Showing posts with label Android. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Android. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Verizon to support Google Voice on Android phones

It's good to learn that Google and Verizon are partnering to deliver better Android devices.

That's not surprising though. The surprising bit is the support for Google Voice ...
Verizon, Google Team For Android Devices -- Smartphones -- InformationWeek
... Verizon said its Android devices will come with the Android Market preloaded, and the wireless operator will support Google Voice. Verizon will be preloading some of its apps onto the devices, as well as tailoring the OS to provide a distinctive user experience..."
Doesn't Verizon make money on phone calls and SMS? Why are they going to support GV? I'd like to learn more. On the face of it, a nice kick at AT&T/Apple.

The "preloading" and "tailoring" sound ominous though.

Update: The first go-round I missed the key part of the announcement. The alliance goes beyond Android phones. It's also going to include collaboration on "netbooks". Netbooks, as in Google Chromestellation. Wow.

I'd forgotten what real competition was like. The Apple-Google wars are about to become the Apple/AT&T - Google/Verizon wars - and Microsoft is on the sidelines.

2010 looks to be another interesting year, but this time with some good news for consumers.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Android comments from an iPhone perspective

Now that Apple has been condemned to the innermost circle of Geek Hell, I'm on the lookout for Android overviews like this one ...
notes on "google phone day 1"
... I'll write about the software later. For now I can say I won't have a problem using it for 30 days. I am sure I'll miss a few games, but most of the apps I use are simply front-ends to web services like Twitter or Google Reader. Google Voice is EXCELLENT. The whole Google Account integration 'just works'. I launched maps for the first time and the system knew who I was and signed me into Google Latitude. Also, my calendar is updated and synced as are my contacts pulled over from Google Voice...
My 12yo is getting into cell phone range and he really likes sliding keyboards. Hmmm.

Update 8/11/09: He couldn't stand the G1 and switched back early. I appreciate his courageous exploration of the wild lands.

Monday, July 20, 2009

How the iPhone has warped our sense of Japan’s mobile market

In the 70s Japan was brilliant. Smarter, faster, stronger than the rest of the world.

Then Japan seemed to lose its way. When I saw this headline I wondered if the story of Japan’s oddball cell phones held a clue ..

Why Japan’s Smartphones Haven’t Gone Global - NYTimes.com

…  Japan is years ahead in any innovation. But it hasn’t been able to get business out of it,” said Gerhard Fasol, president of the Tokyo-based IT consulting firm, Eurotechnology Japan.

Innovation? Really? It sure doesn’t feel that way. Mr Fasol is a foreign consultant (I’m guessing), so maybe he’s being diplomatic. This description is more plausible …

… Japan’s cellphones are like the endemic species that Darwin encountered on the Galápagos Islands — fantastically evolved and divergent from their mainland cousins — explains Takeshi Natsuno, who teaches at Tokyo’s Keio University…

… This is the kind of phone I wanted to make,” Mr. Natsuno said, playing with his own iPhone 3G…

and

… each handset model is designed with a customized user interface, development is time-consuming and expensive, said Tetsuzo Matsumoto, senior executive vice president at Softbank Mobile, a leading carrier. “Japan’s phones are all ‘handmade’ from scratch,”…

Lots of invention, but no ecosystem. It’s all one-offs, again and again. Does this tell us something unique about Japan?

I thought so, but then I realized that the iPhone has warped my sense of history.

If the iPhone hadn’t come along, we’d all be in the same pointless trap – except Japan and Korea would be at the high end and we’d be stuck at the low end – with “smartphones” like Windows Mobile (ugh), the Blackberry (yuch) and the ailing Palm Classic (sigh). Our pre-iPhone mobile ecosystem was just like Japan’s, only much less interesting.

It’s the iPhone that changed the game, and transformed Japan from the future to an isolated island ecosystem. Whatever may come of the iPhone, even if it should fall to Android or Pre or something else, it was genuinely revolutionary. So revolutionary, it’s warped my sense of recent history.

Japan (or, perhaps more likely, Korea) still has a chance though. In the 1970s Japan made lots of computers – using NEC’s proprietary OS. Japan didn’t surge in the PC hardware marketplace until they went to using PC/MS-DOS. (With a major US setback due to congressional trade restrictions blocking desktop imports from Japan – those were the days the US was terrified of Japan.)

If Japan’s manufacturers were to give up on their solutions and focus on Android …

Friday, June 05, 2009

Who will acquire Palm ... and the Pre?

As a long-suffering and occasionally joyful iPhone user, and as scarred and bloodied Palm-era road-kill, I'm very happy that the Palm Pre is receiving first class review coverage. Yes, Pogue and other reviewers are keen to praise the underdog, but this is a genuine achievement.

It's also a desperate Hail Mary pass -- and the goal is not corporate survival. The iTunes hack (the Pre forges iPod credentials) and the expected severe product shortage are just two early signs of how badly Palm is limping now.

I'm with Blodgett ...

The Palm Pre Will Bomb (PALM, AAPL) - Henry Blodgett

.. The smartphone game has become a waltz of elephants, and Palm is just a Jack Russell terrier.  In the US, the smartphone war is between Apple, RIM, and, to a lesser extent, Google.  Palm can yip a bit and run around nipping at the others' feet, but it's too late to become one of the big dogs.

One thing Pre does do for Palm is turn it into a more attractive acquisition candidate.  We doubt Apple, RIM, or Google would buy it, but there's always Nokia, which is nowhere in the US smartphone market...

Nokia is everyone's number one guess for the soon-to-be home of the Palm Pre. I'd wonder about SONY and Samsung -- neither company can afford to surrender the computer infrastructure of the next 15 years.

I also wouldn't write off RIM. It's difficult to describe how badly the BlackBerry OS sucks. Yes, I know it sells well in the consumer market, but that's because most consumers are clueless. I don't think that's going to continue. If RIM's only strength is Exchange server they're in trouble.

So my choices for the future home of the Pre are Nokia first, RIM second then SONY and lastly Samsung. Dell is a wildcard. Any other lists out there?

Thursday, February 19, 2009

The netbook train rumbles onwards - heading below $200 this year

The NYT has been paying a lot of attention to the netbook* train -- the train that's going to run over the industry in the next year or two. They recognize this isn't about features, it's about hitting the $125 2011 Barbie b-smart netbook batteries-not-include price point. They haven't quite figured out that Google's advantage isn't merely Microsoft's (avoidable?) doom, it's Google's Chromestellation strategy, but they're getting there ...

Can Cellphones Grow Up to Rival PCs? - Saul Hansell - NYTimes.com

... Coming by the end of this year are a new crop of small inexpensive notebook computers, known as netbooks, based on the ARM microprocessor design and running one of several versions of Linux, including perhaps Google’s Android cellphone operating system. ..

... Netbooks have been a rapidly growing category of computers, mainly because they are more portable and typically cost $400 or less. So far they have been mostly based on Intel’s Atom chip, which uses its X86 instruction set and thus can run Windows. Some manufacturers, including ASUS and Hewlett-Packard have also offered versions of their netbooks that run Linux, but these have not yet been popular in the market.

Some argue this will change as the combination of an ARM processer and Linux may allow netbooks to be sold for $200 or less.

Earlier this week, Freescale, the chip company spun out of Motorola, announced a new high end chip, based on the latest ARM designs specifically for netbooks. This follows a similar announcement by Qualcomm last month...

... its chip will cost about $15 each when bought in large quantities, with about $5 of other chips that support the processor; the Linux operating system, of course, is free. The company estimates that a computer maker would need to spend $50 to $60 on an Intel Atom, related chips, and Windows.

Mr. Burchers said that the company figures that the $200 netbooks will not have a hard drive, but will have 4 gigabytes to 8 gigabytes of flash memory. The devices will mainly be used, he figures, by people to surf the Internet. A few, more expensive models will be able to connect to cellular data networks, but mainly they will be aimed at young people who connect through Wi-Fi networks.

... No manufacturers have announced they are building netbooks using the chips, but Freestyle was showing a prototype manufactured by Pegatron, a Taiwanese affiliate of ASUS, that makes notebooks for a number of brands...

... Freescale is working with Linux makers to make them easier to use. The chip is designed to be used with Linux versions made by Phoenix Technologies, Xandros, and Canonical, which makes Ubuntu. Freescale added support for Android to its plans this year because computer makers said they see a market for it...

Close, but just wide of the mark. Android is just a smokescreen here. The real story is Google Chrome for Linux, and Google's "Chrome OS" strategy -- aka "Chromestellation".

Of course, let's not forget China's Godson project.

* Since the NYT is still using the term, Psion's trademark battle might be hopeless.

Saturday, February 07, 2009

The straw that broke my iPhone love

It is a small thing, by itself.

Unfortunately, it is just one more bit of nasty among so many more, and it's such a quintessential bit of Apple nasty.

The maximal interval for an iPhone Calendar alert is 2 days.

This is a problem. I need to be alerted of upcoming birthdays and certain other events at least 2 weeks ahead of time. That has been possible with all the calendaring software I've used over the past fifteen years -- except for the iPhone Calendar.app.

Now here's what makes this so perfectly Apple. The iPhone development team had dozens of examples to draw from, not least the original PalmPilot. They must have consciously decided to omit this feature. I imagine the team was proud of dropping a feature few people would use, proud of their minimalist aesthetic.

Ok, bad enough, but I'm used to that. I'm way off in the extreme tail of software users. There's very little I'm really happy with (Windows Live Writer, Gmail, and Google Reader come to mind). Apple's desktop iCal software reaks about as much as their iPhone app.

What makes this straw a back breaker is not simply that iPhone calendaring is pathetic, it's that Apple forbids alternatives. Even on OS X there are a few alternatives to Apple products, but on the iPhone only Apple can use the USB cable, and vendors are explicitly forbidden to distribute alternatives to Apple's core applications. On the iPhone it's Apple's Calendar.app, or it's nothing.

It's a bad story, and, short of a revolution in Apple's attitude, it's not going to get better. Astonishingly, the Apple iPhone and MobileMe have made me miss the old Microsoft.

So I've stopped recommending the iPhone to others anyone who needs at least PalmPilot 1994 functionality, and I won't be replacing my wife's BlackBerry Pearl with an iPhone.

Which brings me to the obvious next question. If the iPhone is a dead end, is their anything better?

Not yet, but I'm going to be watching the Android even more closely, and, I've got my fingers crossed that the Palm Pre will beat very long odds, and I'm watching for the jailbreak team to add a Calendar replacement that runs against Google Calendar.

Update 2/9/09: Google to the rescue? I feel for Nuevasync. The iPhone calendar app still sucks, but I can use the WebKit interface to Google Calendar to make changes.

Update 2/14/09: Saved by Google.

Thursday, January 01, 2009

Squeezed 2009: Netbooks, Android and Microsoft

One of the few advantages of increasing entropy is I remember my first electronic calculator.

It weighed about 10 pounds, needed 120V, and could add, subtract, multiply, and divide. I think it could store one intermediate result. It cost the equivalent of about $150 in today's money. That was a breakthrough, because a year or so before the same machine cost about $500.

That was the end of my slide rule.

Within a year or two vastly smaller and simpler calculators cost about $50, and a few years after that they were essentially free. [1]

Now that was disruptive technology.

We've never seen anything like that in the world of the personal computer. Today's personal computers have been, in most meaningful ways, no more affordable than the Commodore 64 ($135 to produce in 1982).

Yes, after twenty-seven years we have at least a million times the storage and maybe five times the display capabilities at perhaps half the inflation adjusted retail price, but in terms of tasks like writing this post the cost/value equation of the personal computer is closer to the car than the calculator.

Why is that? I think it's partly because calculators, for most people, delivered 90% of their value very quickly. They were commoditized at birth. They were also born before intellectual property protection was fully developed -- in a sense they were "open source" from the start.

By contrast the early development of the personal computer clobbered products like the Data General Eagle, but then a relatively slow change in the value equation built the mother of all profit generating corporations -- Microsoft.

That's about to change. The Market can't solve problems like global climate change or the problem of the weak, but, eventually, when the driving pressures are big enough and with a bit of antitrust help, it will find an out.

The squeeze is coming now. It's coming from China and India, from Google's Chromestellation and Google's Android, from open source and the Target Trutech netbook. Oh, yeah, and from the Great Recession as well.

After all, what's a Netbook running Chrome and Linux but a calculator in drag? It's fundamentally complete. It's built entirely of plastic, silicon (sand) and a tiny amount of rare metals. All the technology development costs have been fully realized, and there's no vendor with true monopoly control. IP attacks won't work if China and India decide not to cooperate.

It's not just the Netbook. Android is open source as well. Stick an Android phone in a cradle with a 1024 display and a keyboard and you have a computing platform at hundred thousand times more powerful than the Commodore 64.

The squeeze has been coming, but in 2009 it's going to be obvious. The price of the personal computer has been doing a Wile E. Coyote -- running on air for 27 years.

This year, gravity is going to kick in. Within another two years we'll see very crappy netbook equivalents being sold for under $75. Maybe they'll be today's netbook, maybe they'll be an iTouch with external display and bluetooth keyboard, maybe they'll be subsidized Chromestellation machines -- but it's going to happen.

This isn't all bad for Intel. The computing must be done. They can sell cheap chips to the netbooks and the phones, and lots of chips to the Cloud.

It's tough for Apple, but they can sell a bundled set of fully integrated and relatively trouble free goods and services alongside new consumer goods. Still, it will hurt. They're going to have to introduce a sub-$500 general computing device in 2009. Remember that when Jobs disses a market he's usually lashing his engineers to come up with a solution.

Ahh, but then there's Microsoft and Dell.

For them, this is very bad.

It will be very interesting to see what they try to do about it.

[1] Today, because they're so exotic, engineering and finance calculators cost more than they cost in the pre-PC 1980s. Or, if you have an iPhone/iTouch, you can run a superb emulator for a pittance.

Update: I left something out of the equation.

Update 1/1/09: This post on Netbooks running Android must have been written at about the same time as my post.

Update 1/2/09: I previously praised a 2007 Dan's Data review of low cost Linux laptops and connected it to the Newton eMate. In a f/u comment on the eMate I note the missing element of the proto-Netbook world of the 1990s (1980s if you count Tandy's famous proto-laptop) -- cheap wireless LANs. I'm still thinking about the Comcast role -- Netbooks aren't necessarily cheaper than laptops if you account for network access costs. That's why the Obama administration's position on public wireless service is such a big deal. It's probably the most important technology policty they will make-- one way or the other.

Update 1/8/09: This Chinese pseudo-x86 "Godson" chip development project is more than slightly relevant.

Update 1/22/09: Microsoft agrees. They're not stupid.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Why Google loves Chrome: Netscape Constellation

Google is serious about Chrome. The Google Pack now include Chrome rather than Firefox. Google is paying vendors to put Chrome on new machines rather than IE or Firefox. Soon Google will pay for Chrome/Linux to go on sub-$250 Linux netbooks, and they'll begin moving the Target Trutech netbook purchase price to zero.

Why is Google so serious about yet another browser?

I still see pundits asking that question, even though I answered it four months ago.

Alas, that particular meme injection looks like a total fail. I tested today on Google, Windows Live, and AOL search [4]. I found my personal post and precisely one other hit -- a comment replicated across dozens of identical spam blog (splog) posts [1],[2] (no links since the source is a splog):
... Google is not the only think-tank pursuing the 'browser-as-desktop'-concept... and far from the first. Does anyone remember 'Netscape Constellation'? That is very likely the reason Gates and Balmer finally unleashed the hounds on Marc Andreessen & Company... and probably the primary reason why 'Netscape' (in name) has been relegated to foot-note status, in internet history...
So there are at least two living people who remember Constellation, and think Google is playing the same cards -- from a vastly stronger hand. As Machiavelli taught us, old strategies never die. They just wait to be played at the right time.

For a second try at a meme injection, I'll reference a fragment of the irreplaceable but forgotten BYTE magazine (1975-1998) written in 1997 by Tom (electric brain) Halfhill [3] (emphases and footnotes mine):
March 1997 / Cover Story / Net Applications: Will Netscape Set the Standard? / Constellation: The Network-Centric Desktop (Tom Halfhill, 1997)

Microsoft and Netscape both want to change how users interact with their computers in a wired world. But each company wants to steer those changes in a different direction. Whoever prevails will probably determine the face of computing for the next decade. [5]

Both companies are preparing for an age of ubiquitous networking in which users enjoy fast access to immense resources on LANs, WANs, and the Internet..

Microsoft's Active Platform -- manifested on a PC as Active Desktop -- leverages the market dominance of Windows by blending the user interfaces of Windows and the Web...

... Netscape's Constellation takes a less Windows-centric approach and puts more emphasis on location-independent computing, regardless of the platform. No matter what kind of system you're using or where you are, Constellation presents a universal desktop called the Homeport . Although the Homeport can appear in a browser window, Netscape usually demonstrates it as a full-screen layer that buries the native OS -- certainly one reason Microsoft is not embracing Constellation.

Constellation will work on about 18 different OSes because it's created entirely with HTML, JavaScript, and Java. Netscape envisions the Homeport as the new base for launching local or remote applications and for accessing the network. It's location-independent because Constellation can save the Homeport's state (including all data files cre ated or modified during a session) on a server... Constellation lets you save copies of your files on the local machine, encrypt the copies, or securely erase all local traces of your session.

Constellation can receive infostreams through Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), Marimba Castanet, and the PointCast Network. HTTP and SMTP are the more conventional methods...

... Netscape sees more platform fragmentation. Users will access networks from Windows PCs, of course, but also from Macs, Unix systems, network computers, home videogame consoles, Web appliances, and mobile devices of every stripe. They won't all run Windows. Netscape also expects more users to borrow time on computers they don't own; for example, business travelers might answer e-mail on network computers in airports and hotels....
Where you read "Netscape Constellation", just insert "Google Chrome-stellation".

Chrome only makes sense as the foundation for Google's fundamental computing strategy, a strategy that will make full use of ultra-inexpensive (free?) netbooks, subsidized Android phones, massive network resources, and, incidentally, any Windows or OS X machine.

Chrome is where Google will start to deliver functionality that, until now, has required desktop clients.

Will Chrome-stellation succeed where Constellation failed? Microsoft now is vastly wealthier than it was in 1997.

I think there's a good chance it will work -- reason enough to consider purchasing Google stock. Microsoft is hobbled by antitrust restrictions, and the inevitable senescence [6] of the publicly traded company. Google has vastly more cash and talent than Netscape ever had, and they're not going to repeat Netscape's error of trash talking the Beast. Chrome is open source, which radically reduces the risk that Google will run into anti-trust or nationalist objections. Not least of all, those netbooks are going to wreak havoc on Microsoft's business strategy -- while only strengthening Google.

Phew. Now to check back in four more months and see if there are more than 3 relevant hits on "Google Chrome" "Netscape Constellation".

[1] Incidentally, Windows Live does a remarkably lousy job of filtering out splogs.
[2] The role of splogs in propagating memes is irresistibly reminiscent of viral propagation of gene fragments.
[3] Ironically, some suspect BYTE was collateral damage from Microsoft's scorched earth campaign against Netscape/Constellation.
[4] It occurred to me that if Google really was doing a Constellation play, they'd have learned enough from the obliteration of Netscape to keep very quiet. Maybe they'd even keep the meme from their search rankings. Now that would have been an interesting story, but it turns out that Google, as usual, had the best results by an order of magnitude.
[5] Microsoft prevailed of course, but they only got to rule unchallenged for about 6-7 years, then Google took the lead. Still, not far off.
[6] To which Apple has been the great exception, but I think they lost their way about 1-2 years ago. Google has a funny ownership structure that might give them a few more good years before the go under. Long enough, maybe, to implement "Chromestellation".

Monday, October 27, 2008

Apple blocks Opera Mini from the iPhone

This is why we iPhone users must encourage everyone to buy a Google Android gPhone ...

Opera Sings an Ode to Browsers Everywhere - Bits Blog - NYTimes.com

... For smartphones, Opera Mobile is a full-featured browser that can display most Web sites. Handset makers pay Opera about 50 cents to $1 per copy for each phone made with the browser on it.

For less sophisticated phones and slower networks, it offers Opera Mini, which takes advantage of a server computer, run by Opera, to handle the processing of Web pages. The server then sends a simplified version of each page to the phone in a compressed form.

Because that makes for much faster browsing no matter what the phone and network, Mr. von Tetzchner said, Opera Mini is increasingly popular on smartphones, even those that use the latest third-generation, or 3G, wireless data networks.

“3G isn’t really that fast,” he said. “We try to deal with the real world.”

Mr. von Tetzchner said that Opera’s engineers have developed a version of Opera Mini that can run on an Apple iPhone, but Apple won’t let the company release it because it competes with Apple’s own Safari browser...

Wouldn't you like to have the choice of a Opera Mobile? Google Android customers will have that choice.

Apple needs the lash of competition to be a barely tolerable companion.

Monday, September 01, 2008

Why Google Chrome?

Google has lots of good reasons to build Chrome. Certainly embedding Gears in the browser is a good reason, that ought to also make former Netscape Constellation engineers smile. Dissing Flash is a always a good reason.

But what's the best reason?

Well, Google is still primarily a search and discovery company. So maybe the best reason to build Chrome is to deeply embed Google search throughout the browser.

I'm 70% through the Chrome comic, and I'm excited. This is a big event, and it's a big event that will benefit the entire user community.

All open source, and they mean open. Any competitor can take anything, thank you not required.

Thanks Google!

PS. See Andy, Google's not done yet ...

Update 9/5/08: Nice story on how Chrome was created.

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

Unintended consequences of the iPhone’s DRM requirements – Apple shoots the Mac

In my real life I’m used to hearing the myths that “software shouldn’t change how people work” and “software should adopt to people, not the other way around”.

If only.

The reality for every product is an ugly compromise between optimal functionality, costs, and dozens of stakeholders. Only one of those stakeholders is you, the user.

In any case, smart humans, and even groups of humans, are still much more flexible than software. In the medium to long term smart users are much happier if they adopt their workflow to optimal software, rather than use crummy solutions that support current workflow.

This is good by the way; when software becomes more flexible and adaptive than humans we’ll regret it.

So, even though I wrote “I will be buying my iPhone in the next week or so. I approach the date like a condemned man!” I realize that I have no choice but to throw out ten years of Palm/Outlook driven workflow for whatever Apple will choose to support.

No choice but to grind my teeth because the biggest iPhone stakeholder is not me, it’s the movie industry. A movie industry with DRM requirements that have led Apple to lockout the Phone cable connector.

Fair enough, that’s the way the world works. Lowest common denominator Apple iPhone applications and alternatives limited because they can’t sync to the desktop mean I need to look to the iPhone’s one strong point – connectivity and a very good web browser.

Which brings me to the point of this post.

The combination of Apple’s lowest common denominator iPhone native apps (ex. no tasks, no work/home calendar management, no global search [1]), and the disabling of better alternatives by absent desktop synchronization, is going to drive me to Cloud Computing faster than I’d prefer.

So who owns the Cloud?

Not Apple. Google.

In the long run, despite medium term anguish, shifting to Cloud Computing will probably be an improvement on my current workflow. It will also put me in a very good position to switch to Android if Google is able to deliver a working version sometime in 2010. In the meantime I will save money by buying fewer Macs, since the Cloud will be providing my family’s processing and storage.

So, things will eventually work out for me.

On the other hand, I’m not sure this emergent solution is entirely in Apple’s long-term interests. Does Apple really want to shoot the Mac?

[1] Both tasks and global search were well supported in the very first PalmPilot I bought around 1997 or so. From the perspective of native applications that I need all the time, the iPhone is large regression from 1997.

Thursday, May 01, 2008

Why did Apple open the iPhone to developers?

Did Apple always intend for the iPhone to be a development platform, or were they forced to change their mind?

A well regarded Piper Jaffray analyst thinks Apple was forced to change its mind ...

AppleInsider | Piper Jaffray addresses 15 more 'unanswered Apple questions' [Page 2]

What was the driver for the App Store on the iPhone for 3rd party applications?
The thriving iPhone hacking community adequately showed that there was significant demand for features the iPhone is capable of, but Apple is not offering. Games, instant messaging, and industry-specific applications are several examples of features that the iPhone does not currently offer in a native application setting. We believe Apple recognized that its user base was dissatisfied with the simplified Web 2.0 apps available on the iPhone's web browser; as a result, the company announced the availability of 3rd party applications in March along with the iPhone operating system 2.0, which is on track to arrive in late June.

I'd have phrased this differently. I'd have said that Apple realized that its initial closed plans were going to severely limit market growth, and expose the iPhone to a losing race with a future Google Android. Maybe Apple figured that even among its hard core base, there were people who weren't going to buy an eternally incomplete solution.

Heck, maybe Jobs read my August 2007 demands and, mistakenly assumed I represented a meaningful demographic.

The good news is that they made the SDK move, even if the application environment is oddly reminiscent of the PalmOS, and even though there's still no word of a synchronization API (an odd omission that few seem to have noticed).

Thanks to everyone who didn't buy the iPhone 1.0, especially those of my fellow geeks who complained bitterly and hacked away at iPhone 1.0.

I fully expect to buy iPhone 2.0 (after the official SDK release) -- even if I Apple withholds a synchronization solution. I wouldn't ever buy an iPhone had there not been an SDK, but I now believe that Apple's geek customers will eventually, with great effort and much gnashing of teeth, force a reluctant Apple to publish a synchronization API for the iPhone.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

The iPhone software advantage: strong Digital Rights Management

This is sad.

But it must be said.

I am no friend of Digital Rights Management. I don't buy FairPlay'd music -- because I can't play DRMd music on my car stereo [1].

On the other hand, I remember when there was a large selection of games and children's software for the Apple II and the original Macintosh. There's almost nothing left like that today - on XP or OS X. The CDs we bought 5-8 years ago were the last of that wave, and they no longer work on XP or 10.4 Classic [2].

There are such games today of course. They're on the Nintendo platform [3].

Why is this software on Nintendo, and yet not on OS X?

It's the Digital Rights Management. You can't give a copy of your favorite Wii game to a friend. You can't even move the games you bought at work to your home. This 21st century version of "copy protection" cannot be broken as easily as as the 1980s version.

The iPhone, like the Nintendo Wii, has very robust DRM. It will not be possible to download an iPhone app via iTunes and install it on your wife and children's iPhones and iTouchs [4].

Unlike the Palm, the iPhone and iTouch will combine robust DRM with a single contact built-in delivery mechanism for software developers willing to push through the distribution hurdles.

Guaranteed distribution. Guaranteed copy protection/DRM.

The iPhone will have a very large software advantage over the Mac version of OS X, and over the Palm and Microsoft mobile devices that have preceded it.

Ringtones were once a billion dollar industry, though that's dying now. The iPhone software advantage will be bigger.

We'll have to pay for the apps though.

I'm happy to do that. It's just too bad we need the DRM to make this work.

--

[1] Most know this, but it's worth mentioning that AAC is a format and not a DRM mechanism. AAC encoded music plays on our SONY car stereo and our Nokia and Blackberry phones).

[2] 10.5, of course, doesn't support Classic on any platform, so when our G5 iMac dies so will all our old favorite children's apps. My son collects the old CDs in his desk drawer, hoping, perhaps, that they'll one day come to life again.

[3] It is odd that no other game platform seems to have realized that teen players come from children players, and yet they don't provide entry level game software. Maybe the execs don't have children?

[4] On OS X and Vista there is a strong tie between a hardware device and a user identity. Each device must sync to a single account on a single machine, though Apple has screwed up the software/hardware/multi-user integration (See also). Once you start going down the iPhone/iTouch route, you will discover a very interesting set of problems with sharing your music library.

PS. An exercise for the Reader: Consider an alternative path that Google's Android might take, and how that path resembles a future funding mechanism for the New York Times.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

The BlackBerry Pearl is Android 0.8

So now I realize (see especially) what Google's been doing while they neglect Blogger, Google Apps, and most of their non-search properties.

They've been putting all their energy into mobile computing.

Yes, we all know about Google Android.

What I've not read is that the BlackBerry Pearl is a kind of Android 0.8 alpha. Interesting, since RIM is definitely not part of the Open Handset Alliance. Coopetition - at best.

I'd written elsewhere ....
Gordon's Tech: Nokia 6555b: the pleasant surprise, and its iSync Plug-in

...We've turned Emily's Blackberry Pearl into a proto-Android, and it works pretty well that way. So we have a data phone with Google Maps, Google Talk, Google Mail and some other odd Google things....
I've gone a bit further since doing that, including a visit to the Google BlackBerry mobile page and building a personal Google page for Emily's Blackberry. It all comes together in an interesting way.

Not that there aren't rough edges! Google has two parallel identity management systems -- one through Google App (like our family domain) and the well known Gmail network. In general the Google App services are one generation behind the Gmail services -- and poorly integrated at that. You can get the Gmail app for a family domain, but you can't get the personalized mobile search home page (google.com/ig). (I think it's also true that you can't embed a widget for the family domain Gmail app on a the personalized search page.)

My workaround for now has been to make my wife's family domain login the "email address" for a Gmail-suite account -- but without actually enabling a Gmail account! set. So she can use the mobile home page and a mixture of Gmail-class and Google-Apps class services on her BlackBerry.

Ok, so it's a bleedin' mess. Still, the result is the closest thing to Android available today. An interesting glimpse of what's ahead.