Mobile Forward

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Sign Up
  • Support MF
    • RSS
    • Twitter

Archives for May 2015

How BlackBerry Crippled BlackBerry

May 31, 2015

In the WSJ, Jacquie McNish and Sean Silcoff published an overview of their new book, “The Inside Story of How the iPhone Crippled BlackBerry”.

It’s an excruciatingly painful account of BlackBerry executives’ response to the iPhone. Having worked in the mobile industry since 1994 and, most intensely since 2006, these executive reactions are familiar to me.

From my perspective, they reveal several key reasons why BlackBerry, and companies like it, struggled:

1. Lack of In-House Technology Development

  • “How did they do that?” Mr. Lazaridis [Blackberry co-CEO] wondered.
  • “By all rights the product should have failed, but it did not,” said David Yach, [BlackBerry’s] chief technology officer.

When executives at this level are shocked by new technology, or don’t understand it, it means they haven’t been leading their company to scout new technology, and haven’t been doing enough in-house development to push limits.

2. Focus on the Wrong Customer

  • Mr. Balsillie’s first thought was [BlackBerry] was losing AT&T as a customer.

It’s true that an operator is a customer of sorts. But the people using your product are the ultimate customers – i.e., the consumers. While BlackBerry focused on satisfying the operator executive, Apple focused on satisfying the consumer.

3. Narrow Definition of its Market

  • “It wasn’t a threat to [Blackberry’s] core business.”
  • Offering mobile access to broader Internet content, says Mr. Conlee, “was not a space where we parked our business.”

BlackBerry isn’t alone in this. Nearly every mobile company at the time paid lip service to the Internet. But they defined it as the “Mobile Internet” and, critically, none acted to provide a device that consumers could easily use. They thought of their devices, and their market, as narrowly limited to phones, not general computing devices. And when your device isn’t a general computing device, the Internet is an afterthought.

This fundamental framing also limited technology development (#1 above). Most mobile companies, if they developed technologies in-house, limited them to the cellular radio, rather than more general areas: computer interfaces (e.g., touchscreen), computer software platforms, the Internet, or imaging. Nokia was the exception, but it’s too complex to discuss here.

4. Denial, Masked by Mischaracterization of the Disruptor’s Success

  • “I learned that beauty matters […]. [BlackBerry] was caught incredulous that people wanted to buy this thing,” Mr. Yach says.
  • This was no ordinary phone. It was a cult with a devoted and rapidly growing following.
  • “The carriers aren’t letting us put a full browser on our products,” [said co-CEO Mike Lazaridis].

Similarly, from my experience as a mobile analyst during that time, no executive in the industry admitted (for a very long time) that the iPhone was a better device. Seeing leaders in denial, in my experience, weakened their ability to focus their companies on the right things. Which leads to point #5.

By the way, the point about “the carriers aren’t letting us”: The price of entry for a “full browser” was a stellar product. And that was under BlackBerry’s own control.

5. Tactical Responses to Strategic Problems

  • Mr. Lazaridis believed the four pillars of BlackBerry’s success—good battery life, miserly use of carrier’s spectrum, security and the ability to type—still ruled in the new smartphone world and gave his company its competitive advantage.
  • [BlackBerry] would take another stab at a clickable screen with Storm 2.

They brought features to a platform fight. Tellingly, the word “platform” (which means operating system – one of the iPhone’s major strengths) appears one time in the article. [I’m not faulting the authors. I’m saying it’s a reflection of the thinking – and BlackBerry’s thinking — at the time.] And even as features, none of them – except the long standby battery life –matched the iPhone. And, damningly, part of the reason that BlackBerry phones had better battery life was simply that people used them less. They were “phones”…


All this led to the following:

To Mr. Balsillie, [BlackBerry] was in an existential crisis, mired in what he describes as “strategic confusion.” The company’s business had been disrupted on several levels, with no obvious path forward.

Part of the answer — the part that gives you glimpses into the path forward — is #1 above. When you shape your own technology, you can see the future before others do. Is there another part to the answer? Yes — having a great product shaper. And it’s hard to grow, or recruit, a great product shaper if you don’t give them new technology to work with.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, BlackBerry, Innovation, Leadership, Product Development, R&D, Smartphones, Technology - Gen'l

SDKs are Signs of the Times

May 30, 2015

I couldn’t resist. These are all great companies, but they wield different degrees of influence, depending on the area. It’s also a reminder: The order of influence wasn’t always the same. Things change.

Apple: We have SDKs for iOS. Google: We have SDKs for iOS & Android. Microsoft: We have SDKs for iOS, Android & Windows. #io15 #ioxnj

— Nick Landry (@ActiveNick) May 28, 2015

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Android, Apple, Google, iOS, Microsoft, OS, Windows

Google I/O – Selective Hearing & Amplification

May 30, 2015

After Apple’s “Proactive” initiative leaked this week, these words from Google’s I/O keynote — during the reveal of “Google Now on Tap” — caught my attention:

Selective Hearing & Amplification from Google I/O

  • Actions
  • Answers […] proactively
  • Context
  • Natural language understanding
  • Things (as in, things recognized)
  • Places (Google can recognize 100M places)
  • Knowledge graph (Google has 1B entities)
  • Neural nets (Google’s is 30 layers deep)
  • Machine learning

Machine learning […] is going to be a critical [capability] for Apple

Some observations

First, these are all related to, or enabled by, the bottom term: Machine Learning. It’s the ability for a computer to learn new things: shapes, patterns of behavior, relationships, and more. This is already a very important capability for Google, and is going to be a critical one for Apple, too. Why? Well, briefly, to enable Apple devices to make sense of the user’s context (location, activity, history, messages, related information, intent, etc.) and, in turn, to help the user achieve her objective, stated or implied. Things like catching a plane, buying a present, or meeting a friend. Or adjusting exercise frequency, sleep, or diet. The possibilities are many.

The figures [Google showed] speak to the […] massive, massive level of investment Google has made

Second, the figures Google mentioned — 30-layer-deep neural net, 100M places cataloged, 1B entities recognized — these are figures that not only speak to the utility that Google Now on Tap will have, they also imply the massive, massive level of investment Google has made. Investment in computing hardware (a good deal of it custom) and software (neural nets, understanding natural language, learning, user interface, etc.).

Finally, this is what Apple’s project Proactive — or anyone’s machine learning ambition — is up against. The question, for Apple is, does it compete head-to-head (symmetrically) or in a focused way (asymmetrically)? Probably the latter. Either way, I can’t wait to see.

Does Apple compete head-to-head […] or in focused way?

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Android, Apple, Google, Intelligent Assistance, iOS, Machine Learning, Smartphones

Google Moves Mobile Forward

May 30, 2015

Good words from Sundar Pichai, Google’s SVP of Products, at Google I/O 2015. Like Apple, Google does great things to move Mobile Forward.

For us, it is about […] putting technology and computer science to work on important problems that users face and doing it at scale for everyone in the world.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Google, Innovation, R&D, Technology - Gen'l

Especially on a Watch

May 28, 2015

There’s lots to take in from the past few days, so I’m heads-down. In the meantime, this might be part of an upcoming post:

Mobile Forward 00268 2015-05-28

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Interface, Smartwatches

Apple Watch Thoughts: Today and (A Little Bit About) the Future

May 27, 2015

After wearing the Apple Watch for three weeks, here are my thoughts.

SUMMARY

It’s a nice digital watch that does many things, quickly. I call this “fast utility”. I value the watch’s fast utility. When it gains phone call and map independence from the iPhone, I’ll value it more. When Siri is able to provide intelligent prompts or surface key information from apps, I might consider it an essential tool. And if the industrial design evolves from functional-but-bland to functional-and-beautiful, I’ll probably love it. But today, it’s just “nice” and a perhaps a few years from “love”. That’s fine. I know it’s Version 1. I’m adopting a wait-and-see attitude. Would I buy one again? For professional use, yes. For personal use, it’s too early to tell. Probably, if it advances the way I outlined above (and at the end of this post).

Where do I think, in more detail, Apple Watch is going next? Click here to zoom to the end of this post, or scroll down.


DETAILED NOTES

Context:

  • Model: Sport 42mm, space grey, black flouroelastomer band; $399.
  • This isn’t a review or a “product manager” perspective. Judgments are relative to my specific values, needs, or expectations.
  • I’ve worn a watch for >30 years.
Industrial Design

The right industrial design for a smartwatch, but not a design to “enjoy”.

  • I always agreed: One button for the watch face, and one for connecting with people, makes perfect sense. People/communication deserves a dedicated button.
  • And I continue to agree with the placement: putting it on the opposite side of the device would be less comfortable. And more visually cluttered.
  • I will spend ~1.5 hours this year putting on the watch. That’s because it takes me ~15 seconds to put it on, as the band slides around. Two key drivers:
    • The need to charge it every day.
    • The design of the Sport band. The Milanese Loop or Link band would reduce the time greatly, but they’re priced much higher.
  • For comparison, my link-band Victorinox takes 2 – 5 seconds to put on.
  • Without always-on watch faces (discussed below), it’s not the same kind of fashion accessory that a mechanical watch is. It lacks the combined rugged / classy / mechanically sophisticated appeal of my old watch.
IMG_1148

Delight (left) vs. utility (right)

Watch Face

Like the industrial design, it’s high on utility and low on enjoyment.

  • Apart from its fashion role, the watch is a tool (as opposed to an entertainment or content-consumption device). In that context, the view that holds the most bits of useful information, and that’s on the longest, is most valuable. That’s the watch face. (See my related post, here.)
  • The ones I used the most:
    • Modular: My preferred watch face. The most information-dense: time + 5 complications. But bland. And it’s the only digital face… on this digital watch. (I owe that observation to Jason Snell, on Macbreak Weekly.)
    • Simple: Second preference. Classic face, plus 5 complications. Lots going on, around the round face.
  • I don’t find the included faces compelling. I get great and frequent delight in seeing a beautiful or classy watch face. It’s like admiring a good-looking car. None of the current watch faces reached that level. They’re “neat” or “cool”, but… that’s not the same. There are three reasons, with the first two likely driven by battery considerations:
    • Background: There isn’t anything that, for instance, resembles mother of pearl.
    • Brevity: The watch face doesn’t stay on for more than about six seconds.
    • Design: There isn’t, for example, a face that looks like my Victorinox watch.
  • In this last matter I am, in many ways, longing for skeuomorphism. This may not be a factor for people without a “watch habit”.
  • More generally – for reasons of utility and aesthetics — in my view, the odds that Apple would deny developers access to the watch face are low. John Gruber believes the odds are low that this will happen, but that if it *does* happen, Apple may use an approach similar to the one for apps on the Apple TV: allow faces only from select partners.
General User Interface Observations

Mostly fine, but laggy.

  • The “Home Screen”: No issues. Familiar, yet tailored for the display size.
  • In situations where I have the option to swipe or use the Digital Crown, I swipe 99% of the time.
  • When I do need the digital crown, it’s very helpful (e.g., set alarm time).
  • The predictive face-lighting-up is perfect… until it’s not. The times when I twist my wrist and *don’t* see the watch face are frustrating, especially if it flashed on a moment ago. Must-fix.
  • Similarly, sometimes the weather complication doesn’t display a number, for a moment or two. This drives me to pull out my smartphone, defeating the purpose of the watch. Must fix.
  • The activity ring user interface is horrible. Emulated and not much better, in my view. It allows for the indicators to have “length”, relative to a straight bar, but they’re hard to recall and hard to read.
    • Test: quick, tell me which ring means what. And is it the length of the ring that matters, or the number of degrees it spans? (It’s the latter… Which is still confusing, because it means rings of two different lengths indicate the same degree of progress.)
    • I realize this was probably an unpleasant trade-off Apple had to make. And, on the views that isolate each type: calories, exercise, standing, the circle fills the screen in a pleasing way. But on the watch face, or in a glance view, they’re not helpful. And on the iPhone “Activity” app they’re difficult to visually trend over time.
Glances & Notifications

Very handy when needed.

  • Glances: Staged, helpful information, available quickly. Widget-like. I really like them.
  • I live a low-notification diet, and that transfers to Apple Watch. No intrusions for me. But, I was using the watch on “Silent Mode”.
  • The most interruption I get is from the Stand reminder, and I sometimes welcome that…but, honestly, I’ve started to ignore it, and I might disable it.
Siri

Multiplies the utility of the watch. Does simple things fast. The epitome of “fast utility”.

  • Love the voice activation: bring the watch up near my face, say “Hey, Siri”, ask Siri.
  • My most used Siri requests: placing a call, alarm or timer, weather forecast, trivia.
  • I miss voice feedback from Siri.
Apple Pay

Nice to have. Convenient.

  • Nice. Definitely saves on fumbling for wallet or phone. I just stretch out my arm toward the terminal, and boom.
  • Have you experienced this: McDonalds was able to accept Apple pay, but not well prepared (at the drive thru). The attendant had to find the hand-held NFC terminal, reach out the window, and hold it there with both arms. Took longer to pay than with a credit card. If the line is long, I’d be more inclined to use my card. I’m assuming this will improve.
Activity Monitoring

I’m glad it’s there. I’m hoping it’ll help me be at least a little healthier.

  • The watch looks out for you. And the prompts aren’t intrusive. I appreciate both. I fully expect it to make me a healthier, more health-aware person.
  • Great perspective from Andy Ihnatko on Macbreak Weekly:
    • “The most valuable thing that fitness watches […] can do is simply expose data that is normally invisible to us.”
    • I think the watch does a decent job in Version 1. Can’t wait to see how this evolves.
  • That said, three weeks in, I ignore the stand reminders or progress reminders. No, they don’t motivate me to keep a streak going. There are more important things.
  • The activity rings…. Horrible. See my comment above.
Phone Calls

High-value feature. Convenient and sometimes essential. Again, “fast utility”.

  • Super convenient to be able to answer a call when it’s in your pocket or not near you.
  • Speaker works well. The people I’ve talked to believed I was simply on my iPhone.
Navigation

I’m not into navigation on the watch; it’s a last resort. I prefer the phone.

  • I do need more time with this feature. I like how Maps uses Force Touch, as the way to drill down and search.
  • Sometimes it’s a bit hard to distinguish between left and right vibration cues.
Digital Touch

I admire it, but I don’t think it’s relevant to me.

  • I value the thought that went into this, but I’ve not used it. My friends don’t have an Apple Watch.
  • I think iMore’s Serenity Caldwell mentioned this on the iMore show: Digital Touch would be more useful if you could use it to communicate with iPhones, too. I’m assuming that’s coming.
Third Party Apps

I haven’t needed any. I’d love to discover one that makes my life easier.

  • Marco Arment: “For most types of apps, the Apple Watch today is best thought of not as a platform to port your app to, but a simple remote control or viewport into your iPhone app.”
  • I haven’t needed 3rd party apps. That might be my low-touch preference for the watch, limited awareness (as in, recommendations from friends), or limited selection. But so I’ve used very few of them.
  • This reflects my preference to use the watch only for quick push / pull micro interactions. For apps like Twitter, Yelp, or Amazon (nice voice search), I’d rather use the phone or not use the app at all.
  • The apps that look most attractive to me are the activity-specific ones: for lists, exercise, remote control. Basically, to help a workflow or provide control.
What I Like the Most / Is there a Killer App?

Fast utility. There’s no killer app today.

  • Fast utility: I value the overall combination of Siri, Apple Pay, Notifications, Weather, Activity Reminders, Next Calendar Appointment, and Date and Time. It’s a Swiss Army knife on my wrist. Sorry, Old Watch.
  • Killer app. There may be one. There isn’t today. In any case, this is a general computing device.
  • I agree with Walt Mossberg’s view on a killer app: “Any new device like this becomes attractive when it looks good, works well, and does multiple useful things of different value to different users.”
Battery Life

Not an issue. But also the biggest issue.

  • Not an issue. As long as I recharge daily, I don’t run out of power. Sometimes 1.5 days.
  • I charge at my desk, during the day. That allows me to sleep with watch on, so that I can use the alarm (silently) and easily check the time.
  • But, to be clear, battery life drives the single biggest hassle and habit disruption: the need to charge the watch daily. That means a) at least one additional charger; b) one more distraction; c) one more “cognitive burden”; c) 1.5 hours per year dealing with plugging it in; d) 1.5 hours spent per year in putting on the watch.
  • I haven’t noticed any impact to my iPhone battery life, positive or negative.
New Habits, Resulting from Wearing the Watch

Surprisingly few new habits needed, but daily charging is a drag.

Habit = 1) things I now do because of the watch, even if I’m not using it that moment or that day; 2) things I do by being able to glance at the watch face.

Friction Habits

  • Tapping the watch face to avoid waiting a second or two
  • Ignoring the stand reminder
  • Daily taking off / putting on
  • New charger at my desk. Using another USB port
  • Monitor watch battery ~1x per day

Benefit Habits

  • Quickly check the weather. Using the phone, or Amazon Echo, less
  • Leaving my phone more often, knowing I can still take a call
  • Quickly check the time
  • Standing (once in a while)

Overall, I’m surprised how few new habits I’ve had to build into my day. And the time saved by having fast access to time, date, weather, and calendar outweighs (or comes close) to the time spent removing/donning the watch for charging.

 What I Miss Most about My “Old Watch”

Rugged looks, classy face. Always on.

  • Its design: Rugged looks, classy face. I’m not too embarrassed to say: it’s a fashion accessory. In terms of utility, the display is always on. And I don’t have to spend time taking it off and putting it on.
Would I Buy an Apple Watch Again?

Maybe. I need phone independence and/or Siri to integrate with more apps.

  • From a professional perspective, I’ll need to buy future models to stay current. Especially if/when they gain cellular connectivity.
  • From a personal perspective, maybe. It’s too early to tell.
  • I initially thought the title of this piece was going to be “Capability is Addictive”. That’s because – and I don’t claim to represent any consumer in this view – each major step forward in general computing has been a boon. Computer, cell phone, smartphone, tablet – once I had these devices, I couldn’t go back. Capability is addictive. And I really, really thought I would be saying that about Apple Watch: “Capability is addictive”… but I’m not. I like it, for the reasons I mentioned earlier. And when I first used the watch, the novelty of having those capabilities on my wrist led me to believe I’d find them addictive. But they haven’t been. I can’t go back to a feature phone, but I *can* go without the watch. Why? Because I have my iPhone. That makes sense; that’s why the Apple Watch is, at this point, an accessory.
  • Will it ever be “addictive”? I won’t pretend to predict this. My own view changed in a week or two; how would I dare predict it over a longer span? When many things get better — the laggy display, the dependence on the phone, the need to remove it daily, charge, and put it on again. And the cost of several hundred dollars every so often. And, more intangibly, the fact that there’s more pleasure in taking out my phone (whether that’s good or not) and certainly more pleasure from my analog watch face — when these get better, then I’ll see.
  • If I do decide to keep buying Apple Watch for personal use, I’ll probably settle into a two year upgrade cycle, eventually.
Where is Apple Watch Going Next?

The slides further down sum up my high level view. Basically, it’s likely Apple will advance along these primary directions:

  • Information display: Always-on / ambient mode. 3rd party watch faces
  • Voice interaction: Siri can surface key information from apps. Andy Ihnatko:

This is an opportunity for Siri […] imagine […] all this data is there […] “Hey Siri, How’s my health doing?” and it will simply say […] “Over the past 3 days, you achieved your walking goals, however you haven’t been getting up enough, and you should be getting more sleep.”

  • Cellular connectivity: Providing independence from the phone
  • Context awareness: GPS and indoor location, IOT connectivity
  • Intelligence: Simple prompts across a range of areas. Andy Ihnatko again:

Every time you do this, it is the watch’s job to figure out why you did that and display that one piece of information that you probably most intensely want so that you can put it down again. I love that this is valuable to me despite the fact that I rarely have to interact with it or tell it what I want.

Mobile Forward 00262 2015-05-27

Mobile Forward 00263 2015-05-27

Mobile Forward 00264 2015-05-27

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Smartwatches

Two Key Questions After Jony Ive’s Promotion

May 26, 2015

This post is “inside baseball” and written that way… but if you like baseball, cheers.
______

Two key questions remain after Jony Ive’s promotion. They’re not new questions, but they’re worth re-visiting:

Is Jony Ive now more involved or less involved in evaluating future Apple products and categories?

What person or persons are Apple’s “product pickers”?

Earlier, I mentioned how:

No one expects Apple to name projects and specify details but, if Ive was going to stay meaningfully involved with products, you’d expect some additional language and emphasis in that regard. It’s a sign, in my view, that his future contributions while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

From the “original” senior leadership team, only Cook, Schiller, Cue, and Ive remain. This matters in the sense that they learned a lot from Steve Jobs and from each other (and taught Steve Jobs, in many ways, I’m sure). Of these, my guess is that Schiller and Ive have both the deepest and most rounded product sense. I think there’s little question they’ve been the face, heart, and hands guiding Apple products for the past few years, no doubt with support from a broad cast of talented employees.

So, what’s the answer to the questions above? I have no idea. None. These things are rarely that clear; the Steve Jobs era(s) were the exception, and even then “clear” is the wrong word. Perhaps “clear-er”. If I had to guess, here’s my hunch: Jony Ive will continue to give his senior leadership vote, as he always has. And Phil Schiller will continue to drive product definitions, with Kevin Lynch continuing to be on-point for the watch.

This is what transition at Apple looks like: slow, smooth, hopefully imperceptible from a business standpoint. And yet very apparent from a human standpoint, as one era transitions to the next.

So nothing changes? Not quite. Richard Howarth (industrial design) and Alan Dye (interface design), Jony Ive’s direct reports now have a (bigger) voice and more respect. They’re not “new”, but they’re new to the senior leadership team. With Ive transitioning from day-today management, you can be sure they’ll be in senior staff meetings. The direction, detail, and questions in key discussions will be different. Better or worse? Of course we won’t know, at least for a while. But different.

Oh, and Phil and Eddy, they might be edging off a bit, too. Again, of course I’m guessing. But this is what transition at Apple looks like: slow, smooth, hopefully imperceptible from a business standpoint. And yet very apparent from a human standpoint, as one era transitions to the next.

[Richard Howarth and Alan Dye] are not “new”, but they’re new to the senior leadership team.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design

Jony Ive’s Promotion is Likely a Gentle Fade to an Incredibly Impactful Career

May 26, 2015

We can view Jony Ive’s promotion to Chief Design Officer (Stephen Fry’s article and Tim Cook’s memo) at Apple thru the following lens:

Why does a company create a new position?

Several reasons, in order of most mission-focused (and most frequent) to least:

  1. To provide more formal and senior oversight to a critical area
  2. To accommodate an executive’s strength or weakness
  3. To retain an executive (e.g., match a prior role)
  4. To move an executive off the critical path of the company’s operations
  5. To honor an executive

Which of these might apply in this situation?

1. Nope. Design was already a formal area, and Jony Ive was already in charge.

2. Nope. Some of Ive’s comments to Stephen Fry might appear to support this (i.e., that the move accommodates Ive’s design strength by freeing him from administrative and management work). But, in fact, as Senior Vice President of Design, he was already able to pick and choose how he applied his time and talent. If this was truly about reducing time spent in meetings, performance reviews, and resource planning, it wouldn’t require a promotion to “Chief” anything.

3. Nope. Not an issue.

4. Likely, in my view. For the same reasons that Seth Weintraub of 9to5mac speculates about: that Ive probably wants to spend more time with family. Ive’s promotion makes for a smoother transition. Important when you’re the world’s biggest company, and when your stock is particularly sensitive to news.

5. Likely, in my view. If you read Tim Cook’s memo, it’s not about citing new information (accomplishments) as the promotion drivers. It’s about rewarding Ive with the title that matches the influence he’s had all along. It’s an acknowledgment; an honor. And he uses general language that, while in the present tense, also sounds commemorative. In fact, this is a strong indication that this “memo” was really meant for public consumption. And by “public”, I mean “investors”.

But between Cook’s memo and Fry’s article, talk about the future is glaringly absent.

But wait, doesn’t Tim Cook’s memo also say that Jony Ive will now focus “entirely on current design projects, new ideas and future initiatives”? Yes.

But between Cook’s memo and Fry’s article, talk about the future is glaringly absent. In Fry’s piece, Ive only went so far as to inform him about helping with the store re-design and the campus.

Let me state this more clearly: Ive, to-date a product-critical executive has been promoted into a more senior and impactful role, and the discussion about his future is limited to stores and work spaces. (To be clear, the stores are absolutely critical to Apple’s success and, arguably, in need of a meaningful re-design. Vital work. Interesting work. Odds that it makes the best use of Ive’s time and talent? Low, I would say.)

Ive, to-date a product-critical executive has been promoted into a more senior and impactful role, and the discussion about his future is limited to stores and work spaces. […] a sign […] that his future contributions, while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

Granted, no one expects Apple to name projects and specify details but, if Ive was going to stay meaningfully involved with products, you’d expect some additional language and emphasis in that regard. It’s a sign, in my view, that his future contributions while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

So, to repeat: it appears that Ive is gently stepping aside, being duly honored by Tim Cook, and reserving the right to make an impact here or there, on the project and level of his choosing. If this — and, to emphasize — it’s obviously speculative — if this is true, it’s certainly an immensely well-earned, well-timed taper to an incredibly-impactful and inspirational career.

If [his stepping aside] is true, it’s certainly an immensely well-earned, well-timed taper to an incredibly-impactful and inspirational career.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Design

Tune in this week …

May 25, 2015

Tune in to Mobile Forward this week, when I’ll say things like:

  • “They brought features to a platform fight” – I know what you’re guessing, and you’re probably right.
  • “It’s a weather machine” – Don’t make me repeat myself.
  • “Rugged looks, classy face” – Probably not about me.

And I’ll finally publish a few words on Apple Watch… I know, I know… tick, tock, tick, tock…. Oh, wait, it’s digital, so I should really say 0, 1, 0, 1. No, don’t correct me; I’m sure that’s how it goes.


FOLLOW UP: I didn’t get to the “weather machine” item, above. In its place, I wrote about the news that Jony Ive was promoted, here and here. The “weather machine” post will have to wait.

Okay, you’ve waited long enough. What was that post going to be about? I’m not going to write it, so I’ll tell you: Amazon Echo.

We’ve had it for three months. It’s nice. Voice-activated access to weather, a timer, music, jokes, information. Nice Bluetooth speaker, too.

The Echo iPhone app shows you a history of how you’ve used the device — each request. I took a stab at tallying and what we use it for, to make a simple chart. I haven’t made time to finish that, and I don’t think I will. But, my family’s number one use: to ask what the weather is going to be. Hence my colorful phrase “It’s a weather machine”. It’s biggest rival, curiously (other than our iPhones and iPads)? The Apple Watch – now the weather is on my wrist.

Oh, and the “Don’t make me repeat myself” line? Well, it’s called the Echo.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Tune In

Market Scan Highlights: 2015-05-24

May 24, 2015

Mobile Forward 00240 2015-05-24

Highlights from this week’s Market Scan. Read it here. Subscribe here.

  • Why China is hard to figure out (Marginal Revolution)
  • Rumor: Android M Will Come With An Update Guarantee For Nexus Devices (Android Police)
  • Google seeking new partners for next generation Nexus phones (DigiTimes)
  • Apple acquires high-accuracy GPS technology firm Coherent Navigation (AppleInsider)
  • Apple: Tim Cook: Apple Pay coming to China ‘soon’ (Mashable)
  • Apple: Key iPhone 6s specs seemingly detailed in new report (BGR)
  • Apple: Report: iOS 9 will be optimized for older devices, including iPhone 4S (Ars Technica)
  • Xiaomi Picks Leadcore to Go Vertical – In search of its own custom processor (EE Times)
  • BlackBerry: Microsoft, Xiaomi, Lenovo and Huawei ‘evince’ interest in BlackBerry (IB Times)
  • Apple: KGI lowers Apple Watch forecast significantly, says over 80% of sales are larger 42mm version (9to5Mac)
Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Acquisitions, Android, Apple, Assorted Links, BlackBerry, China, Google, iOS, Market Scan, Payment, Processors, Sensors, Smartphones, Smartwatches

Saturday Assorted Links

May 23, 2015

1. Apple Watch App From Starwood Will Literally Open Doors. Keyless check-in is cool. One of many ways that smartphones and smartwatches will connect us to things and places.

2. BlackBerry targeted for acquisition, say sources.

Microsoft and a number of China-based handset vendors, including Xiaomi Technology, Lenovo and Huawei, are being indicated as potential investors, the sources noted.

3. BlackBerry to Lay Off Undisclosed Number of Employees in Device Business. The company, like others, stopped innovating. And it also simply stopped adapting.

4. Researchers find Android factory reset faulty and reversible.

The group estimates that as many as 500 to 630 million Android devices might not be capable of completely wiping the data saved in their internal disks and SD cards.

The estimate is far from exact, and the real number could be meaningfully lower, but it’s still in the hundreds of millions. As John Gruber, of Daring Fireball would say, tongue in cheek: “Open always wins.”

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Android, Apple, Assorted Links, BlackBerry, Google, IOT, Security & Privacy, Smartphones, Smartwatches

Why Apple May Increase Support for Older iOS Devices

May 22, 2015

Mark Gurman (9to5Mac) does it again, with another scoop on Apple’s plans. One (of several) interesting points is around support for older iOS devices. Now, even today, Apple supports iPhones and iPads for meaningfully longer than Android OEMs (or carriers) support Android devices. Gurman reports:

Our sources note that even A5-based Apple devices, including the original iPad mini and discontinued iPhone 4S, will be able to run iOS 9. […]

Instead of developing a feature-complete version of iOS 9 for older hardware and then removing a handful of features that do not perform well during testing, Apple is now building a core version of iOS 9 that runs efficiently on older A5 devices, then enabling each properly performing feature one-by-one. Thanks to this new approach, an entire generation (or two) of iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches will be iOS 9-compatible rather than reaching the end of the iOS line.

His contacts don’t outline the logic for extended support, but below are several likely reasons. Essentially, it helps Apple reach more consumers with devices and increases the installed base of consumers that can buy apps and services, including Apple’s expected new video and music streaming services. And – crucially – it helps Apple reach lower price points without resorting to building low-margin products.

The longer iOS devices live, the bloodier the low-cost Android smartphone market becomes.

Here’s the thinking, in more detail:

  1. Buyers who keep the iPhone benefit from its longer life. Family members benefit from a more useful hand-me-down.
  2. Buyers (or re-sellers) that sell it can earn a higher price, or a faster sale, or simply deal in that product type, profitably, for a longer time.
  3. The second owner is happy to buy a device that will last longer. Android devices usually don’t bring that benefit.
  4. This enhances Apple’s reputation (helping sales), earns goodwill (what Android device receives OS support for very long?), and sell more apps and content (except in markets with high piracy; yes, like China).
  5. Equally, as Apple rolls out new services – video streaming, music streaming – it benefits by allowing more devices to access those new services.
  6. Finally – but still notably – it’s a mechanism for Apple to reach low price points that it can’t reach with new iOS devices.

A bit more on #6. The longer an iPhone (or iPad lives), the lower its street price becomes. And yet, with good iOS support, it still works. Effectively, that’s an iOS device at a price point that Apple would never otherwise meet. It’s at a price point (range) currently addressed by low-cost Android OEMs, who survive (?) on razor-thin margins. The longer iOS devices live, the bloodier the low-cost Android smartphone market becomes.

Now, you might say: Apple doesn’t make money on that older device — it sold it years ago. So who cares about reaching a lower price point? Technically, Apple can still make apps, content, and services revenue. And it’s a sale that Android misses. And, honestly, almost no one makes money at those price points anyway.

 As Apple rolls out new services – video streaming, music streaming – it benefits by allowing more devices to access those new services.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, iOS, Refurbished, Smartphones, Tablets

Google Ad Chief Says Larger Phones Help With Mobile Sales

May 22, 2015

Alistair Barr, reporting for the Wall Street Journal, interviews Sridhar Ramaswamy, who leads Google’s advertising group:

“As phones get bigger the space issue becomes less challenging,” he said, pulling his Nexus 6 smartphone out to show its six-inch display. “This is essentially a tablet. People’s ability to navigate sites and fill out forms and such goes up tremendously.”

That makes sense.

On Google’s progress in mobile advertising:

WSJD: Did Google underestimate the impact of mobile on search and ad prices?

We recognized the power of mobile from very early on. I don’t think we haven’t taken mobile seriously. Android was an early bet on this. But for all companies, not just us, it’s one of these things where the pace of change is quite incredible, in spite of all the early investments that companies and people like (Google founders) Larry (Page) and Sergey (Brin) did.

I’m sure Google recognized the potential early on. It’s one of the best high-performance companies I’ve seen. (Meaning, it has great people, pursues great goals, and achieves many great outcomes.)

But here’s what I think when I see a big company under-respond to a big trend: it’s a big company. There likely isn’t a small, focused team with freedom of action to experiment and move fast. There probably *is* a bright, motivated set of people, but distributed across several teams, with several layers of management, trying to look outward, inward, propose, and respond (internally, via slides) to many requests, constraints, and status checks. That’s what big companies are: a revenue engine that supports many, with tons of talented people and potential directions, but a lot of complexity. Good work gets done, but more slowly. Risk is reduced, but some central opportunities go under-developed.

That said, a small team is no guarantee of success. It would take Google to count all the small companies and small teams that fail. But it helps… with speed – in orientation, decision, action, and repeating that as necessary. Combine the resources of Google with the dexterity of small teams, and the potential for achieving great things, including winning in the mobile advertising market, is high.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Google, Mobile Search, Phablets, Product Development, Smartphones

This is What a Female Engineer Looks Like

May 22, 2015

Erin Summers, writing for Quartz:

The few articles that specifically showcase women in tech create an unattainable archetype of a woman that somehow manages to run marathons, raise a family, always looks impeccable, and marginalizes the amazing technology that she built. […]

We decided to take control and do something about it, and that’s how project “wogrammer” was born. We interview our fellow women engineers and showcase the cutting-edge technology they’ve built. The more voices of real, authentic woman engineers we can share, the greater hopes we have of breaking stereotypes and focusing on the technical achievements of women.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Moving Forward, STEM

Apple Watch Demand Flattening as 42mm Models Estimated to Represent Over 80% of Orders

May 22, 2015

Joe Rossignol, reporting for MacRumors (excerpt below). KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo has a decent – and the best – track record among financial analysts in getting inside information and/or predicting Apple developments.

KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo issued a note to investors today that claims Apple Watch demand may be slowing down, resulting in shipment forecasts being revised down by 20% to 30% to 5-6 million units in the third quarter.

Kuo expects total Apple Watch shipments to fall within the 15 million range for the 2015 fiscal year, lower than the consensus of 20-30 million units, but remains upbeat about the Apple Watch and long-term wearable trends.

KGI also estimates that the 42mm model drives 80% of shipments. That’s based on information about the production split and on order shipment times.

Share:Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email

Filed Under: Apple, Smartwatches

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

MOBILE FORWARD POSTS

Popular Posts

   Go to Complete List  ››

Latest Posts

  • The PC is Passé. What Now?
  • Google RankBrain: AI in Search
  • Tim Cook on Cars
  • Foxconn Makes About 30% of the Components in a Tesla
  • A Search for Another Run-Time Model
  • How Tesla is Ushering in the Age of the Learning Car
  • Nobody Can Override the Director
  • Apple’s Bold Platform Risk
  • Toyota Executive: “Toyota has to change its ways” to Move Forward
  • Intel Working on an iPhone Modem: New Chatter
  • On Product Names
  • Windows Laptops Need Better Engineering, Not Better Marketing
  • On Robot Creativity and Imagination
  • Perfecting Pixar’s Movies Takes a Crazy Amount of Research
  • A Leading Indicator of Success

Categories

Archives

  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015

Mobile Forward

About
A
Contact

Categories

Recent Posts

  • The PC is Passé. What Now?
  • Google RankBrain: AI in Search
  • Tim Cook on Cars
  • Foxconn Makes About 30% of the Components in a Tesla
  • A Search for Another Run-Time Model

Support MF

Subscribe

Follow MF

Twitter
A
RSS
A
By Email

Search

Copyright © 2021 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in