Cute cube

4 February 2010

It’s fascinating how the advent and ascent of app phones is transforming thinking about user interfaces; check out IDENT’s GestIC technology:


Samsung gets smart…

4 February 2010

It seems that Samsung has recognized the importance of the smartphone market – Samsung aims to treble smartphone sales in 2010 | Reuters – and now has ambitions to treble its shipments. While a target of 18 million smartphones sounds impressive, that doesn’t make it a leader:

With Nokia’s shipments comprising about 40% of the smartphone market, it’s on track to be about 220 to 250 million units, depending on how fast it grows; that implies 7-8% market share for Samsung, split across the Android and WinMo platforms.



Love the data, hate the graphic

4 February 2010

One of the key themes we’re focused on at the moment is the multilateral asymmetric contest amongst major platform players (Apple, Google, Microsoft and Nokia in particular), device vendors (Apple, RIM, Nokia, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG, Motorola, HTC in particular), service providers (Google, Apple, Amazon in particular) and network operators (Verizon, Vodafone, FT Orange and so on). There’s some interesting data from Silicon Insider illustrating the size of the stakes…

'Show me the money'

The cash resources of some of the major players

While the numbers are interesting, I have to confess I hate the graphic…

It looks like an area chart, but it’s actually a line chart. Tufte’s head would explode…

And I’d love to see the analysis extended to include Nokia, RIM, Samsung and so on. And in this context, who cares about Intel, other than ARM and Qualcomm?


The new age of connected devices?

2 February 2010

Does the iPad herald a new age of connected devices, or is it “just a big iPod”?  Reviews have been mixed.

Apple's iPad: With WiFi for $499; with WiFi and 3G for $629

And even if you love it, will you be willing to pay the extra $130 upfront and $29.99 per month for 3G service, or is WiFi sufficient? (Particularly given that a 3G chipset adds only $7-10 to the BOM).

I suspect WiFi is sufficient, and that the price of 3G connectivity is too steep.  It is too steep, in particular, because in a new era of multiple connected devices each new device cannot come with its own expensive data plan.  It is one thing to pay for home broadband ($40-50) and a smartphone data plan (~$30).  It is another to add a netbook, a MiFi, a connected camera, an eReader, and/or an iPad and have each of these carrying its own contract.

Would you buy a separate data plan for each of these devices?

My family looked at netbooks for Christmas this year, and chose to buy without the subsidy and wireless broadband contract.  The most common use cases for netbooks and iPads are still likely to be in places with WiFi connectivity:  Home, office, hotel, café.  And if you own more than one connected device, then you are better off buying a MiFi portable WiFi hub (from Verizon or Sprint) and sharing 3G connectivity across multiple devices than having a 3G connection for each device.

With this in mind, it actually could make more sense for wireline broadband providers to subsidize netbooks and iPads and connected consumer electronics than for wireless companies to do so.  In our case, the netbook bundled with FiOS Internet or Comcast’s DOCSIS 3.0 service would have been more compelling than the 3G offer.  For the iPad, a purchase for less than $499 with WiFi and a bundle of pre-loaded apps and services (such as Verizon Media Manager or a Comcast TV Everywhere app) from a broadband service provider would be interesting indeed.


Blackberry outage was like a crazy Stephen King novel

23 December 2009

Yesterday’s Blackberry outage was eye-opening.  There are mixed reports all over the web about the extent of this outage and what caused it, but I lost email, PIN messaging, Blackberry messenger, and had intermittent problems across all other apps on my device.

I was traveling with a Blackberry-wielding colleague.  Usually this would make us feel like business Samurai, ready for anything.  Yesterday, this overconfidence caught up with us.

Emails to my travel agent never made it through, and there was no rental car waiting for me in DC.  Even at Hertz, I had one of those “not exactly” moments, and it took an interminable half hour to get a car.  In transit from the airport to meet people for dinner, neither of us could get wireless data connectivity.  No ability to search for the hotel and restaurant by name.  No ability to use Google Maps to get directions.

Also, we kept dropping calls.  Even calling to get directions was not as smooth as usual, but eventually this is the “old fashioned” way we found our destination.

Me:  “I can see the mall on my left, and the XYZ company on my right.  No, I don’t know what street I’m on.”

Friend/colleague on other end:  “I think I know where you are; go 1 mile, then turn left.”  (Not so long ago, this would have seemed miraculously cool – like in the Matrix:  “I need an exit!” – now it seems pretty pedestrian and painful.)

This sort of event brings home how much we depend on technology on a daily basis.  And how quickly we’ve become spoiled by technological capabilities that are relatively new.  It reminds me of a sort of post-apocalyptic Stephen King novel, where the protagonist needs to find their way through the world using their feet and their wits, but they are suddenly bereft of all modern technology and convenience.

Without Google Maps (and frequent United flights!) I’m not sure I’d make it to Denver in The Stand.  I’d probably jog right past.  Would you make it?

Perhaps more importantly, this has me seriously questioning my loyalty to Blackberry.  From a competitive analysis perspective, this is a disaster for RIM. Two major outages in a week.  A general degradation in service over the past year.  Meanwhile, my partner is having great fun with his iPhone, and my wife’s Droid Eris seems pretty darn cool.


$83,000 or Free, which pricing strategy will win?

22 December 2009

I saw this at the gas station yesterday; I suppose they have one at every gas station:

Air is free, but water isn't

It struck me that at one time or another someone may have thought they would make money from air.  Or clearly, that they were monetizing this device in some other way.  For instance, by attracting customers from the station across the street that didn’t have free air.  But now all the gas stations have this service, so no one makes any money from it even in an indirect way.

It’s also interesting that air is free, but water is expensive at the gas station.  In fact, water is more expensive by the gallon than gasoline!

We’ve been thinking a lot lately about why some things are free and some things are expensive – and, in particular, why so many more things are becoming free.  Technological progress, asymmetric competition, and open innovation are relentlessly driving costs down and capabilities up.  A prior post pointed out the innovation trajectory of processors, storage costs, and bandwidth.

Asymmetric competition is when competing players have very different motivations and are happy to destroy each others economics in order to chase these goals.  For instance, Google has been going along merrily, annihilating the value propositions of email, watching videos, smartphone operating systems, office productivity applications, and mobile navigation all in the name of capturing more eyeballs and clicks for advertising.  These are all areas where people once spent billions of dollars.

A recent video I saw of an NEC product under development brought this all home to me, and it is worth looking at more closely.  NEC appears particularly blind to the power of open innovation – leveraging the achievements of others and the vast army of technologists and developers moving forward at breakneck speed in a wide-variety of areas.  Instead of building on the best of what is available, they appear to be developing something proprietary and from scratch.

My friend Josh at 3Play Media showed me the video of  this NEC product, a cool new “universal translation” system.  Well, at first it seemed like a cool idea.  Two users with glasses.  One user speaks in, say, Japanese, and then the other can see the words in English projected on the lens of the glasses.  Wouldn’t it be great if you could go anywhere and have the world translated for you like this?

The system has two glaring problems, however:

  1. The price – NEC is targeting a price of around $83,000, making it barely competitive with hiring a full-time human translator
  2. The clunky hardware – the current lab version of this is so geeky and clunky as to be completely ridiculous and impractical at any price

Of course, NEC plans to bring the price down with volume.  And I am sure that they will be investing to make the glasses nicer and more like “regular” glasses.  Unfortunately for NEC, they seem to be investing a lot of money in things that might not matter that much (like wearable computing) and competing against an avalanche of free stuff that likely will.

The universal translator has five key elements:

Five elements to make a universal translator work

  1. First, we have the device itself.  The concept of a wearable, glasses-based system is intriguing and sexy.  The reality, however, is horribly expensive, clunky and a long, long way from ready for mass market appeal.  Also, why have a specialized device for translation?  Wouldn’t the use case be nearly identical if you presented the translation on an iPhone or Android device or even better if you text-to-voiced it to a blue tooth earpiece?  These technologies are here today and effectively free for this service.
  2. Then we have some part of the service working in the cloud.  Sounds good, but don’t expect to charge extra for this.
  3. Then we have voice recognition.  Similar to the device, don’t we have armies of developers working on this problem in other fields?  Won’t voice recognition just improve on its own and not require NEC to spend much time or money on this element?  Eventually, there will be a voice recognition piece that can be bought off the shelf and work well enough.  It won’t cost $83,000 and won’t contribute to NEC’s value creation.  Windows 7 has apparently made some strides in this area.
  4. The translation itself.  This has to be the secret sauce, right?  But once I have it in text I can already go to Google and translate it for free.  Any language into any other language.  No, it isn’t perfect, but is it good enough to avoid paying much?  Or do I want the $83,000 version?  Probably good enough.
  5. Presentation of results of the translation.  This is a solved problem, very easy in either text format or voice.

So, what is NEC basing it’s pricing strategy on?  And when are they planning to come to market?  Based on this quick and dirty analysis, we should have a free app on iPhone within a year or so (if there isn’t one already!).

I guess this means translation is more like air than water.


What is the Internet?

11 December 2009

Nuff said:


MIT UIs

11 December 2009

Two very cool next generation UIs from MIT:

A new Media Lab system turns LCD displays into giant cameras that provide gestural control of objects on-screen

The iPhone’s familiar touch screen display uses capacitive sensing, where the proximity of a finger disrupts the electrical connection between sensors in the screen. A competing approach, which uses embedded optical sensors to track the movement of the user’s fingers, is just now coming to market. But researchers at MIT’s Media Lab have already figured out how to use such sensors to turn displays into giant lensless cameras. On Dec. 19 at Siggraph Asia — a recent spinoff of Siggraph, the premier graphics research conference — the MIT team is presenting the first application of its work, a display that lets users manipulate on-screen images using hand gestures.

‘SixthSense’ is a wearable gestural interface that augments the physical world around us with digital information and lets us use natural hand gestures to interact with that information.


Augmented reality – real world value

10 December 2009

We are doing some research on the future of the web, and one of the areas of interest is augmented reality. I’ve seen and played with some demos, but actually found two apps of real value to me over the next few days, when I’m in London:

  • Nearest Tube does just what it says – finds the nearest tube stations and identifies their locations

When you load the app, holding it flat, all 13 lines of the London underground are displayed in coloured arrows. By tilting the phone upwards, you will see the nearest stations: what direction they are in relation to your location, how many kilometres and miles away they are and what tube lines they are on. If you continue to tilt the phone upwards, you will see stations further away, as stacked icons.

  • WorkSnug finds WiFi hotspots in London, and good places to work

The latest [augmented reality app] is one that [is very] helpful indeed, to anyone who’s found themselves desperate for wi-fi and a coffee while on the road [in London]. Work Snug, an app being developed in conjunction with Plantronics, leads you to cozy workspaces, each of which have been rated on a list of qualities, from noise levels to seating to wi-fi.


Nokia, Apple and asymmetric competition in Regent Street

8 December 2009

The Register reports the sad but unsurprising news that Nokia’s flagship store on Regent Street is going to close.

Nokia Store Regent St UK

Nokia Store Regent St UK (from silicon.com)

It was actually the most recently opened store: there are others at London Heathrow and in places like Helsinki, New York, Chicago and São Paulo. You can check it (and the other stores) out online: http://www.flagship.nokia.com/

For those of you who don’t know the locale, it is directly opposite Apple’s UK flagship store.

Apple Store, Regent St UK

Apple Store, Regent St UK (from the London Evening Standard)

I recently suggested to a client that they visit the two stores, for a sharp contrast in economics, illustrating what we call “asymmetric competition“:

  • the Nokia store sells ‘phones – lots of different models
  • the Apple store sells ‘phones – a couple of different models
  • the Apple store also sells services, such as mobileMe at ~$100 a year
  • the Apple store sells music and video and applications, through iTunes (as cards, in the store)
  • the Apple store sells computers

As a result, at the moment Apple has fundamentally different economics from Nokia. Apple makes money in a variety of related ways, from mobile devices, and from personal computers (each of which generates several times the margin of even an iPhone), and from complementary cloud services and digital media and other devices.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this Apple Store is London’s most profitable store, generating ~£60 million a year or £2,000/sq ft, three times the sales per square foot of Harrods.

Harrods

Harrods

Each iPhone drives significant additional revenue and contribution beyond the device itself; as a result, Apple’s economics are fundamentally different from Nokia’s, or indeed from any other player without the same scope of activities.

There’s a related discussion about ‘phones vs platforms, and on the shape of product portfolios, which I will post on later this week.