Why Phil Schiller's Statement on Cannibalization Was the Most Interesting Part of 60 Minutes

There was a lot of good stuff in the 60 Minutes Apple profile with host Charlie Rose this past Sunday (12/20/15).  If you haven't watched it, you should.  It's a rare glimpse inside the design studio.  And it's full of tidbits like Apple having 800 hundred engineers just working on camera technology.  Tim Cook's answers on taxes, China labor, and privacy made me cheer.

But Phil Schiller's comments on how Apple's products tend to cannibalize each other was the most fascinating insight of the night.

Here's the excerpt...

Charlie Rose: Is there danger of one product cannibalizing the other product?

Phil Schiller: It's not a danger, it's almost by design. You need each of these products to try to fight for their space, their time with you. The iPhone has to become so great that you don't know why you want an iPad. The iPad has to be so great that you don't know why you why you want a notebook. The notebook has to be so great, you don't know why you want a desktop. Each one's job is to compete with the other ones.

There's been quite a recent trend of Apple's most outspoken fans and commentators to question where each new item "fits" in the line up.  Many have panned the iPad Pro as being too "laptop" like but without the software to back it up.  The newest MacBook got railed for being too thin and light and under powered; essentially too "iPad like."  The iPhone's "Plus" size made many question if the iPad Mini was on the way out the door. 

At the heart of each of these questions was an underlying assumption that now seems to have been wrong.  All these commentators have assumed that the old Apple model of the "box" (consumer desktop and laptop, pro desktop and laptop) was still in play.  As such, they've been trying to ask with each new product, which of those 4 groups is it targeting?  But Schiller's comments seems to suggest that the simple model of "pro" versus "consumer" may be outdated.  Instead, each product is pushed to simply be the best, most powerful version of a form factor it can be.  If we think of it that way, what might we re-imagine about product goals...?

Laptops should be the most powerful, but portable machines possible.  That certainly fits the new MacBook's ethos.  Ultra slim, ultra light, yet running a desktop class OS.

Tablets should be the most powerful, but casual machines you can make.  The iPad Mini and Air are powerful enough for productivity, yet casual enough for the couch.  And the new iPad Pro is incredibly powerful, but with extra approaches for artists.

Phones should be top of the line.  Light and thin for ease of carry.  Great cameras (the most used feature).  Fast and powerful.  The iPhone is all these things.

The Watch should be great fashion.

Desktops should have amazing displays and be non-intrusive footprints.

When you start to think less about the "product mix" and instead focus- as Schiller suggests- on letting each thing be the best version of itself, a lot of the decisions Apple has made make more sense and the overlap is simply a byproduct.

It's easy to want to hold onto the old "box" model of Apple's past.  After all, it's a story steeped in Steve Jobs legend and Apple fans love those.  But I think Apple has moved past that model and so it's time that reviewers and commentators do the same.  After all, Steve never wanted us to be trapped by a good idea from the past.  Keep thinking different.

The Future of Apple Pay is Apps

 Pay is great.

The convince, the security, the privacy.  And the sheer fun of paying for things with my watch or phone at a register.  It’s great.  I’ve been enjoying  Pay since day one and I love it.

I just wish it was more places.

The truth is,  Pay (and other digital payments, in the US at least) is a slow burn.  Sure, more stores are adopting it, but it’s taking a while as terminals have to be replaced and infrastructure has to take hold.  It’s working, but it’s slow to come because physical changes to terminals take time.

Which is why I think the real future of  Pay is on the web and in apps.

A few weeks back I bought a few towels from Target that weren’t available in-store.  Using  Pay, I didn’t need to give the retailer (whose track record for payment security is notoriously shoddy) my credit card or even my shipping info directly.   Pay had it all stored and ready to go.  The transaction couldn’t have been simpler.

I really hope more online sites and apps switch over.  Fandango just did which is great.  But I want it in all of them.

It makes sense.  I’m more reluctant to give my credit card info to sites on the web than to worry about swiping it anyway.  And with all my shipping info stored the whole thing is fast and easy.

It’s like having one-click buying everywhere without the worry of my card being stored by dozens of merchants.

I really hope more brick and mortar stores start taking it.  But I’m even more hopeful that more app and websites start taking it.

(Hint, hint  TV app makers!)

Playboy’s New Format Shows the Power of Platforms and it Should Scare Us All

So, Playboy has decided to give up the “N” and become “Safe-for-Work."

I mean, not really.  I still wouldn’t recommend you go there on your company computer.  It’s just that now the magazine is following Maxim’s success by going a little less risqué in their published pics.

*Sigh*

When Hugh Hefner set out in the 1950’s to create a men’s magazine, he also set out to change American cultural views on nudity and sexuality.  The company is claiming that this part of the mission is done because, well, internet porn.  So since the thrill is gone, they don’t feel that nudity adds to the magazine’s draw.

It’s true that Playboy’s numbers are down and that the re-branding of their website to "safe-for-work" made a tremendous impact on visits.  But to me, this is all pointing towards Playboy having failed their mission, not succeeded.

I’ve been a Playboy subscriber since 2007.  And what I’ve come to appreciate about the brand was that they were very much sex positive in all their work.  The internet, generally, is not.  So while Playboy may be trying to spin this as “nudity is everywhere, mission accomplished” what I see is a lot of poorly produced, poorly conceptualized, and often negative sexual content to which Playboy offered an alternative. 

But what’s worse is that these changes are an admission from Playboy that our culture hasn’t changed at all.  Most of this is driven by the need to be “shareable” in the social media world.  Apple, Facebook, Instagram, Vine, Periscope, and (to the least extent, but still very much so) Twitter don’t play well with “pornography” and make sharing difficult or impossible.  Playboy is a media company and media companies clearly have to play in the social space to be relevant.  This has become so true that now, that the oldest, most widely known brand in adult entertainment is giving up the “adult” stuff to stay alive.

That says a lot- and to me something very scary- about the state of these “platforms” and they power they wield.  This wasn’t coercion and it wasn’t some backroom meeting by all the big players to force Playboy to change it’s ways.  In some sense, that would be more sinister, but less frightening.  Instead, this is just the result of group-think amongst the biggest players in an evolving media game.  Where attention and dollars are filtered through sites and apps that, without even trying, can compel an iconic brand into giving up a 60 year old legacy to survive.

I’m not mad at Playboy and I’ll keep my subscription.  I really do read it for the articles.  But I’m worried about what this means for free-speech, free-ideas, and the future of media.  If we- the consumers- allow our support for a brand or writer or publication to be filtered only through someone’s “platform” then we are allowing that platform to shape the message.

But that’s just my opinion...

My Tweetbot 4 Review - Activity Tab is Worth the Price of Admission

Tweetbot 4 has been out for about a week or two now and I’ve switched over to it being my everyday Twitter client.

My Twitter needs are simple, but like all my needs, very particular.  Here’s what I’m looking for and how Tweetbot stacks up.

1. Universality; most importantly timeline sync.  I’ve tried “tweet marker” and never found it to be reliable enough.  I want my computer, iPhone, and iPad to all be synced flawlessly every time.  iCloud sync has proven to be quite good at this on my last client and Tweetbot nailed it as well.  Tweetbot’s advantage here is having a Mac client and not just iOS.  So huge win on my top feature.  But in addition, Tweetbot for both Mac and iOS are very well designed for their platforms with tons of great features.  I particularly love the “TweetDeck-style” columns on the Mac.  And the new iPad app makes great use of the screen space.  Tweetbot is right now the only Twitter client that I feel is great on every device I own.  Wonderfully, they also just added “badge sync” so if you clear the badge on your iPad, it’s gone on your iPhone.  Why can’t Apple just get that working across the system already??
2. Great design.  Tweetbot looks great, but more importantly, works like my brain does.  I never liked the “unified timeline” approach, despite it’s convince, because often I get a reply to a tweet from a while ago and so seeing that later never made sense.  I like the tabs at the bottom for quick access to things and their method for changing tabs is great.  All the features you want like auto-dark theme and such are available too.  I’m a big fan of having the text match size and font to the system- looks very nice and right at home.

But beyond being the best in these requirements, Tweetbot also wins for having done some fantastic features that I really love.

First up the easy one- adding Safari View Controller to open web links.  This is quickly becoming a must-have for me in any app that I use links in regularly.  Now that I’m deep into 1 Password, Pocket, and using an iOS content blocker, I’ve really got Safari running in a way that makes me happy.  Having all that work for me when I open links in apps is just amazingly good.  And Safari View Controller is easier on developers too, so win-win.  I LOVE Safari View Controller and hope all my apps get updated with it sooner than later (hint, hint- Feedly ;) 

Next, and most notably, the Activity Tab.

This is the feature that finally killed the native Twitter client for me.  The one thing that Twitter’s own app did best was showing “activity” but that crown has been passed.  Tweetbot’s Activity Tab alone is worth the price of admission to me.  Being able to quickly see who’s followed me, faved or retweeted me, and what tweets are getting noticed is awesome.  Yes, it’s a double-edged sword for those who are stats-obsessed, but for me who is just curious and often absent minded, this is amazing!  I’m in love with this feature.

Overall, Tweetbot 4 is a fantastic update and well worth your time and money.  I had switched away from Tweetbot about a year ago and this update has completely brought me back.  I plan to stay for the foreseeable future too, with the Tapbots team having perfected the Twitter client.

But that’s just my opinion...

(Author's Note - I have no affiliation with Tweetbot or Tapbots, nor was I given any compensation or consideration for this article.  I just wanted to give some praise to an app I really love and happily paid for myself.)

Linked - Google’s Attempts at “Transparency” Show Just How Creepy They Are

Linked- http://www.cultofandroid.com/76700/google-records-voice-search/

I get the technical reason for (at least temporarily) archiving these.  Voice recognition is a machine learning problem and it only gets better when humans help “train” it (i.e., listen to recordings the machine didn’t get right and try to correct manually.)

But the fact that they tie it to your user ID is unacceptable.  And showing me that in the name of “transparency” is nice, but doesn’t forgive the fact that they’re keeping data that way.  Now a data breach means all that can be traced back to you with some work.  They’re making it too easy for, at the extremes, the NSA or other government activity or determined hackers.

This is just one more example of how Google doesn’t take user privacy seriously.  Their attitude remains- “This is your cost of doing business with us.  We’ll start showing you just how deep the rabbit hole goes, but we’re not changing how we do things."

That cost is too high for me. Apple has already made clear that they randomize their data and delete it after 2 years.  And I’m happily sticking with DuckDuckGo.com (which keeps getting better and has replaced Google for me so well I don’t even notice).

The Universal App Pricing Problem (that Apple TV will make worse)

Tweetbot 4 is out and is a fantastic app that any Twitter power user should consider.  But if Tapbots didn't have it rough enough with the v3 paid upgrade, I think v4 is going to give people just as much heartburn when the introductory sale is over.

As of today (10/13/15) you can get Tweetbot 4 for $4.99 as a universal app.  It's the same price that Tweetbot 3 was selling for.  But that's 50% off; meaning it's about to go to $9.99.

Now, Tapbots have never been shy about how they feel in regards to app pricing.  Upgrades in particular are a problem.  But I think there's another one lurking that is only going to get bigger as Apple TV comes into play; and that's Universal Apps.

Quick review- "Universal Apps" are designed to run on both iPhone and iPad natively.  Essentially, it's two apps in one.  Apple has also announced that Apple TV will support Universal Apps as well; so if you buy a game, for example, you can download to all three of those devices and only have to pay the one price.  It's convenient for sure, but it begs the question- why pay for versions of an app you can't use?

Tweetbot 4 costs twice what Tweetbot 3 did.  Part of that pricing justification is that you're getting both an iPad and iPhone version of the app.  Previously, those were purchased separately at $4.99 (iPhone) and $2.99 (iPad).

So what now for the users who only have an iPhone?  They pay $9.99 for an app that used to be $4.99 and who's price jump is largely due to having an included iPad version?  Doesn't seem like a great value proposition.  

A Universal App's appeal is great for those that have all the included devices.  For others, it's a higher price for features they can't even access.  

Once again, developers and users are going to find themselves at odds.  Developers will rightly want to be compensated for the work needed to make apps universally compatible.  Users, by contrast, will either A) want a lower, bundled price and one purchase to work everywhere or B) to not have to pay for versions they can't use.

So what's the solution?

Well, in my very un-technical opinion, I would think perhaps bitcode could provide an answer.  Apple's new way of allowing developers to download only needed assets by device type- if paired with a more nuanced pricing model- could do the trick.

What if instead of listing the price, the App Store button simply said "Buy?"  This remains a clear indicator that the app is not free.  However, now by tapping on the "Buy" button, you're given multiple prices - iPhone Only, iPad Only, Apple TV Only (depending which device you're buying from), or Universal- each with it's own price.  Apple could use Apple ID info to limit the list only to devices you have registered (i.e., if you don't own an iPad, you won't see that option).  And bitcode means you could buy just one and not all versions anyway.  Now, what if you buy and iPad someday and want to download the app from your "Purchased" tab?  Again, you get a choice; instead of the "cloud" icon, you see the "+Get" button.  Pressing here brings up the option to pay the difference and get the native version of the app; similar to "complete my purchase."

This would allow developers to get paid proportionate to the work they do, and keep prices low for single device users.

And Apple will never do it.  It adds too much complexity to the experience.

But they're going to have to do something.  And soon- because if Universal Apps are coming to Apple TV, the race to the bottom pricing can't continue.  Developers need to be able to charge for upgrades or device specific versions.  Bitcode to me seems like a great tool to make it happen.  But it all hinges on Apple having the guts to add a little complexity for users along the way.

Give us a chance, Apple.  I'll be we can prove we're smart enough.

Apple the TV Stuido

I hope this is bunk.

As if Apple didn’t already have enough on it’s plate.  But more importantly, this would be a BIG departure from their core competency which is hardware and software.  Apple builds platforms on which others can deliver content. To me, this is no different than if Apple decided to start making game apps.  It’s too far from the core and would be a big signal that the company is losing it’s way.

It’s on par to me of saying, it’s okay to make a “News” app, but when you start writing the articles too, you’ve gone too far.  

I hope it’s bunk.  I know it’s working for Amazon, but Amazon SUCKS at hardware and software’s marginal at best.  Don’t go there, Apple.  Keep the focus.  Make this one of the 1000s of “no’s” instead of a “yes."

Give it More Time

Bold prediction- I don’t think the  Watch is going to be on an annual refresh cycle.

This is one of those “lessons learned” from the iPad.  A premium-priced device that’s essentially an accessory has a very hard time selling up a lot of units year-over-year.  The iPhone is an anomaly that’s driven by contracts and subsidies.  The iPad has followed more closely to the Mac in terms of upgrade cycles.  And I think the Watch has the same roadmap.

Apple’s mistake with the iPad was putting it on an annual refresh cycle that gave analysts a reason to judge it’s year-over-year performance on-par with iPhones.  That’s a bad measuring stick for the Watch.  Like the iPad, it’s much more expensive to consumers and thus the ability to buy a new one each year is much lower.  Additionally, I think the limited functions of the Watch will mean that older models will be “good enough” for much longer.

Apple would be smart to not set expectations for the Watch’s hardware on an annual cycle.  Software, fine, but limit the hardware releases to perhaps every-other year.  Give owners more time enjoy the current model and thus more time to feel “old” about it when the next one comes along.  

Additionally, given how difficult and large the production requirements for this product are, I have to think you need more time between re-toolings to get your profitability back out.  And something tells me there won’t be much down-market demand for “last-year’s” Watch to make up the margins the way there is in phones.

In the meantime, a stream of new bands each year would keep the product feeling fresh and make great profits for Apple.

Bottom line, I won’t be surprised if we don’t hear about the Watch again until next fall.  But that’s just my opinion...

Google's New Logo

Yeah… not sure if I like this one.

This trend towards overly flat design may have just jumped the shark.  For example, that lowercase “g” in the original logo in serif script is used in several places as a stand-in for the whole logo (i.e., the iOS Google Search app).  Will that be changing?  I should, but the sans-serif version will look completely generic.

Logo changes are a dangerous move; especially when you have one of the most recognized brands in the world.  Google’s logo may just be the most viewed corporate logo of them all.  You risk putting people off and, if nothing else, you invite a tremendous amount of criticism.

This to me was a case of, “it ain’t broke, why fix it?” but at the least it’s bold move.

For my two cents, it looks less-refined and more childish and frankly a step backwards.

But that’s just my opinion...

Obligatory Apple Predictions Post

My guesses for September 9th.  Sorted by device, listed from most likely, to wildest...

iPhones

• Hardware refreshes with 6s and 6s Plus.  Same screen sizes.
• New processors (A9, M9)
• Upgraded cameras.  Better sensor, bump to 12MP.  4k video is a maybe in my book (tough on space and battery life, but might pair nicely with an upgraded  TV?).  Also, might get optical stabilization on the 6s as well as the 6s Plus.  Software-based front-facing flash is 50/50.  Don’t expect to see the results of the Sony knowledge grab yet- that will likely wait for the 7.
• Force Touch screens.  The biggest questions here will be around how the software integrates it.  Open API for developers?  Or system-owned actions?  I favor the latter, for the record, as a small number of consistent gestures would be best for UI and adoption.  My picks would be A) “Clear All” on the Notifications screen, B) Activate Camera from the Lock Screen [much faster than the swipe up and no more mis-gestured control center] C) App Switching from anywhere inside the OS.
• 1, maybe 2 new colors (Pink seems to be most likely, but whatever happened to that Rose Gold rumor?).  Also- I REALLY want the “space grey” to be the same as the Sport Watch color.
• OLED screens.  Don’t ask me why, but put this on the way out in left-field column.

 TV

• New Hardware.  Upgraded to at least the A7 (but could be A8 or A9)  Larger, but similar form factor.  802.11AC routing.  Plastic or aluminum is a 50/50 guess.
• New remote.  Includes touch screen, microphone, and multi-axis sensors.
• New software.  Includes SDK for developers and APIs for HomeKit.
• Unified search with Siri.  Building on the same iOS API for “deep linking” I think this is a “must-do” feature for a TV platform today.
• Always-on listening.  For HomeKit integration especially, the ability to say “Hey Siri” anytime in my house and activate a response.  The challenge here is to not have multiple devices waking up at once (or if they do, make sure handoff syncs them so I get only 1 response).
• Multiple colors.  Lots of people thinking this will be a given in the new scheme of things (Space Grey, Gold, Silver) but I doubt it.  I’m putting this in the “eh maybe” end because I think most likely you’ll get any color you want, as long as it’s black.

Miscellaneous

• New  Watch Bands.  These have proven wildly successful and super profitable.  And we know there are lots of colors floating around that haven’t been given wide-release yet.  Project RED is likely and a bunch more.  Just in-time for the holidays and to tide us all over until the next big hardware release. (which I think could take a while...)
• AirPort Refresh.  Makes sense to me along side a new  TV and might even serve as an additional microphone for house-wide “Hey Siri” integration.

And finally, my “not gonna happen” list...

• Apple Retail Refresh.  Not before the holidays.  I think they'll wait for next spring and then have the summer for remodels.
• iPad or iMac.  I’m holding out for a separate event all about bigger devices in October. New iPads, maybe the rumored “iPad Pro” and my big wish-list item; a 4k Retina iMac at 21”.
• New  Watch.  I don’t think Apple is going to go for an annual refresh here.  Call it lessons learned from iPad, but I don’t think they want to be on an annual cycle in this new category.  Watch bands- yes.  New Watch- not for a while...
• Cars.  Nope.  Not yet.  Maybe in a couple years...

One more thing...

• My wildest, most crazy prediction yet- an Apple made  Pay terminal.  Yes, they got big buy-in from Square at WWDC.  But if Apple really wants  Pay to take off, they HAVE to get more retailers using it.  Banks=good.  Retailers= Critical.  What if Apple made a fantastic and easy to use  Pay reader that could quickly hook up with any existing register software?  No change in payments processor, no new POS terminals. Just plug and play?  It’s crazy, but I’d love to see it happen.

Okay, there you go.  I’m allowed to keep my tech blogger card for 6 more months now.  Let’s see what happens in just one more week!

Linked - Check the Math

Linked - Wal-Mart is Cutting Workers Hours After Pay Raise

I remember when I was working for a major retailer and a state-wide minimum wage hike was on the ballot.  All my hourly employees were elated as it was looking as it would pass.  When they would ask me about it, I always had the same answer- be careful what you wish for.

Our payroll budget, I would explain, is given in dollars; not “hours.”  So if the cost of labor goes up, the hours will go down.  The budget is fixed; not the hours used.

Payroll Budget ($x)/ $per labor hour = hours available.

They (wrongly) assumed that if the cost of labor went up that the company would simply have to “eat the cost” out of profits.

The company didn’t.  The wage hike passed and we had fewer hours to schedule.  The result was laying-off several of the small-schedule part-timers (mostly high school and college kids) who were most excited about the hike.  The regulars worked the same number of hours for a slightly higher wage, but had to work much harder to cover the productivity loss of the extra hands.

Everyone suffered.

Minimum wage is a red-herring argument.  It will never be enough, it will always be eaten up by inflation, and honestly, it hurts the middle class far more than it helps the poor.  

Be careful what you wish for…

Downside of the Day Job

So, I haven’t quite figured out how to balance all this self-imposed workload yet.

Trying to stay current is never easy.  But when you have a “normal,” 9 - 5 job that rightfully commands your attention during the day, keeping up a twice-daily current events tech blog becomes a challenge.

The proof is in the blog roll.  I’ve been quiet for almost two weeks as I’ve barely kept up on any news personally.  

Which is why this is still hosted at Blogger and kept (relatively) quite.  I’m still in my “can I do this?” phase and so far the answer is inconsistent.

But I’m still committed.  So to those of you who are following and reading regularly, thank you.  I’m not quitting- but more tinkering to find a format that works is still to come.

The Only Android Feature I Actually Want on iOS (and not for the reason you’d think)

Unquestionably, iOS has taken many cues from Android over the years, and vice versa.  It’s not surprising that software platforms end up borrowing each other’s good ideas as it makes it easier for users to feel comfortable anywhere.  And while there are a stockpile of “Android Features iOS Should Steal” articles out there, today I realized that for me, there’s really just one I’d like.

Today, Apple issued iOS 8.4.1.  The release notes are almost exclusively focused on improvements to  Music.  Which means I have to go through the trouble of updating my entire operating system to get updates to a single app.

It’s a pain.

I would love it if many- nay even most- of the native Apple Apps for iOS would be updated through the App Store.  It would be great if features and bug fixes didn’t either A) have to wait for an annual upgrade or B) be SO glaring that they warrant a system update to fix.  I worry that sometimes we don’t get little fixes because a full OS update would be too much.

Granted, not every app needs that level of detail.  I doubt my Compass requires much more than a once a year refresh.  Neither does Calculator or Clock.  But Music, Podcasts, maybe even Calendar or Mail could all probably benefit from a bit more attention.

It could also be a great way to relieve the pressure on the annual update cycle.  Update the OS in the fall, but perhaps have a massive app update in the Spring.  

At any rate, for today I’m sitting here waiting a good 10 minutes on updating my OS just so my Music app has less bugs.  I’m happy for the update, but I can’t help wishing I’d just pressed a button in the App Store rather than wait for my whole phone to reboot.

But that’s just my opinion...

Linked- Shut Up and Take My Payment!

Linked -Apple Pay Coming to Rite Aid

Thank goodness.  This CurrentC/ MCX deal has been the worst kind of horse crap.  Anti-competitive, protectionist, horse crap.

If your service had any merit, you wouldn’t be afraid of the competition.  But I supposed when you’re plagued by early security disasters and an inability to even get to market (still a couple of weeks left to make that Q3 timeline, right?), you have plenty of reasons to be afraid.

I’m just happy that retailers aren’t going to keep letting their customers suffer to make some floundering business partner happy.  I love  Pay and I will keep going out of my way to support businesses that offer it.  Come on, retailers- shut up about CurrentC and take my money!

Google, Alphabet, and Anti-Trust

No doubt you’ve read the news by now that Google is going to split itself into several subsidiaries.  I’ll spare you re-hash of the details and jump straight to my own theory.

I think this is a preemptive move to combat anti-trust issues.

Google is already under heavy fire from the EU and the FTC in the US is rumored to be close behind.  There are going to be more investigations and allegations coming their way.  

Let’s take a look at a few of the “spin-offs” to see how this might play out.

First up, Fiber.  While I’m all for faster internet speeds, I’ve long dismissed Fiber as a nightmare for privacy.  While techies in slow speed areas might be willing to give up anything for low latency and fast torrents, Fiber has, to me, always been about two things.  One, get as many people online as you can (where Google profits) and make the speeds fast so they can do more (also helps Google).   Two, monitor not just the activity of logged-in or Chrome users, but literally ANYONE and EVERYONE who uses the infrastructure.  It’s the same proposition that Android has always made.  Cheaper, more accessible, but every move you make becomes part of the machine learning.  When Google owns not only all your search and your platform (via Chrome or Android) but also the very pipe that carries you to all of it, they have a monopoly of information vacuuming.  I find it terrifying, but the FTC may well find it problematic.  Spinning off Fiber makes a lot of sense.

Next let’s look at Nest.  Internet of things is going to continue to grow and the Nest division is already making plays to be the frontrunner in the space.  First your thermostat.  Next your fire alarm.  Now a household camera.  And no doubt, there are more products to come.  If you think all these devices are not contributing to your data profile you’re crazy.  Google is using everything has to data mine you.  Keeping the products area separate (on-paper) from the others may try to help reduce the “creepy” vibe most people have today about Nest.

Interestingly, Google retains several areas that logically would have made sense to break-up if you’re worried about anti-trust.  YouTube for example, or Android.  But for now at least, I think Google’s structure is too integrated around those products to be able to separate them.  Too many engineers working too closely to split them out and lose the brain power.  But it does say A LOT to me that Android in particular remains part of the “search” business.

That said, breaking out the other stuff- the moonshots, the ventures, the more ambitious and experimental stuff, means that it may be more protected from investigation if “Google” is taken-on by regulators.  And for “Alphabet” protecting those trade secrets by taking them out from under the investigative umbrella may be reason enough for all this shuffle.

Bottom line, I admittedly have an open bias about Google.  I have for a long time and I always will.  For me, it begins with human nature.  If you feel the need to put “Don’t be evil” on the wall as a constant reminder, it tells me you’re fundamentally worried about running afoul of that very mantra.  Most people don’t need a daily reminder that they shouldn’t be evil.  Google was built on a warning; not a value.  So perhaps it’s my nature to take the most cynical view possible of the company.  Maybe they’re being completely honest in their assertion that this is about making greater strides for humanity and such.

I just doubt it

Linked- Running Out of Time

Linked- Conventional Watch Sales Slide After Apple Watch Launch

I find this interesting in a few ways.

First is my own experience.  I’ve been wearing my  Watch from day one and I love it.  It’s become part of my daily routine.  But before I got it, I had stopped wearing a watch for several years and hadn’t bought one in almost a decade.  My belief had been that  Watch would expand the watch wearing population, not cannibalize it.  To my mind, the thing to consider is didn’t the iPhone already replace a watch for many people? (much the way we’ve seen steep declines in point-and-shoot cameras or mp3 players).  I would have expected the watch hit to have already happened and that the “smartwatch” would re-grow the category as opposed to creating converts.

Second, this to me speaks volumes about what pundits aren’t getting right about smartwatches.  There continues to be this call for a “killer app” that will make the device compelling to so many.  But as has been said so many times, the iPhone didn’t have a “killer app” that it used to sell it’s self. The “killer app” was “phone” because it replaced a key piece of tech and then allowed it to do so much more.  In the same way, perhaps we are now seeing that, in fact, the “killer app” of the watch is simply timekeeping.  If this watch is good enough to replace your existing watch AND give you a whole new slew of features, then perhaps it’s got what it needs to be a success.

The difference, of course, is that more people own a phone than wear a watch by far.  But perhaps the measure of success shouldn’t be how many people now strap something on their wrist that previously didn’t; but how many devoted watch fans find smartwatches compelling enough to switch.

Either way, a new billion-dollar product can’t be a bad thing.

Why Fox Should Release the New Fantastic 4 to On-Demand Right Now

If you follow comic book movies at all, you know doubt have heard the complete panning that is aimed at the new Fantastic 4 reboot.  With Twitter firing-off at machine gun speed and an 8% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the film is clearly in trouble. All this is reflected at the box office, where it raked in only the #2 spot on it’s opening weekend.

It’s a fascinating look at how movies make or break in the age of social media as the movie's story has been chronicled in blogs and tweets and how early reviews went viral in a way that infected the film to a fatal degree.

Which is why I think Fox should immediately release it to on-demand streams.

The only way to combat the on-slaught of opinion makers is for people to see it for themselves.  But today’s high cost of cinema means that negative press will cause many people to sit this one out.  It’s a “wait-and-see” approach to movie watching that many of us have adapted and it’s not going to change.  As our home theater set-ups get better and cinemas get more expensive, the incentive to gamble $15 on a ticket for a movie getting panned in the press is going away. 

Releasing it to on-demand services now means that many people who may not pay for a movie night out might spend the $5 on a streaming rental.  If the movie has any merits, it may help sway the conversation or even convince a few to go see it in the larger screen.  Worst-case, it doesn’t help at all and they’re right where they are now; at least with a few more early views on their hands.

But the really disappointing scenario would be to release it later and have opinions changed too late.  It won’t matter if 6 months from now people say “it wasn’t as bad as we’d heard” because the mindset will be cemented and the sequels will have been canceled.

Of course, if the movie is as bad as it’s reviewed, none of this may matter much.  But for now, there’s at least an interest that might have some fans (myself included) willing to give it go if we didn’t have to pay theater prices.  I say, roll the dice, release on-demand, and see if you can capture every possible dollar now while the marketing mind-share is still fresh.

But that’s just my opinion...

ELI5- How Does 20% Equal “Saturated?"

Apple’s stock took quite the beating in the wake of it’s latest quarterly earnings.  Not because the company’s fundamentals aren’t sound (they’re rock solid) or because they didn’t earn enough money or profit (both set records) but because analysts seem to think Apple has reached it’s peak with nowhere to go but down.

Here’s what I’ve never understood; time and again all we hear is how Android is beating Apple up in marketshare.  So how can it be that Apple has nowhere to grow?

There’s just the great irony of beating up a company for low marketshare while also beating them up for having no growth potential.

Twitter is suffering the same fate right now.  The stock continues to tumble as investors worry about “active user growth” despite the fact that Twitter has plenty of room to grow.

In both cases, I think the Wall Street is making the same fundamental mistake in that they don’t understand the products or the companies.

Now, in Twitter’s case, there’s a strong argument that even they aren’t entirely sure.  But Apple is crystal clear on who they are.  And in both cases, the companies are turning in solid performances.  It’s all about failing to miss outsiders (aka “analysts”) expectations.

Both these companies are perfect examples of why the stock market is such a silly place.  Stock prices are driven by a handful of analyst’s skewed perspectives of what expectations they have for a company.  Often this has no strong correlation to what the company is thinking, doing, or capable of; and that’s just crazy.

So how is it a company with 20% market share is considered to have “saturated” the market?  Because some group think among so called “experts” decided that 20% was the most that company could ever hope to get.  Forget profit, forget performance in real dollars.  Stocks are driven by expectations; not results.  Don’t forget it.

Friday Five- Beers for Fall

Since my day job is in the beer distribution industry, I have the privilege of trying more than most.  As summer winds down and our warehouse begins to see the fall seasonals arrive, I figured I could take a Friday afternoon to give you my favorite 5 beers for the fall season...

Sam Adams Oktoberfest- Not only is this my favorite seasonal, but it's my favorite beer of all time.  The rich, caramel notes of this traditional marezn style brew put me right in the fall mood.  It's delicious and frankly a shame that I only see it once a year.  Thank goodness they started canning it so I can keep it around a bit longer!

Leinekugel Orange Shandy- I was only just turned onto this about 2 years ago, but oh boy it's good!!  My favorite of the Leinie shandy by far!  A delicious, well-balanced orange flavor runs through this weiss beer.  Purely delicious and distinctly fall.

Dogfish Head Punkin' Ale- No fall list would be complete without a pumpkin beer, and Dogfish Head is my pick.  Great balance of beer and spice.  Plus (as someone who is lukewarm on pumpkin anyway) the four pack means I get just enough of what I want.

Breckenridge Vanilla Porter- Technically, this is a year-round offering but something about that rich, porter-style and the toasty vanilla notes feels like sweater weather to me.  Find it on draft with nitro and it's a real treat!

Abita Turbodog- Again, a year-round offering, but to me a distinctly fall flavor.  A dark brown ale with coffee and chocolate notes.  It's what the adult me wants in my trick-or-treat bag!

Okay, there you go- another Friday, 5 more awesome things!  But that's just my opinion.  Enjoy!

Linked- Russian Roulette is Safer in Big Groups

Linked- Why Android Fragmentation is a Good Thing

Oh boy, this is fun.  I'm betting this is how the Macalope feels.

I get wanting to try and put good spin on this god-awful report, but this part just makes me literally "LOL."

/One of the problems with Apple's monoculture is that a security vulnerability in the latest operating system release has the potential to affect a greater percentage of the user base than it would on Android. Apple has all its eggs in one basket./

See?  Android fragmentation means the likely hood YOUR version of Android is susceptible to malware is smaller!! Kinda like how if you play Russian Roulette with 6 people instead of just 2, the odds are better.

Unless of course you're playing with 6 bullets.  Then everyone loses.  Kinda like when a bug affects 95% of your users.  Hell, even an iOS bug only gets to 85% of Apple's.  If you're into numbers.

I don't need to explain why this is so laughable.  But, boy howdy, they call us "mindless fanboys" and then go write this crap?  

Funny... whenever I hear "die-hard" Apple fans talk, it's always about things Apple does wrong.  But whenever I hear "Fandroids" get together it's always denial-level affirmations of why Android rules.

But yeah... we're the sheep...

Social Storage Concerns

This one has been bugging me quite a bit lately...

As summer winds down and the geek game of "guess what's in the next iPhone" picks up, we're once again hearing the cries of "please, please let it have a 32GB minimum storage" echoing around the Twitter chamber and reverberating throughout blogs and podcasts everywhere.

I'm sick of it.

Not because I think 16GB is sufficient- I don't- but because it's a chorus of whining about a MINIMUM spec from a bunch of people who almost universally and consistently buy the TOP spec.  

Now I have long rejected the belief that you must be a part of something to critique it, but in this case I can't help but wonder what the big beef here is?  Apple has access to all kinds of data we don't.  I'm sure they've looked at the back-up sizes and usage rates of 16GB users many times over and decided for a significant portion of this group, 16GB is working and not a problem.

Granted, iOS 8's adoption probably was slowed down quite a bit in the early stages by storage, but A) Apple's addressing that with a smaller iOS 9 update, along with some fancy new features and B) the current adoption rate is 85% so clearly it didn't prove to be a deal breaker.

Regardless, call me a dupe, but I believe Phil Schiller when he says (to John Gruber on The Talk Show) that it works for most users and keeping one component low allows for other components to be better.

If you consider the iPhone as a product, the ONLY changeable spec in the line-up is storage.  Every iPhone has the same chip sets, the same camera, and the same build quality.  So I have no doubt that Apple designs the best specs they can for the lowest priced phones and then bumps prices up.  

Which leads me to this point; the argument I hear from so many is that 16GB is Apple being "stingy."  Why not just cut the margin and take a little less profit to be nice?  I hate this argument.  Profit isn't a bad thing; even if you're Apple making the most of anyone.  It's not greedy.  Apple is providing tremendous value- more than any competitor- to their customers.  And it's not just a hardware profit proposition.  Remember, the iPhone in particular, makes most of Apple's money (67% or so, I believe) so that profit is floating a huge amount of the "free" services like iOS upgrades, etc.  And customers by and large don't seem to mind as they keep buying in record numbers.  By any account, Apple is making good choices.

So what bugs me so much?  Well for one, in most cases, these people complaining are not and would not be buying the bottom storage option; even if it was 32GB.  So they aren't the target market anyway.  It's like saying "Hey Apple, you should spend time and resources making a product for other people I won't buy anyway."  And underlying that is "And do it even if it means cutting your profit margin a bit you greedy jerks" which I find even more offensive since those margins are what's making all the other stuff you're demanding Apple do possible.

Bottom line, criticism is good.  Feedback is good.  Opinions are good (obviously).

But for goodness sake, quit complaining on other people's behalf.

Apple & IBM; A Match Made in the Cloud

The news that 200,000 IBMers will be getting shiny new MacBook Pros is stirring a lot of noise about Window’s decline or the quiet rise of Apple in the enterprise (depending on who’s view you take.)  I, however, think there’s a much broader issue to consider and that’s how cloud computing is making “platforms” a thing of the past.  

As little as 7 years ago, if you wanted to get work done, you did it on your local machine.  The internet was nothing more than a highway for information; bits flying across digital fast lanes taking what was on your machine and moving it to another.  The cloud has changed all that.  No longer does the spreadsheet you and three others work on live separately on everyone’s machine with everyone sending out the latest “version” every time they hit save.  Now the document lives on a server and we all make our changes and do our work on the same file.

Apple’s rise to acceptance in the enterprise hasn’t been because of a slew of new enterprise features or the kind of dedicated support and sales the Microsoft so famously pursued.  Far from it.  Instead, Apple has creeped into the enterprise on the coattails of the cloud; and will likely continue to do so as more and more work moves off the platform and to the web.

This is good news for Apple and for the enterprise.  Apple is getting access to a large, well-funded market without having to spend the money or resources to “cater” to it.  They aren’t having to sell to enterprise clients and they aren’t having to dedicate time and resources to enterprise demands.  They just keep making the same great products that people want and as the enterprise can accommodate it, they will.  The enterprise, who’s mantra is to buy hardware as rarely as possible, is quite happy to make the investment in Apple products who’s lifespans can be many times what a typical Window’s machine survives.  They also are less prone to service calls and failures, which makes IT people happy as well.

The long time sticking point for most in the IT world was network access and network security.  Now, as more and more we move our data to cloud services who handle security protocols over the web anyway, this last major road block is fading away.

To be sure, there are still companies who’s security needs will keep them running the most controllable platforms they can.  But as cloud security becomes “good enough” for many if not most companies, how we access those clouds is less important. 

Stable, easy to use machines that work with all the devices we use seamlessly will become more important.  The future of IT- even in the enterprise- is going to become increasingly user focused and Apple is in the perfect position to capture that.  While Windows 10 might be great on the desktop, users are increasingly mobile and will continue to find features like Apple’s “Continuity” more appealing. 

By focusing on individual productivity and ease of use, Apple is setting themselves up to be a power player in the enterprise of the future.

Who’d have guessed?

Linked - Kold Shoulder

Linked- Keurig's Future Depends on This One Item

Unless the new machine removes the DRM, don’t expect anyone to upgrade anytime soon.

I loved my old Keurig and was hoping to get a new one, but the restrictive nature made me re-think my plans (which I’m glad I did, because the AeroPress is incredible!!).

People need to really think about this concept of “ownership” in the modern age.  DRM and other such restrictive licensing agreements essentially mean you don’t “own” a thing; you’re licensing it.  That might make sense on say, a subscription music service, but not on purchased music.  And certainly, when you buy say, a tractor, you expect that you OWN it.

I know the old joke that “you don’t own coffee, you rent it” but if Keurig wants to put DRM on my morning beverage, maybe I should send them back the bottle of “leftovers."