LIVEdigitally

Tag Archives: blackberry

Technology Predictions for 2010

Posted on by

Every year I predict, every year I get at least one thing right. And many wrong.  But that’s the fun part, right?  This year instead of categorizing based on the technology area, I’m going to organize based on my own scale of how crazy the prediction itself is…

The No-Brainers
Stuff that is almost definitely going to happen. Except the ones that don’t…

  • Twitter growth levels off, though Twitter usage increases. I actually wouldn’t be surprised to see the churn rate equal the signup rate as I believe Twitter still has a massive problem with getting new users enchanted with the service.
  • A new version of the iPhone comes out that is incrementally better than the 3GS.
  • Google launches “Android for Set-Top Boxes” but gains little traction in the foreseeable future. (repeat from ’09).
  • CES 2010 exceeds expectations, either in the form of interesting new gadgets or industry-wide product/technology launches.
  • BlackBerry overhauls their “app store” to make it more iPhone-y.
  • Mac OSX market share continues to rise.
  • Superslim TVs (like the Samsung LEDs – drool!) become the hot category for displays.  Many of them are “connected” to various Internet services.

Sounds Feasible
Predictions that are a little more “out there” but don’t require any major convincing.

  • Zynga files to go public, and the entire “social gaming” category gets even more unbelievably outrageous.
  • Yahoo! begins some kind of realistic turnaround. They have far too much foot traffic and too many good properties to continue to fail for so long.
    • Hint to Yahoo! – reinvest in your Flickrs, Deliciouses, and other “interesting” stuff that you are good at, and stay OFF the television and other places that you are not good at.
  • One PC maker emerges from the trenches with a really well-designed laptop that actually can stand up against a Macbook enough to make people take notice. (repeat from ’09).
  • “Real-time Web” loses steam as a meme. While I’m personally very bullish on the impacts and possibilities, it’s far too niche and far too unimportant to “regular folks” to care about.
    • Probably same for “Cloud Computing”, but since everyone’s just confusing it with “The Internet” it might have more staying power.
  • Apple releases stats on iPhone/iPod/iTunes/app store that are just mind-blowing.
  • 4G/LTE networks spread faster than expected, become viably competitive to the mainstream consumer within the year.
  • The term “Social Media” finally begins to fade across all industries other than Social Media Mavens, Gurus, and Wizards.  The latter reach level 7 and learn how to cast User-Generated Fireball and Community Driven Magic Missile.
  • All non-Apple tablets are craptastic.  Ditto for touchscreen phones.
  • 3DTV gets embedded into lots and lots of TVs, much to the chagrin of consumers who don’t feel the need to look like that goofy guy in Back to the Future, even in the comfort of their own living rooms.
    • Note that in my opinion the only thing that really makes 3D “work” in the home is sports. And even that’s a long shot.

Whatcha Talkin Bout Willis?
Stuff that’s probably not going to happen, but ya never know…

  • Facebook reveals huge revenue numbers, files to go public.
  • Twitter gets acquired by Microsoft.  Yeah, I’m being specific here, but it’s the only logical acquisition, and Microsoft’s got deep enough pockets and have failed at virtually all things Internet.  In a nutshell, Ballmer wants to bring sexy back.
  • The Apple Tablet ships in 2010. Sure all the “in the know” folks are convinced this must happen, but most of them said that about 2009 (and/or that Apple would ship a netbook).
  • Some kind of flexible-display type of device is announced (might even ship).  If I had to hunch (and I of course do), it’d either come from Apple or as a new Kindle.
  • Tru2Way is announced as the new failure of openness from the FCC.
  • All versions of Rock Band and Guitar Hero in 2010 fail to exceed sales stats of 2009 or 2008.
    • Hey guys – remember how that Who Wants to be a Millionaire show was super popular? Then they started running it 4+ nights a week?  Then it moved to daytime?  There’s something called a “saturated market”.  Stop with all the specialty versions and get back to improving the base game, which you can sell add-ons to.
  • Cisco buys a few more gadget makers and technology providers in their attempt to own the Digital Home.  In each case they continue to exhibit poor timing and overpay for slightly outdated platforms.

Can I get a hit of that stuff?
Things that are just plain unrealistic, but I’m saying them anyway.  This way if they happen I can say I was the first to say them.

  • Apple does not ship a tablet. Yes, I contradict the above point, since I do think “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” holds up in general.  However, it is Apple, and this is a terrible device category, and Steve Jobs hates doing things crappily.  BTW, you really should read this piece if you are even remotely following the Apple Tablet news – it’s extremely well written and insightful.
  • Facebook buys Twitter.  It’s not really all that out there as a concept (although I’d wager the personalities behind both companies are big forces against it).  Both companies need to continue rapid growth. Both companies need to create lots of revenue.  Both companies want to be “empires”.  There are many overlapping aspects, but the combined entity could realistically “own” the social network.
  • A new game console launches.  I put this in the long-shot category because nobody is really incented to create a new console right now.  The Xbox 360 is finally hitting it’s strides; the PS3 has way too much cost to recoup, and the Wii is enjoying it’s ride.  If I had to guess, I’d wager on a 4th party entrant (Samsung?).  If one of the big three, I’d pick the next console as a “Wii HD”.
  • A “Lifestreamer” device comes to market.  It’s not quite a phone, but it’s always on, always recording, and has amazing synch with some Web service.  Never takes pictures, only video. Able to “Tag” moments.  Has real-time streaming capabilities.
    • Scoble buys units for himself and entire family. 😉
  • Microsoft (or possibly Yahoo!) goes on a major Internet services acquisition spree, picking up companies like Zoho, bit.ly, Adobe (yes, Adobe), Pandora, Evernote, UserVoice, and more.
  • The TwitterPeek is the #1 hottest selling device of the year!

That’s all folks, see you in 361 days for the results.

Note that I anticipate much snarkiness in the comments.  Have at it.

The Third Age of Gadgets nears its end

Posted on by

The iPad TabletMac MacTouch iSlate will supposedly launch next year, and with it comes the end of an era.  For that statement to make any sense, I should probably backtrack a bit and give a little explanation.  While considering the impact of this product (should it even exist beyond the labs in Cupertino, that is), I’ve been thinking back on the history and evolution of gadgets.  Incidentally, I’m only considering electronic gadgets, but not including computers (or laptops) nor kitchen-related items (pretty much everything in the modern kitchen is some kind of gadget).  I’ve grouped them (in my own mind) into three major phases, and in pure Tolkienish geeky wonderfulness, I’m calling them Ages.

The First Age

Definition: For sake of discussion, I’ll define the First Age of Gadgets as starting with calculators and LCD watches (and, of course, calculator watches).  Sticklers will quickly point out something I’m missing, but in my opinion that’s when the concept of “gadgets” really got kicking.  These products (1) required batteries and (2) did one thing, typically pretty well.  These early gadgets were typically fairly functional in nature, not very gimmicky or showy.  They were also workhorses as compared to modern products – you can drop most “old school” products and not fear for significant damage (probably directly related to LED or single-line LCD outputs).

Timeframe: roughly the early 1970s all the way into the 1990s. That said, many products came out in the ’90s that would still be considered First Age gadgets, per the definition above.

Defining gadget: tie between Walkman and Game Boy.  Both effectively defined a product category, and still do to this day in most respects. It’s far too easy to argue that the iPod is just a “modern” Walkman, and ditto for the DS/PSP.

Memorable gadgets: Mattel Football, Atari 2600, NES, Speak and Spell (the first DSP was inside it), the Polaroid instant camera, and HP calculators (they could graph stuff!), DiscMan (also great, but not as revolutionary as the WalkMan).

The Second Age

Definition: In a nutshell: USB connectivity and/or card reader integration. Slightly more detailed: the Second Age of gadgets is about products that were able to connect and/or share data with a computer (but did not include WiFi) and/or cell phones.  Gadgets started becoming a little more pervasive, a little more mainstream, a lot more pop culture. In addition to the gadgets themselves, the category of gadget accessories really began to boom (chargers, carrying case, rechargeable batteries, etc).  This was also the dawn of the gadget blogs. I asked Peter Rojas, founder of Gizmodo, if he could recall why he launched the site: “It was an experiment, something Nick and I started almost by accident.  I don’t think either of us thought blogging would become as big as it did. People are a LOT more interested in gadgets now than when I started Gizmodo in 2002 – it’s become part of pop culture.”

Timeframe: late 1990s to mid-2000’s.  Obviously there were definitely earlier cell phones and we still have completely disconnected gadgets coming to market today, but this is still a fairly definable time.  Interesting, I referred to this timeframe in another “look back” kind of post last year.

Defining gadget: tough call, but it’s the iPod. No other device was so utterly perfect at the concept of end-to-end interaction between the device and the computer.

Memorable gadgets: TiVo, Motorola StarTac and RAZR, PalmPilot and Palm V, Sony PlayStation, Rio mp3 players (especially the Karma), Casio Exilim and Sony U10/U20 digital cameras, Creative Nomad Jukebox, Garmin Nuvi.

The Third Age

Definition: Internet access and connectivity. Devices had either built-in Internet access, or some hybrid method of interacting with the Internet to share content, data, or services.  In many cases Third Age devices are simple evolutions to their predecessors, but some innovated distinctly enough so that there’s no blurry lines.  Just as the USB-only devices evolved to a point of wacky ideas, we’ve already seen the same thing begin to occur in the current era.

Timeframe: mid-2000’s to 2010.

Defining gadget: This is a debatable call, but I’m going to go with the BlackBerry. It truly ushered in the notion of a converged device with phone and Internet access, and was the major game changer of usage behaviors with regards to mobile devices.  Obviously the iPhone has had its own impact, but one could argue that (1) the BlackBerry is a clear success, and (2) the iPhone might never have come out without it.

Memorable gadgets: iPhone (see, it’s there!), Xbox 360, Harmony 880 remote, Slingbox (disclosure: I built it, so I’m biased, but I think it belongs on the list!), Sonos (disclosure: I have worked with Sonos in the past, but again, I think it’s hard to argue that any other product has so well integrated the Internet and personal media and home gadgets), Eye-Fi (like it or don’t, but it certainly opened new concepts), the Flip, the Kindle. Oh, and of course the Twitterpeek (just kidding).

The Fourth Age

Regardless of the iSlate, we are at the brink of a new generation of gadgets that utterly change the way we think of technology and mobility. Internet access and data synchronization/sharing will be considered ubiquitous and pervasive across new devices.  I consider gadgets like the FitBit right on the fringe of what I’m talking about – designed for a connected life, but don’t focus on a typical way of being used. My expectations for what I’m calling the Fourth Age of gadgets center around three major changes and improvements in displays, inputs, and power.

Displays: I assume we’ll be seeing flexible display surfaces (folding, roll-up, etc) that change the way we physically interact with a device.  The concept of a hard, flat screen (even a touchable one) seems very outdated to me. I think the real revolutionary tablet will be the first one with some form of flexible display (and my money’s on Apple for making this happen). I also foresee better use of microprojectors to remove the need for an on-board display at all.

Input: Next generation products should have inputs much more interesting than just a keyboard.  Let’s assume the concept of gestures is one good starting point, but it really needs to be taken further than the pinching and scrolling effect.  I’m also anticipating more use of optical recognition (like Natal uses) to simple “watch” the user control a device – gestures are even more interesting when you don’t have to touch a screen. Voice recognition and input is basically already here, but yet to be fully put to work (thanks David for that suggestion). Another is more interesting uses of accelerometers and motion sensors, where a gadget is interacted with simply by how you move it around.

Power: I consider batteries, even the most modern Li-Ion ones, one of the key deficiencies in gadget design. Batteries create massive inefficiencies in cost structure, environmental impact, and product usage. As a stopgap solution, I am a fan of the wireless charging concepts, but that’s really just a big bandaid in my opinion. We are right around the corner from making rechargeable fuel cell based devices very feasible. This is a good step, but I’m anticipating some more monumental leaps.  As per my thoughts on flexible displays, I think the materials sciences engineers out there are cooking up some very innovative solutions to make gadgets last longer, weigh less, and be notably cheaper to produce.

For a little sanity check, I asked Josh Topolsky, Editor-in-Chief of Engadget, his opinion:

“I think we’re just starting to scratch the surface of what’s possible in mobile computing (non-laptop, non-traditional computing, that is). Smartphones are in their infancy, tablets are non-existent; what we’ve seen in demos only just begins to show the potential in this space. When manufacturers can add the horsepower and bandwidth needed to those devices without sacrificing battery life or design, our perception of computing will shift dramatically. Multitouch interfaces and UI concepts that involve more than just moving boxes around on a screen will completely upend our ideas about how you interact with the machine; gadgets like the iPhone and Surface have already sparked that fire. In just a few years (say, less than five), I expect that using a laptop or desktop computer will seem quaint, or worse: antiquated.”

Personally, I’m excited about the future.  I’m just ever-so-bored of the current state of gadget affairs.  The iPhone has just sucked the life out of real innovation, and everyone’s playing a pretty boring game of catchup, with the occasional attempt to one-up Apple.  The problem is the giants of CE are acting like big sluggish organizations, and the cost structures have been prohibitive to enable startups to find easy paths to success, with few exceptions to these rules.  Hence why we in the Third Age we have One Phone to Rule Them All.  But 10 years ago we’d have bet on Sony, not Apple, to lead the revolution.  I wonder who will lead us on the road ahead (and if we’ll see it at CES 2010?).

Blackberry's Imperfect Storm

Posted on by

I had some time to play with the BlackBerry Storm last week, and I’m surprised how much I disliked it.  I feel it was a complete misstep on the part of RIM, and is indicative of the problems of handset manufacturers short-sighted thinking as they compete with the iPhone.

Competing with the iPhone is like competing with CSI
CSI is one of the top broadcast TV shows every week.  Millions of people tune in to watch a fairly vapid crime drama show with cool lighting effects and gruesome murder scenes. Many millions of people.  So if you are a clever TV exec, and you want to compete in the same timeslot, do you (a) create an equally vapid crime drama show with more cool lighting and gruesomer murders, (b) create a completely different show, such as a romance, comedy, reality, hospital, etc, or (c) offer alternating reruns of Matlock and Baywatch? As tempting as (c) might be, the answer is (b) – they call it cross- or counter-programming.

The World’s First Touchscreen Blackberry?
This is the main marketing campaign around the product (don’t ask me why).  The commercials (much like the gPhone commercials) are blatant ripoffs of the iPhone commercials, and they shouldn’t be.  This is the core problem of the whole device – it’s not an iPhone, and more to the point it shouldn’t be an iPhone.  Instead of building a great next-gen BlackBerry (like they did with the Curve, Pearl, Bold), they made a less functional product by trying to duplicate the core strengths of another product.  In other words, they are airing CSI: Indianapolis when they should be showing Reality Stars Paintball on Ice.

All CrackBerries need a keyboard
The BlackBerry is beloved because… it integrates perfectly into Exchange/Outlook/Corporate email environments and it is a phenomenal mobile email device.  IT administrators love it as do the end-user who can easily write emails while attending meetings, at family events, on the tarmac, dinner parties, and even while driving. The product experience is heavily tied into the keyboard, one could even consider it the signature piece of the device.  A BlackBerry without a keyboard can’t possibly (and, to the point, doesn’t) replicate the same “BlackBerry Experience”.

The Missed Opportunity
The “correct” touchscreen BlackBerry would have a physical keyboard as well.  Seems like an obvious, yet somehow missed move by the company.  Touchscreen keyboards can’t replace the physical one, and just dabbling touch-UI features onto the rest of the BlackBerry experience makes for a wholly unsatisfactory device.  Instead, the company should’ve kept the form factor of the present-day device, but made the screen touch-enabled.  Best of both worlds, satisfies the email-craving workaholic as well as the fun-having gadget owner.

Instead, the BlackBerry Storm might just be the mullet of phones.  It’s probably the best “other” touchscreen phone on the market (so far), but that’s just not good enough.  There are plenty of ways to compete with the iPhone, and I’m dissappointed at the lack of originality and creative thinking displayed by other cell phone manufacturers.  Something tells me the best competition will come out of left field, the way Asus first innovated with their eeePC.  I hope the clever product people at RIM who’s ideas got shot down to make the Storm can bring out the concepts they really wanted to ship (and I’m just going out on a limb with that – despite being Canadian I have no special insight into their product roadmap).

Can the BlackBerry Storm Kill the iPhone?

Posted on by

I saw a post entitled “Why BlackBerry Storm Is An iPhone (and G-1) Killer” and thought it needed a rebuttal. The post makes some very salient points on how it’s a good device, on good carriers, app store coming, etc. All good points. Now let me explain why I think those points are utterly irrelevant.

The iPhone (which I don’t own, for the record) is not compared to the BlackBerry on the same terms.  It’s not a portable email device, and it doesn’t want to be one.  To compare the two devices its more important to think about the decision-making that goes in to buying either device.

Business buy BlackBerries.  They will continue to do so.  Few businesses buy iPhones, this too will likely remain the same.  Accordingly we don’t need to take enterprise purchasing into account, as this market makes purchasing decisions based on price, security, integration, etc.  What we’re really talking about here is consumers.

Consumers who buy luxury goods are not buying things based on cold-hard fact comparison.  If you drink Grey Goose vodka or use Kiehl’s skincare products or purchase Infiniti cars, odds are pretty good you do a lot less “comparison shopping” than you do when buying mainstream products (btw, for more on this I recommend reading “Trading Up“).  The iPhone clearly falls into this category, people buy it for reasons that have little to do with technical specifications or even feature set (heck, they sold almost 8 million units before they launched the app store).

The iPhone has further achieved success because, frankly, it’s an amazing product (despite its inability to do video recording like my good ol Samsung UCH-740). It’s one of the best phones, best MP3 players, and overall best gadgets you can buy.  It doesn’t matter if the BlackBerry does “somewhat better” in almost any category, whether it’s web-surfing, email, or downloadable games.  Being “better” is far from good enough to beat the iPhone.

A recent survey showed that 22% of teens wanted an iPhone.  I don’t think these same teens are even remotely close to buying a BlackBerry (you know, like Dad uses at work).  There’s no sex appeal to the BlackBerry brand, and building a great device isn’t enough to turn it into a sexy one.  Just ask the HTC G1/Android phone that question (that thing is enough to make Nokia phones look sleek!).

The BlackBerry Storm seems like it’s going to be one heck of a BlackBerry.  Best one ever, no doubt.  Probably the best portable email device ever made.  And they will probably grab a good chunk of the existing BlackBerry market.  But kill the Iphone?  That gun’s not loaded yet, and it would take RIM years to create the combination of product/brand positioning to come even close.