Archive for the ‘Smartphones’ Category

Opera Mini 5 Beta for Android

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

Opera has released a beta of its Opera Mini 5 browser for Google’s Android OS. Mini’s signature feature is the way it caches and compresses Web pages on the server side so they’re relatively snappy on a phone even via a sluggish wireless connection. As its name suggests, Mini started out as a pretty basic browser, but version 5 is full-featured for a phone browsser: It’s got tabs, a password manager, and Opera’s Speed Dial feature that provides one-click access to favorite sites.

In my brief time with Mini 5 so far on a Verizon Droid, it felt fast but not strikingly faster than the standard Android browser (an experience which PCMag.com’s Sean Ludwig also encountered). Formatting is never as faithful as in the stock browser, and some of the sites I visited with the beta looked just plain wonky. But on the plus side, Mini let me get into one Web site–the back-end part of WordPress.com I use to update Technologizer–which I haven’t been able to access with the bundled Android browser.

Worth a look if you’re a browser buff with an Android phone (and I’m glad that Android users have the option of choosing Mini–here’s hoping that iPhone owners get to choose, too).


Rumor: iPhone OS Multitasking

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

Apple will enable multitasking of third-party apps in iPhone OS 4.0? Sounds good to me…


AT&T’s Backflip: Fresh Out of the Android Oven–and Already Stale

Monday, March 8th, 2010

More Android fragmentation madness: If Motorola’s Verizon Droid is a loaf of day old bread, then its new AT&T Backflip sounds like it’s stale beyond all recognition.


Android Market Needs Stars

Monday, March 8th, 2010

The quantity of software in Google’s Android Market app store is growing rapidly. But compared to Apple’s App Store, the Android one is still short on stuff by rockstar developers like this one. Wonder what Google is doing to make it worth their while to build great stuff for its platform?


Microsoft Phones: Verizon in April?

Thursday, March 4th, 2010

Is Microsoft planning to introduce Microsoft-branded phones? Project “Pink” is a rumor that’s been floating around for months, and at this point it’s not that interesting a question. But here’s the latest scuttlebutt, courtesy of Gizmodo: A Sidekick-like Microsoft “social networking” phone will be coming to Verizon Wireless in April. It won’t be running Windows Phone 7 Series, or at least not Windows Phone 7 Series in the form that Microsoft has been talking about.

Maybe that’s Microsoft’s strategy for entering the phone business without ticking off its hardware partners: Use a different flavor of OS for its own phones, and restrict itself to a fairly narrow slice of the market…


How Long Do You Give the Desktop?

Thursday, March 4th, 2010

One of the big subjects of debate on the Interwebs this morning is a big, existential technological question: Are phones on the cusp of replacing PCs?

Don Dodge (presently of Google, formerly of Microsoft) thinks so:

“The future of computing is that your cell phone will become your primary computer, communicator, camera, and entertainment device, all in one. The exciting new applications are running in the browser, with application code and data in the cloud, and the cell phone as a major platform.  I think in the near future there will be docking stations everywhere with a screen and a keyboard. You simply pull out your phone, plug it into the docking station, and instantly all your applications and data are available to you.”

So does Google Europe sales chief John Herlihy, as quoted by a Silicon Republic story:

“In three years time, desktops will be irrelevant. In Japan, most research is done today on smart phones, not PCs,” Herlihy told a baffled audience, echoing comments by Google CEO Eric Schmidt at the recent GSM Association Mobile World Congress 2010 that everything the company will do going forward will be via a mobile lens, centring on the cloud, computing and connectivity.

BetaNews’s Joe Wilcox basically agrees with Herlihy:

“Three years — most certainly five — is not an unrealistic time horizon at all. Even if it proves wrong, Google is acting like change will come rapidly. Last month, Google CEO Eric Schmidt asserted the company would put mobile first — yes, before the PC. There is no Windows monopoly on mobile handsets to stop Google, Apple or any other would-be mobile competitor from rapidly advancing. Cloud services, whether delivered by applications or browsers, promise anytime and anywhere access to anything.”

On Twitter, meanwhile, folks like Microsoft PR head Frank Shaw, Gizmodo editor Brian Lam, and analysts Michael Gartenberg and Ian Fogg chimed in:

@fxshaw

I am sure that Don wrote this post on his android phone.

 

@blam

just going to say, for non geeks, the phone is more accessible than the computer.

 

@gartenberg

The phone *is* important but it will not become MY primary computer, communicator, camera, and entertainment device. Nor yours either.

 

@ianfogg42

If primary = most time spent, then I think the iPhone is already my primary computer.

 

A few thoughts about this enormous topic, in no particular order:

  • Phones already are PCs–they just happen to be really small ones that don’t run exactly the same operating systems as their bigger brethren.
  • The vast majority of interesting applications are already highly mobile, networked creations. When was the last time that a brand-new piece of PC (or Mac) software was a huge deal? True, not all interesting apps are available in great smartphone versions yet. But they will be.
  • Old devices usually give way to new ones over time. But they usually don’t utterly vanish. And predictions about timetables are almost always wrong–they’re often either far too quick or far too slow.
  • A device can be both pervasive and–in terms of innovation and mindshare–kind of irrelevant. The FM radio is already there. Thinking of desktop PCs (ie, non-notebooks) as FM radios isn’t crazy.
  • I don’t see the need for large screens and full-sized QWERTY going away, ever. But there’s no reason why they must be connected to a dedicated, full-blown computing device in every situation. Like Don Dodge, I’ve long thought that we’ll end up with screens and keyboards that can talk to our phones. (I don’t think it’ll be done via docking stations, though–it’ll all be wireless so our phones can stay in our pockets.)
  • We don’t need to look into the future to see an era in which many people find phones as valuable in their own way as traditional PCs–it’s here today, and really got underway with the introduction of the BlackBerry more than a decade ago.
  • If virtually all of your data and much of your applications end up living on the cloud, the idea of a death match between PCs and phones starts to sound silly. You’ll use both–as well as great big screens like TVs–and they’ll all be portals to your real computer, which is…the Internet.

More thoughts later–I’d love to hear what you think. Here’s a silly little poll:


Apple-HTC: The Grim, Dystopian Scenario

Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010

I promise I’ll stop talking about Apple’s suit against smartphone rival HTC until further developments warrant. But the more I think about it, the more I’m struck by the parallels to Apple’s 1988 suit against Microsoft and HP over Windows and HP’s New Wave interface.

Here’s a good story over at Low End Mac on the case, as well as Apple’s earlier threats to take Microsoft to court and the agreement between the two companies that postponed the courtroom battle for a few years. In the 1988 case, the role of the iPhone was played, of course, by the Mac. And Android phones like the models mentioned in Apple’s filing are played by Windows PCs.

(Actually, the parallels between Windows a couple of decades ago and Android right now are uncanny: Windows was nowhere near as slick and well-designed as the Mac, but it was good enough that Microsoft’s licensing strategy paid off hugely. Android is nowhere near as slick and well-designed as the iPhone, but it’s good enough that Google’s licensing strategy seems to be on the cusp of paying off hugely.)

What was the upshot of the 1988 lawsuit? Apple spent four years and a lot of money on the case, and ultimately lost it. During that time, the Mac platform didn’t evolve all that much and Microsoft came up with Windows 3.0 and 3.1, the first two versions that weren’t crude jokes. In retrospect, it’s pretty hard to argue in retrospect that Apple shouldn’t have gritted its teeth and tried its damndest to beat Microsoft through technical innovation and smart marketing tactics, not before a judge.

The two situations have plenty of differences. For one thing, in 1988 Microsoft’s DOS dominated the computer market and it wasn’t entirely clear that Windows would catch on. Apple circa 2010 is a far more powerful company than Apple circa 1988, and the iPhone platform is in way better shape than the Mac was. The 1988 case involved copyright; the current one is over patents.

And who knows? Maybe there’s some alternate universe in which Apple won the 1988 case, Microsoft was forced to cripple Windows, and the two companies ended up in very different places.

So here’s the grim and dystopian scenario, and it’s grim and dystopian for Apple, not for HTC or Google: A few years from now, maybe this new case will end up looking as ill-advised as the 1988 one. Maybe Android, despite being a principal target of Apple’s wrath, will end up on most of the smartphones in the world that aren’t made by Apple–but won’t ever catch up with the iPhone in terms of general polish. Maybe people will see the iPhone as a breakthrough that lost ground to a less inventive but more pervasive competitor.

I hope not. And as we watch Apple and Google, we should be able to get a good sense of where things are going a long time before the legal wrangling ends…


Eight Naïve Questions About Apple’s Suit Against HTC

Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010

I’m not a reflexive enemy of the U.S. patent system. But having spent the day mulling over Apple’s lawsuit against HTC over smartphone-related patents, it still feels like the move is bad for consumers, bad for any smartphone-related company that isn’t headquartered in Cupertino–and quite possibly bad for Apple, too.

Now that this shoe has dropped, you gotta think that lots of other shoes are poised to drop all over Silicon Valley and Asia. Here are some questions I’m scratching my head over tonight. I suspect some people will maintain that the answers are obvious, but they’re not (yet) obvious to me…

1. If Apple wins, what does it mean for other companies’ phones? Could rival makers artfully work around Apple patents and produce handsets that tippy-toe up to the legal line without crossing it?  Or would there be a bunch of cool features that every other manufacturer would have to abandon?

2. What does Apple want? The lawsuit says it wants the court to tell HTC to stop making phones that infringe on Apple patents, and to fork over a wad of cash to Apple of unspecified size. But would Apple be equally happy collecting a royalty on every HTC phone and/or setting up some sort of patent cross-licensing agreement? Does it plan to sue every company on the planet that has anything to do with a phone that sports any feature outlined in an Apple patent?

3. What does this mean for future versions of Android? At the crazy rate at which Android evolves, there will be new versions out well before any sort of verdict. Will Google and phone manufacturers neuter them to avoid ticking off Apple even more, or will they continue on their merry way until a judge orders them to do otherwise?

4, What does it mean for Apple’s relationship with Google? We already knew that the two companies were buddies no more. Now Apple is going after Google’s Android OS by way of the hardware manufacturer that embraced it first. Can it continue to sell an iPhone 3GS with multiple bits and pieces of Google DNA, including Google as its default search engine, Gmail integration, Google Maps data, and a YouTube app? Will Apple find replacements? Will Google want to yank its stuff?

5. What about Palm? Until now, it’s been the iPhone competitor that folks most often speculated might suffer Apple’s legal wrath. Like I say, I’m not fit to render legal opinions on anything, but WebOS sure has features which feel similar to ones mentioned in Apple patents such as this. Will it get sued? Will it get scared?

6, Will other phone companies freak out? They might decide to steer clear of features that feel even kinda-sorta like ones detailed in Apple patents, just to reduce the chances of winding up in court. Even if the case agains HTC isn’t resolved one way or another any time soon–and maybe even if HTC wins.

7. What does this mean for Apple? I tend to associate software-related lawsuits with companies whose hubris has exceeded their product-development chops. (Lotus, a once-great firm, devoted much effort in the late 1980s and early 1990s to suing other spreadsheet developers–if it had focused on writing software rather than filing lawsuits, we might all be using 1-2-3 to this day.) Apple remains the most inventive single producer of personal-tech products on the planet, but this just doesn’t feel like a great sign.

And here’s question #8: What are your thoughts about all this?


The Next Nexus

Friday, February 26th, 2010

Rumor: Google’s Nexus One “superphone” will hit Verizon Wireless on March 23rd--which happens to be the first day of the big CTIA wireless show…


A Web Site is No Longer Enough

Friday, February 26th, 2010

The way in which we interact with technology has changed dramatically over the past few years. The era of light computing has begun, and social media is big enough that the average person can shape perceptions. A Web site is no longer the most meaningful way for us to interact to tell companies about their products or to use online services.

Smartphones are selling in droves, and people are using apps rather than visiting Web sites for everything from buying movie tickets to checking stocks. At any given time, it is likely that conversations about big businesses are happening on Facebook, Twitter and other social media, and those conversations can be initiated by anyone from anywhere.

This week, Apple announced that a 13 year old from Connecticut had downloaded the billionth iPhone app. Over 34 million iPhones have been sold to date, and sales of Android smartphones are surging.

What’s more, smartphones have become more affordable, as economies are scale are reached and competition heats up among platforms.

Developers are focusing on Android and the iPhone, which provide excellent tools for writing apps. Microsoft is reinvesting in Windows Mobile in a big way, Symbian has become open source, and an industry effort has begun to deliver standardized Web apps that work across platforms.

The momentum of smartphones has become irreversible, and so has the resulting change in consumer behavior. I use a Twitter app to tweet on my iPhone instead of logging into the Twitter Web site. If I’m in a rush, I’ll buy movie tickets with Fandango’s app– it’s a lot easier than zooming in to see the tiny buttons and fields on its Web site.

Web sites don’t cut it functionally, nor are they longer the best way for businesses to reach people on the Web. A mobile Web site is not the answer either, and here’s why –they limit imagination, and hence the potential to interact with customers.

One of the top selling iPhone apps is “I Am T-Pain.” T-Pain is a musician who is famous for using the auto-tune to distort his voice. The app lets people sing into their iPhones so that their voice sounds like his. A Web site gives T-Pain a presence on the Internet, but it couldn’t offer T-Pain the same recognition that his app provides.

It is also shortsighted for businesses to assume that a Web site will offer a clear picture of customers’ desires, or that the world’s greatest experts on your products are working for it. Sometimes we know better as consumers. Businesses can’t and should not prevent it from happening, but they can join the dialog.

Social CRM is an emerging discipline that recognizes that the traditional two-way channel of communication between business and customer should include interactions among customers themselves. Numerous start ups including Bantam Live and established vendors such as Salesforce offer solutions to make that possible.

Good luck having that same interaction on a company’s Web site. It likely won’t happen in corporate-run forums. Companies including Comcast recognize this, and have begun to address customers through Twitter. We can only hope that they are really listening.

How people access information is changing. It’s time for businesses to think big while thinking small to provide us with the best possible service.