cupertino have received a good deal of bad news lately. Some pundits have even declared that Apple’s Golden Age has ended, and the inevitable spiral back down to fringe player status has begun.

It began with the much-publicized Antennagate issue. The outer band of metal on the iPhone 4 served as more than decoration; the segmented border acted as an antenna for various radio functions. When grasped in a certain way the cell reception would dramatically decrease; I was able to reproduce the effect on my own 4 but never had an actual impact on my usage because of it. Famously Steve Jobs declared that users were merely “holding it wrong”, rather than own up to the engineering flaw.

Fast forward to the release of iPhone 5, iPad Mini, and iOS 6, and the controversy that came with them. The iPhone 5 has been a joy to have; thinner, lighter, yet with a larger screen. Yet some just weren’t impressed; pundits complained it wasn’t different enough, that the interface was dated, some even going so far as to complain that it was too light. The iPad Mini failed to wow some pundits due to its suboptimal specs, and reports of smaller lines than any other iOS product launch seemed to support the lukewarm reception.

The there are the real issues of iOS 6. Some complained of the removal of the YouTube app (even though YouTube is usable via Safari and several third party apps). There were sporadic complaints about wifi, Exchange settings, and the elephant in the room: Apple’s new Maps.

As Apple and Google spiraled from Frenemy to just plain adversaries, Apple has attempted to remove all traces of their competitor from their mobile platform. Chief among these has been Google’s Maps; once a crowning jewel of the handset. Rumors stated that Apple rushed to replace Google’s Maps with their own, even though they still had a year left in their contract with the search giant. Sadly, on release Apple’s Maps wasn’t ready for prime time, with numerous reports of incorrect rendering, bad directions, and warped satellite imagery. Landmarks were omitted or misplaced.

Now Apple is dealing with bad press closer to home. The recent shakeup of administrators and rumors of discord that led to the retirement (and then unretirement) of key executives showed cracks in what had been thought to be a solid, almost hive-mind group of visionaries that had assumed control of the organization after the death of Steve Jobs. Statements of infighting and contrasting visions would lead the reader to wonder why the fired executives were ever brought on in the first place.

All of these issues have led up to a precipitous drop in Apple’s stock price. At one point it was thought that the price per share might top $1000, as of 11/2 the price had plummeted to $576.80. What is a tech enthusiast to think? Are the few voices declaring the end of Apple’s reign accurate?

While I lack access to the inner circles of Apple, I can advise those that like me spend too much time perusing tech news to relax. None of the iOS devices have had a controversy-free release, and the eye of punditry has been focused ever tighter on Apple’s offerings with each successive product. Hyperanalysis comes with market leadership; almost no one noticed when the once highly anticipated Notion Ink Adam tablet failed to be released on time, and then fail to meet its prerelease hype, yet the iPhone 5 got a good deal of e-ink for not being ‘different enough’.

I’ll agree that Apple’s Maps was rushed to market, but in defense of the maligned app I haven’t had a single issue with it since the release of iOS 6 (and Google Maps led me far astray more than once). Some pundits have pointed out that Google has a several year head start on Apple when it comes to map data, and I would agree with the notion that Apple will have it on at least equal footing in a very short timespan. In the meantime, there are multiple options (including using  Google maps via Safari) for iOS 6 users that don’t feel like waiting.

The iPad Mini is a product of adaption of existing product lines. It sports some of the same internals as the iPad 2, as well as its screen resolution (albeit on a smaller screen, making the pixel per inch count significantly higher) for a reason- it made the device not only more affordable to produce, it allowed a seamless introduction into Apple’s existing product ecosystem. The Mini can use all existing apps with no conversion, and while its screen isn’t Retina Display quality it is better than its closest iPad relative. Apple had to walk a fine line to create a legitimate product between the iPad and iPod Touch- too powerful and you steal sales from your other products, too weak and no one will be interested. Much like Porche intentionally created their Boxster as slightly underpowered as not to infringe on the more expensive 911 and Cayman, Apple crafted the iPad Mini with exact specs- it offers value via a smaller and lighter form factor, more screen than an iPod Touch but less power and resolution than the full iPad. I would have loved for Apple to have followed Amazon and Google’s business plan of selling their devices at cost, but Apple has never done so. The $329 price marks it as a superior good; if you are shopping with price as your sole determining factor Apple seems comfortable with you choosing an Android-powered device rather than undercutting the $299 iPod Touch.

As for their executive team, who can say what inspired the creation of the group that was just dissolved. I had noted that the quickly reversed changes to Apple’s retail outlets went against what I and many others valued in Apple. The skeumorphic design of some of Apple’s software lineup has been curiously deviant from their overall design (just look at the stitched leather design of Calendar compared to the design of the device). I’d wager that the shift of control of iOS 6 to Jony Ive will result in some subtle changes to the interface of iOS 6. Apple has strongly stressed user experience as the primary benchmark of their product line for almost the life of the company, and I would expect the reshuffling of responsibilities to reflect this.

Lastly, stock prices are notoriously fluid. Wall Street and investors crave just two things: profit and stability. While Apple is still obscenely profitable (and holds more cash reserves than many nations) the shakeup of executives was unexpected and untimely. This was bound to have an impact on investor behavior. Couple this uncertainty with the introduction of a powerful competitor with Microsoft’s release of Windows 8 and their first internally-produced hardware the Surface, along with the rapid improvement of Android-powered tablets like the Nexus and Kindle Fire and you have a recipe for sure-fire turbulence.

Ultimately, nothing has really changed. Apple’s meteoric sales of iOS devices cannot last forever; one would assume that they are spending a good portion of their vast reserves on R&D to develop the next wave of cutting-edge devices. Apple is still incredibly profitable, and the outlook of their entire product line (save the iPod Classic and Mac Pro) is rosy- sales of just about every category of device has met predictions, and the Mac’s market share has risen along with the unexpected adoption of the iPad by businesses.

No pundit, least of all this modest blogger, can predict the long term outcome of a major international organization, but I can venture that the short term outlook of Apple is very good. While competition in the new market of portable devices is about to become much more intense, Apple still has a very advantageous position. Reports of their pending demise are more than a little premature.

Read Full Post »

It’s not all bad news for iOS 6 Maps

While the overall impressions for Apple’s new homegrown Maps app hasn’t been flattering, it’s not all doom and gloom for the vilified geolocation service.

Even before its release pundits had covered Apple’s efforts to cobble together their own mapping service. The incentive to do so is multifaceted; the wealth of data that comes from user’s activities alone would make the mapping service worthwhile. There’s also the alleged disagreement between Apple and Google as to who would have the most control over the interface, and the inability to build in turn by turn voice directions as Android‘s version has. While the acquired and leased data have been adequate for my uses here in the US, users have been very vocal of their displeasure of how inaccurate Maps has been, culminating in an open apology from Apple’s CEO Tim Cook.

AppleInsider brings some much needed good news for iOS 6 Maps in a recent article. While the data for the cloud service in most of the world has been of questionable accuracy at times, apparently the new Maps app has been warmly embraced by Chinese users. The app lacks spoken turn by turn navigation and the eye catching 3D flyover features, but makes up for this with its unparalleled accuracy. This competitive advantage is due to the scarcity of companies collecting mapping data in China (the article cites 11, with half of those only available to government institutions).

While I have no doubt that iOS 6 Maps will improve quickly, for the immediate future I’ve opted to rely on third party solutions for my navigation needs. The iTunes App Store even recently created a new category specifically for navigation apps in response to the perceived need. It is encouraging to see that given accurate data iOS 6 Maps can not only be usable, it can excel.

Read Full Post »

The perils of abandoning the status quo

Now that a select few have gotten their hands on the iPhone 5 reviews and opinions are starting to trickle in. Many are positive, but more than a few observations aren’t so enthusiastic. Unlike the transition from the 4 to the 4S, the release of the iPhone 5 has brought more than a few significant changes.

To start with, iOS 6 marks the end of the contract between Apple and Google that gave us integrated Google Maps. Apple had been quietly purchasing mapping companies and procuring data in order to have their own product when the contract ended. The wealth of data providing such a service to users offers alone made the effort worthwhile to Apple, but having an ongoing feud with the search giant wasn’t going to inspire Apple to extend the arrangement. Apple’s new Maps App has been the source of much discontent, inspiring one former Apple enthusiast at TUAW to write of his choice to cancel his iPhone 5 order so he could switch to a Samsung handset. As an infrequent user of the Maps App (and a resident of the US, where apparently the new Maps fares best) I haven’t had an issue so far. The same can’t be said for the Google-powered original Maps; twice on long road trips it led me astray, once directing me miles away to the middle of an orange orchard instead of the South Florida hotel I was traveling to.

As more than one pundit has pointed out, Google has a significant head start in the mapping business, and considerably better infrastructure. While Apple followed Google’s footsteps in procuring existing companies for the foundation of their Maps feature, they have yet to adopt Google’s trump card- relying on primary research in the form of the ubiquitous Google Maps vehicles that actually travel the roads, rather than purchased or licensed databases. I expect Apple’s Maps to improve exponentially; the question is if users will see improvement soon enough to keep them from switching to other third party solutions (including going back to Google’s Maps).

Another two-edged sword of a feature has been the new Lightning connector. The need for more space inside the new iPhone’s chassis necessitated adopting a smaller connector, and Lightning’s reversible input means no more swapping the cable around like a USB cord to get it to match the port properly. The new cable has it’s share of critics, however; many have pointed out that overnight Apple has made an entire industry of accessories that relied on the iPod-era connector obsolete (or at the very least in need of an adaptor that for the immediate future only Apple will sell, as they haven’t licensed third parties to make it yet).

To complicate matters, the new Lightning connector won’t work with some accessories regardless of adaptor. The new cable won’t support video out or iPod mode, the protocol used by some accessories (like factory installed car stereos) to mirror your iPhone’s track information. The official Lightning to traditional 32 pin adaptor provides a digital-to-analog converter allowing the iPhone 5′s digital audio out to still work with traditional accessories in some way, but there’s no guarantee that less expensive third party adaptors will do so as well.

There are also concerns about stress on the Lightning port, as many accessories with a dock rely on the traditional 32 pin input’s broad metal head to provide stability as your iOS device sits in the cradle. Some, like the newly-minted Une Bobine use the 32 pin as its sole means of holding the iPhone.

It’s not all doom, as MacWorld has posted that Apple will be releasing HDMI and VGA adaptors for the Lightning port in the coming months. I’d wager that a plethora of cables and adaptors will pop up very soon, spurred on by the iPhone 5′s record setting sales figures so far.

It’s not easy moving beyond the tried and true, but Apple has demonstrated more than once that they will happily bury existing tech, sometimes before it truly becomes necessary (ex: Apple’s stance on optical drives in their latest Macs). My experiences with Google Maps has kept me from despairing over the switch to Apple Maps. None of the other issues brought up to date are deal breakers for me; the iPhone 5 offers far too much value for any of the problems pundits have discussed to be a factor, especially when the rapidly changing nature of gadgetry is taken into account.

Read Full Post »