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."

Reddit Can’t Find Their Identity with 2 Hands and a Flashlight

From /u/Spez most recent AMA...

/We didn't ban them for being racist. We banned them because we have to spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with them. If we want to improve Reddit, we need more people, but CT's existence and popularity has also made recruiting here more difficult./

If your site (and by extension your very business model) depends on user-created content… you may want to tread very carefully when making changes that will impact your user base.

Linked- Kicking the Can

Linked - Why Doubling the Minimum Wage Would Actually Be Madness

So much good stuff in this article, but here’s my favorite part.

Less than 2% of American workers actually make minimum or less.  Moving this to $15 an hour would mean closer to 40% of workers would be making minimum.

The fallacy that liberals always make is that when faced with a cost increase, businesses will just go “awe, shucks- guess we won’t be quite so profitable anymore” and take the hit.  It NEVER works that way.  Businesses will always find methods to mitigate the hit (automation, reduction of staff, cuts to benefits, or- worst of all- shutter the doors).

And these are same liberals who rail against “mega corporations;” who are the ONLY ones with the economies of scale to pay these wage and benefit requirements while keeping prices low

You want Wal-Mart on every corner?  Because this is how you get Wal-Mart on every corner….

Linked - What Might Have Been

Linked - Why is HTC trying to drive away it's remaining loyal customers?

The most disappointing “what could have been” Android phone, running ads for the most disappointing “what could have been Marvel movie.

At least there’s a theme.