My RSS » Items by Joe Wilcox

Items by Joe Wilcox

Is Apple right to ban Airfoil Speakers Touch?

Posted: May 24th, 2012, 6:54pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

If you want a gander at one of iOS 6's new features, just ask developer Rogue Amoeba. Apple unceremoniously pulled Airfoil Speakers Touch, which has been in the iOS App Store since 2009. In the past, the company has refused apps or pulled others that compete with Apple repeat functionality iOS offers. The ban hints at streaming capabilities coming in the next version, while raising questions about appropriateness or fairness. Hence the question to you: Is Apple right to ban Airfoil Speakers Touch?

"Today, we’ve been informed that Apple has removed Airfoil Speakers Touch from the iOS App Store", CEO Paul Kafasis says. "We first heard from Apple about this decision two days ago, and we’ve been discussing the pending removal with them since then. However, we still do not yet have a clear answer on why Apple has chosen to remove Airfoil Speakers Touch. Needless to say, we’re quite disappointed with their decision, and we’re working hard to once again make the application available for you, our users." Apple had already approved the removed version.

Rogue Amoeba has been here before, struggling to get the app approved. In November 2009, Kafasis bluntly stated: "The App Store is broken". The developer had to remove functionality for App Store approval, but restored it later on. "Following our post detailing the ordeal we had getting Airfoil Speakers Touch 1.0.1 through the store, we were contacted by Apple", Kafasis explained three years ago. "They indicated that, due in part to our post, they were changing their internal policies and would allow the desired behavior and artwork to be displayed". What was the problem? "Showing the computer artwork and application icons from your sending computer".

The new ban robs Rogue Amoeba of revenue, for which it has few options to recover on iOS. "As far as we can tell, Airfoil Speakers Touch is in full compliance with Apple’s posted rules and developer agreements", Kafasis says. "We’ve already filed an appeal with Apple’s App Review Board, and we’re awaiting further information. Unfortunately, Apple has full control of application distribution on iOS, leaving us with no other recourse here".

An anonymous commenter, responding to Kafasis states surely what many people suspect:

I’m going to take a wild guess and say that Apple is going to include a similar streaming feature in iOS 6 and iTunes 11, so they pulled your app for being too similar to the future feature. Disappointing though for many reasons, but purely from a customer standpoint because not everyone will be able to upgrade to iOS 6 or iTunes 11, or want to.

The app already offers functionality close to Apple's Airplay, but supports streaming from more devices and third-party services. Version 3, which released about a month ago, added support for iPad. The other big change, which just might foreshadow iOS 6 and iTunes 11: Enhanced Audio Receiving, which according to Rogue Amoeba turns an iOS device into a "full-fledged mobile AirPlay receiver. That means you can stream audio from one iOS device to another, or even send from iTunes directly to iOS. Why spend hundreds on a costly third-party AirPlay device, when you can use the iOS device you already have?"

Or in the case of Apple, why let a developer offer this functionality when iOS 6 and iTunes 11 can do so?

Airfoil Speakers Touch user MVeeH reacts: "If Apple is going to pull apps which have been around for years when they make their own version, everyone is in trouble. I love this app and I’m glad I got my copy already. Apple, this is weak sauce!!"

Do you agree? Is Apple simply curating the platform to keep the user experience pure? Is the company sacrificing a developer to avoid competition? Perhaps you see something else. Please respond in comments.

Photo Credit: Pavel K/Shutterstock

Who says Google promotes piracy?

Posted: May 24th, 2012, 3:18pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Perhaps the question should be: Who doesn't? Google search is a powerful tool for finding content of any kind, including copyrighted material posted without permission. Today Google sets the record straight, by releasing the URLs copyright holders request removed from search: 1,246,713 over the last month. These came from more than 1,000 copyright holders directed at about 24,000 domains.

Apparently more details about other copyright areas will come later. For now, search is priority, with Google planning to update requests daily. The report available on Wednesday offers data through yesterday.

"We’re starting with search because we remove more results in response to copyright removal notices than for any other reason", Fred von Lohmann, Google senior copyright counsel, says. "So we’re providing information about who sends us copyright removal notices, how often, on behalf of which copyright owners and for which websites".

The number of requests are increasing, with as many as 250,000 requests per week, or more than the total for all 2009. Does that mean there is more pirated content, or just more effort to take it down?

Top organization: Microsoft, with 543,378 URL requests. Top reporting organization: Marketly LLC, with 461,851 URL requests. Oh? You haven't heard of the company, either? I expected the MPAA or RIAA near the top. NBC Universal is third. But Marketly? The only company of that name I easily Googled is located in Seattle and lists Microsoft as a customer.

Google's von Lohman claims:

Fighting online piracy is very important, and we don’t want our search results to direct people to materials that violate copyright laws. So we’ve always responded to copyright removal requests that meet the standards set out in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). At the same time, we want to be transparent about the process so that users and researchers alike understand what kinds of materials have been removed from our search results and why. To promote that transparency, we have long shared copies of copyright removal requests with Chilling Effects, a nonprofit organization that collects these notices from Internet users and companies. We also include a notice in our search results when items have been removed in response to copyright removal requests.

Publishers have complained for years that Google holds copyright in low regard, since the company profits from searches of all kinds and its "open philosophy" in some ways contradicts long-standing intellectual property ownership tenets.

Given the number of requests, surely some, perhaps many, aren't legitimate:

We try to catch erroneous or abusive removal requests. For example, we recently rejected two requests from an organization representing a major entertainment company, asking us to remove a search result that linked to a major newspaper’s review of a TV show. The requests mistakenly claimed copyright violations of the show, even though there was no infringing content. We’ve also seen baseless copyright removal requests being used for anticompetitive purposes, or to remove content unfavorable to a particular person or company from our search results.

The revamped disclosure policy is rather brilliant, if you ask me (and no one is). Google can show that it honors copyright holders' requests, while also exposing what and whom they are. Now people fighting real and would-be copyright cartels have a weapon, too. Transparency is a two-way street.

Photo Credit: Yuganov Konstantin/Shutterstock

Google+ for Android catches up with iPhone

Posted: May 24th, 2012, 12:19pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Well, perhaps I should qualify that with "almost", depending on what matters more to you as a user. On Thursday, 15 days after releasing a major Google+ update for iPhone, the Android version arrived. Timing is interesting. According to NPD, considerably more Android users access Google+ from the browser than the app -- 16 percent to 10 percent overall reach, in March, respectively. My question for you quick downloaders, will that be true for you, or is the app now preferred? It's no idle question, because the web experience is now so vastly different from the app.

Like its counterpart, Google+ for Android offers bleeding-edge photos. Pretty much everything about Google+ bleeds the edge of the screen. The effect is immersive. You just want to scroll and scroll -- and you will since so much less content fills the screen now. But the Android version has better visual flow than its iOS counterpart. Stated differently: It's snappier, more alive. "We're building for a mobile future", Google senior veep Vic Gundotra says. That's apparent from just how different the app is from the web experience -- and how immersive.

Immersion is Everything

Immersion is critical in an app of this kind:

1. Engagement. Social networking is all about relationships, meaningfully making connections with others. Google+ distinguishes from Facebook in several key areas, with common interest being one of the most important. The Circle concept allows people to engage with others they might not know based on something important they share, while Facebook is more about extending relationships with people whom they know -- even if just casually. The app's immersive quality pulls you into Google+ and there engaging others. New capabilities, such as inline editing and integrated Hangouts, improve and extend engagement.

2. Discovery. Because Google+ is so much about interests shared in common, discovering them is crucial. Also, there's a Twitter-like quality to the Google+ newsfeed that makes finding things all the more important, and difficult. The immersive, bleed-to-edge UI and tabs like "What's Hot" improve discovery of people, interests, happenings and news -- as well as the "Nearby" tab and easy "check-in" option.

3. Time spent online. Immersive web services/apps hold peoples' attention. This time is crucial for a cloud provider like Google that deals with lots of transitory traffic, mainly from search. Catching and keeping people is:

Good for the brand
Connecting users to ancillary products or services
Providing the eyeballs for selling and capitalizing ads or other promotional gimmicks

For time spent on mobile, there is dramatic change underway. In March, according to comScore, the average American Facebook user spent more time on the site from smartphone than personal computer -- 441.3 minutes to 339 minutes, respectively. What neither Facebook or Google has done well: Wrap meaningful ads around the content, and that's an area the search giant has much to prove because 1) It's core to revenue; and 2) The bleed-to-edge design doesn't make room for ads the way one with lots more white space would.

What's Google+ 2.6 Like?

I downloaded Google+ for Android v2.6 late morning EDT on Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ and Asus Transformer Pad 300, running Android 4.04 and 4.03, respectively. I can't attest for how the user experience might differ on devices running older operating systems.

My reaction is mixed compared to the iOS version, which in some ways I find superior. Responding to Gundotra, Eric Leslie writes: "I was excited when I saw the iPhone version, but this looks like a rough port. There isn't much polish. If you're looking at a post and start scrolling down, there is a weird gradient that moves over the top that looks odd until you reach the white where the comments are. I don't see any sexy animations like the iPhone has. Come on guys!"

Beyond the visuals and improved discovery, two features stand out: Inline editing and integrated Hangouts. The latter, for video chatting, was one of Ice Cream Sandwich's stand-out features when launched last year. But as the cloud computing giant improved the feature as part of Google+, Hangouts grew clumsy, since users had to initiate them outside the social network. No longer.

"To get started, tap 'Hangout' in the (new) navigation ribbon, add some friends and tap 'Start'", Gundotra explains. "We'll ring their phones (if you want), and if someone misses the hangout, they can ring you back with a single tap".

Inline editing is a "Doh?" feature that Google should have included from day one. Who wants to post while mobile if making a typing mistake he or she can't fix later on?

Search is improved, and I find it to be better than in the browser. Google+ for Android presents options for "Posts" and "People". However, my initial reaction, which might change with further use, is that Google+ for iPhone discovery is better.

In the bullet points in the section above, I noted the value of connecting additional services. Some Google+ users aren't satisfied with how far the service has come. In response to Gundotra, Phil Lott calls the new app a "huge improvement", but then requests: "Please unify Google Talk, Google+ Hangouts and Google Messenger. These services don't interoperate the way the should, although they have very much in common. I' don't understand why I can't text someone on Google Talk via Google+ Messenger etc."

The tablet experience is superior in some ways, lacking in others compared to new iPad. Clearly neither Google+ app is optimized for tablets. On new iPad, the user taps 2X, which expands the size to fill the screen with iPhone border around the app. On the Android tablet, Google+ fills the screen, offering the more visually-appealing edge-to-edge experience. However, text and photos are much sharper on new iPad, which is in part because of the higher resolution display.

Have you used either or both apps? I'm particularly interested in how you think they compare. Important: Please state what device and OS version you use.

Geeks rejoice at Google's legal triumph over Oracle

Posted: May 23rd, 2012, 2:43pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Google couldn't have asked for better in its intellectual property dispute with Oracle. The judge turned out to be a programmer, and his ongoing guidance to the jury tempered deliberations. Then there were a couple of lucky breaks, the biggest perhaps from former Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz, who volunteered on the witness stand the company saw no grounds to sue Google. Wherever the luck, and perhaps a tenable defense, Google won big today with the jury finding that Android doesn't violate Oracle patents acquired from Sun.

The reaction, as measured by Google+ posts, is magnanimous for the search giant -- and, well, as for Oracle it's best not to whack the beaten too much more. I chose to take reaction from Google+ because it's such a techie hangout.

Had Oracle triumphed today's patent warfare could easily have become a nuclear nightmare. There's legitimate argument that a win for Google is a win for all those developers without the patent portfolios of the likes of Apple and Microsoft. Still, that scenario is possible. The judge could rule APIs are copyrightable, so Oracle may yet walk away with an industry-swaying ruling.

Perhaps those gleeful about the verdict are more vocal, since I found more of this kind of reaction. "Oracle probably shat themselves when it was revealed that their presiding judge is a programmer", Chris Droste opines.

Linux creator Linus Torvalds:

Prediction: instead of Oracle coming out and admitting they were morons about their idiotic suit against Android, they'll come out posturing and talk about how they'll be vindicated, and pay lawyers to take it to the next level of idiocy. Sometimes I really wish I wasn't always right. It's a curse, I tell you.

Tech blogger Ishaan Garg: "A just verdict :)"

"I'm quite surprised by the verdict being totally dismissive of Oracle claims, as Google somewhat took lightly some pieces of Oracle / Sun IP (albeit definitely not on the scale that Oracle claimed), but I guess that we developers and not only ! can all rejoice about this!" writes software developer Yannis Bres.

Software engineer, and ex-Googler, Cedric Beust calls the verdict: "Fantastic news!"

"Oracle you should have known it would come to this", student Candyce Moore writes. I mean, how much money did you want from Google again? 75 Trillion something like that? Which is, you know, more money than actually exists in the world".

Applications program manager Brett Freeman: "Shocker. Anyone feeling sorry for [Oracle CEO] Larry Ellison? Didn't think so. At least attorneys made $$$".

"Patent suits aren't events any more, they're a new fact of life, possibly even a new standard operating corporate strategy", help desk tech Frank Lazar writes. "Isn't that why Google's buying Motorola?"

PC World writer Katherine Noyes: "Wahoo!" Mohamed Rafiq believes that "Oracle got what they deserved and meanwhile in the process lost some friends".

"Google should give some pocket change -- $100 m-- to Oracle so that they can save face and 'settle'", systems biologist Tau-Mu Yi suggests. "These trials make me nervous. Google should have reached some type of licensing agreement with Sun back in the day".

Computer tech Brian Booher: "VICTORY!!! Now sit down and shut up Oracle!" "Congrats on the win today in court", writes student Jose Rodriguez.

"I'm actually kind of shocked by this one", Brian McClure expresses. "Not because I think Google infringed but rather that the jury had enough understanding and common sense to see through Oracle's lame arguments".

Red Hat evangelist Jan Wildeboer: "Getting myself a bottle of Augustiner Helles. And relax, knowing another babystep towards a better world just occured in the Oracle v Google case".

Photo Credit: William Perugini/Shutterstock

Who will buy Samsung Galaxy S III?

Posted: May 23rd, 2012, 11:10am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Samsung starts selling its third-generation S Series smartphone next week -- May 29, although some locales are expected to get it a day earlier (if not sooner). Our BetaNews poll, "Will you buy Samsung Galaxy S III", has enough responses -- 2,361, as I write -- to report results. Cut to the point: 36.59 percent of you won't buy the S3. At least among our tech community, there is huge interest in the smartphone, which is now available for preorders here, including Amazon.

Some of you have preordered, or will do so: 15.37 percent. Another 32.57 percent plan to order within 3 months and 9.45 percent within 6 months. Those willing to wait are likely to pay less, as national cellular carriers offer Galaxy S 3, albeit locked. The pricier, unlocked models are carrier and contract free. The poll results corroborate last week's report of 9 million preorders. In the United Kingdom, Carphone Warehouse reports strong preorder demand for the S3.

On these shores, preorder prices vary. Last week I reported $649.99 from Expansys-USA. Price today is $694.99. Either I'm dyslexic or the price jumped 50 bucks. Over at Amazon, via reseller Blutekusa, the phone is $799.99, which is more in line with the S2's debut.

A reader going by Lawrence of Arabia comments: "Yes, but I'll wait for the price to drop, just like the Galaxy Nexus". Judging by the S2, those buyers willing to extend cellular carrier contracts can expect to pay around $200. Americans ordering now should note: You won't get LTE on the unlocked phone, which doesn't support T-Mobile's HSPA+ network. You can talk but not get fast data. Those who wait, can expect fast data from whatever carrier offers the S3.

"My plan is to get the S3 upon the condition that the current specs make it into the carrier phone (or at least very similar specs)", writes Neoprimal, who should be satisfied if S2 is example. "If they don't then I'll wait and see what the next Google phone has to offer. I do prefer Google phones because of getting the updates are guaranteed, but things are changing and carrier phones seem to be getting updates on a more consistent basis at the very least".

TomasF won't buy the S3, "because it seems that Samsung and other android makers -- not to mention Google -- have no interest in implementing compliance with some of the Exchange security policies, notably the ones we use at work. Since HTC seem to be more than average interested in this and implement additional support through Sense, I went for the One X".

Reader jfplopes is considering for "right now the S3 -- and even considering the upcoming iPhone 5, I would probably still go S3 or similar Android device. And it's not because I think Android is the best thing in the world. I have both Android and iOS devices".

Will you buy Samsung Galaxy S III?

Jim Hi is simply satisfied with another Samsung Android: "I bought the Galaxy Nexus when it was released. It's still a very impressive phone, and I plan on keeping it for a bit longer. Many of the S3 specs are similar to the Nexus. I can't afford to buy an S3 just because it's new. Maybe I'll catch the S4! :)" Commenter tigerheartbambi's situation is similar: "I'm loving this samsung galaxy S III but too bad I already bought Samsung Galaxy Note a month ago".

"I would love this cool phone or whatever you call it.:-)", Anne Carpenter comments. "The big screen really appeals to me -- this sounds very cool!"

Are Facebook bankers backers or backstabbers?

Posted: May 22nd, 2012, 10:54am MDT by Joe Wilcox

What's the measure of Facebook's IPO? MBAOnline sent us a couple of infographics explaining just that (see them below the fold). But I must qualify that they don't take into account downward trends and some nasty behind-the-scenes backstabbing. Late yesterday, writing for Reuters, Alistair Barr reports that ahead of Facebook's Friday IPO, lead underwriter Morgan Stanley reduced revenue forecasts during the roadshow promoting the public offering. JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs did similarly.

Fallen dot-com stock analyst and risen tech news publisher Henry Blodget adds perspective. "This by itself is highly unusual (I've never seen it during 20 years in and around the tech IPO business)", he observes. "But, just as important, news of the estimate cut was passed on only to a handful of big investor clients, not everyone else who was considering an investment in Facebook". Uh-oh, selective disclosure violates SEC rules.

"Any investor considering an investment in Facebook would consider an estimate cut from the underwriters' analysts 'material information'", Blodget explains. "In other words, during the marketing of the Facebook IPO, investors who did not hear about these underwriter estimate cuts were placed at a meaningful and unfair information disadvantage. They did not know what a lot of other investors knew, and they suffered for it...The SEC should investigate this immediately".

The back-door revenue cuts followed an amendment to Facebook's IPO prospectus and may also have contributed to the market's somewhat cool reception. Facebook shares fell 10 percent yesterday, the first full-day of trading. On Friday, newly-minted Facebook shares closed pennies above the $38 offering price. The stock closed at $34.03 yesterday and is down 4.44 percent to $32.52 in mid-day trading today.

But before the stock's two-day fall, Robert X. Cringely put the IPO in meaningful perspective. "If you are an investment banker, you want IPO shares to go up on their first day, rising in price by at least 10 percent though no more than 20 percent. This shows the IPO is hot, the company is booming", he says. "If you are an IPO company founder and, even more explicitly, you are Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, you want your share price on the first day to go exactly nowhere, which is what Facebook’s did. That means no money was left on the table and the company got the best possible deal".

But if that's true, what were Facebook's lead investment bankers thinking? Surely we'll know soon enough. Update, May 23: Since I posted yesterday,this story exploded. See Business Insider and Wall Street Journal for riveting followups. On Wednesday, investors filed a lawsuit over the IPO.

If you've read this far, your reward -- the two aforementioned infographics -- follows the top-image photo credit.

Photo Credit: Guillaume Paumier

Larry Page: 'Motorola is a great American tech company'

Posted: May 22nd, 2012, 9:23am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Googorola is now a reality. Today, Google formally completed its Motorola acquisition, after completing the final hurdle, approval from China, over the weekend. The approval came with conditions -- that Google keep Android open for at least 5 years -- but the company had been on that track anyway.

Motorola is a big purchase, $12.5 billion, initiated in August 2011. With Motorola, Google gets an enormous cache of patents -- pending and approved around 24,000; enormous wealth in cellular research and development, manufacturing operations; and a heap load of headaches. Over the weekend, for example, International Trade Commission blocked entry to a majority of Motorola mobile products for violating a single Microsoft patent.

Questions now are many. Where will be the layoffs and how many? What kind of restructuring will there be? How will Google make Android devices without competing with other OEM partners? How will Google handle ongoing Motorola patent concerns -- either as plaintiff or defendant? On that former, Moto aggressively, perhaps too much, pursues other companies.

The first restructuring steps are underway. In a move not unexpected, Motorola CEO Sanjay Jha will step down and be replaced by Dennis Woodside.

Full text of Google CEO Larry Page's announcement:

The phones in our pockets have become supercomputers that are changing the way we live. It’s now possible to do things we used to think were magic, or only possible on Star Trek--like get directions right from where we are standing; watch a video on YouTube; or take a picture and share the moment instantly with friends.

It’s why I’m excited to announce today that our Motorola Mobility deal has closed. Motorola is a great American tech company that has driven the mobile revolution, with a track record of over 80 years of innovation, including the creation of the first cell phone. We all remember Motorola’s StarTAC, which at the time seemed tiny and showed the real potential of these devices. And as a company who made a big, early bet on Android, Motorola has become an incredibly valuable partner to Google.

Sanjay Jha, who was responsible for building the company and placing that big bet on Android, has stepped down as CEO. I would like to thank him for his efforts and am tremendously pleased that he will be working to ensure a smooth transition as long-time Googler Dennis Woodside takes over as CEO of Motorola Mobility.

I’ve known Dennis for nearly a decade, and he’s been phenomenal at building teams and delivering on some of Google’s biggest bets. One of his first jobs at Google was to put on his backpack and build our businesses across the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and Russia. More recently he helped increase our revenue in the U.S. from $10.8 billion to $17.5 billion in under three years as President of the Americas region. Dennis has always been a committed partner to our customers and I know he will be an outstanding leader of Motorola. As an Ironman triathlete, he’s got plenty of energy for the journey ahead -- and he’s already off to great start with some very strong new hires for the Motorola team.

It’s a well known fact that people tend to overestimate the impact technology will have in the short term, but underestimate its significance in the longer term. Many users coming online today may never use a desktop machine, and the impact of that transition will be profound -- as will the ability to just tap and pay with your phone. That’s why it’s a great time to be in the mobile business, and why I’m confident Dennis and the team at Motorola will be creating the next generation of mobile devices that will improve lives for years to come.

Do you think Motorola will be a good fit for Google?

Google mind reading comes to Gmail

Posted: May 21st, 2012, 3:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I'm not the biggest Gmail fan. Sure, I use the service, but my inbox fills up too fast, and managing the madness is measured procrastination. Email in general is the problem; Google's service is simply easy to blame. But a new enhancement coming in days has me finally ready to adapt behavior to attitude -- and stop being the email file clerk.

Google is in process of adding nifty contextual, autocomplete capabilities to Gmail -- that is if you find this kind of soothsaying useful. I confess to making more typing errors when Google search autocomplete tries to anticipate my thoughts. Mind reader it is not enough, so what good is all that information Google supposedly collects about us all? :) As for Gmail, the new autocomplete starts with what you've got.

Isaac Elias, Google software engineer, explains:

Now when you type something into the Gmail search box, the autocomplete predictions will be tailored to the content in your email, so you can save time and get the information you want faster than ever before. For example, you might now get lax reservation or lax united as predictions after typing 'lax' if you have received an email with a flight confirmation for your trip to Los Angeles in your inbox recently.

I shutter to think how Apple's Siri might respond if I asked for lax. Constipation cure perhaps? I sold my iPhone, so it's all snarky speculation, since I can't ask Siri.

The Gmail feature will be slow coming. "We will be rolling out improved autocomplete in English over the next few days and will follow with more languages over the next few months. While initially improved autocomplete will not be available for Google Apps customers, we plan to bring this feature to Apps domains in the future", Elias says.

Why do these enhancements all seem to come to Apps last? This isn't the first time. Is it one of those businesses aren't early adopters things?

Anyway, the change means that I'll stop filing away email. I'll clear out my inbox to "personal" and "work" folders and sort everything by search. Gmail search already is quite efficient, but contextual autocomplete is enough for me to change my wicked ways -- well, some of them.

What does this mean for anyone emailing me. I might respond within days now. ;-)

Photo Credit: SOMATUSCAN/Shutterstock

Tell me, in what alternative universe does Chrome usage surpass Internet Explorer?

Posted: May 21st, 2012, 9:07am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Surely it can't be this one, but that's what StatCounter's weekly report would have you believe. Can it be true? Has IE really fallen so low and Chrome come so far? That's my question for you, as we revive our browser usage poll.

For the week May 14-20, IE global usage share is 31.94 percent compared to 32.76 percent for Chrome. This change in leadership comes after a May 1 methodology adjustment that should penalize Chrome. Google's browser pre-renders pages to speed up search, but not all are viewed. StatCounter now adjusts for them. I must say that StatCounter's data dramatically differs from Net Applications', which on May 1 put Chrome third to Firefox and IE usage about three times more.

Regionally, huge variances appear, according to StatCounter. For example, for the same week, in the United States, IE share is 37.81 percent, while Chrome is 23.83 percent, just ahead of Firefox (22.51 percent). In China, where Windows piracy is rampant, IE gets a big boost over Chrome: 72.81 percent to 12.79 percent usage share. United Kingdom: 36.81 percent to 28.95 percent, respectively. In Kenya Chrome is 19.85 percent to IE's 18.69 percent. However, Firefox is overwhelming usage share leader: 55.25 percent. In the other three countries, Chrome ranks higher than Firefox.

About eight months ago, I polled BetaNews readers about browser usage. I long ago closed the poll, which after 4,594 votes put Chrome ahead of IE as your "primary web browser": 40.01 percent and 22.12 percent, respectively. It's time for a new one, but so I can keep it open longer browser versions are excluded. Firefox and Google release new versions about every six weeks, which doesn't give any poll of this kind much shelf life.

I'll fess up before you do. Chrome is my primary web browser, and it has been since late 2010. The reasons aren't rocket science. Google rapidly innovates Chrome, improving features and increasing benefits. Absolutely I use other browsers and should when writing about technology. But superior sync capabilities, satisfying performance, security hardiness and ongoing improvements keep me hooked.

However, I find Chrome to be a memory hog, particularly on Windows, where it poorly cleans up after closing. I typically must use Task Manager to manually close open Chrome processes.

Firefox would be my preferred second choice, followed by Internet Explorer, Opera and Safari. Apple, which should set the standard for WebKit browsers, cedes innovation leadership to Google. That's too bad, since hundreds of millions of iOS users don't have much choice. Mobile Safari is their default choice, and Apple doesn't allow truly competitive browsers in the App Store.

But what about you? Which is your "preferred" primary web browser -- that is how I rephrase the question for the new poll. I want to know the primary browser when you can choose, not when dictated by say school or workplace.

Which is your preferred primary web browser, meaning when you can choose it? (For personal computer, not phone or other device.)

Another question: Do you believe that IE usage share exceeds Chrome? I don't, and that's no disrespect to StatCounter. The data doesn't jive with NetApps, which I must admit to favoring for reporting browser usage. I think of NetApps as old reliable measuring this data. But perhaps StatCounter's methodology is superior or offers a different perspective about browsers. Certainly the weekly data caught my attention.

Is it this universe or another that Chrome is king? Please answer below and take the poll above.

Is Google+ gaining against Facebook on Android?

Posted: May 20th, 2012, 10:55am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Ahead of Facebook's Friday IPO, NPD released usage data for Android smartphones. Unsurprisingly, user reach is quite high. In looking over the data, I honed in on Google+, which makes a surprising showing for a social network not even a year old. But behind early adoption is a lesson for Google and Android developers about the app vs browser.

First, the data NPD highlights: Nearly 75 percent of Android users accessed Facebook, via app or browser, in March. But, separately for both, reach declined from February to March. However, the overall trend for the app is up. By comparison, Twitter: 23 percent web, 16 percent app. Google+ reach is 16 percent web, with the app swinging between 10 percent and 15 percent. For all three social networks, web reach exceeds the app.

"While the app may offer a more optimized/richer experience, what we do find in our research is that some mobile users just prefer relying on the mobile website for some activities", Linda Barrabee, NPD research director, says, responding to my question about app versus web usage.

Yes, but there is such preference for social networks, where apps tend to offer more features and ways to interact than mobile sites? Among the considerations I see:

User experience of Android apps versus iOS ones
Android web browser, or Chrome, experience versus apps
Habits -- on the desktop, people generally consume Google services in the browser

Barrabee doesn't answer the first. "We currently do not meter smartphone behaviors on iOS, but will be adding those capabilities in the near-term". I asked because comScore data shows Americans largely favoring apps over the browser. The second says much about developers' mobile sites as Android browsers or apps. The third needs little explanation.

Behind reach there is something more important: Time spent online -- 470 minutes average in March using the Facebook app. NPD didn't release Google+ time online data.

Surprising Reach

But is reach high, considering Google+ opened in limited beta end of June and to the public in late September? I asked Barrabee: "The Google+ number, while lower than the others, strikes me as quite high for a social network not even a year old. Would you agree or characterize it differently?"

She replies: "In looking at the relative figures overall for Google+ compared to Facebook, Google+ app reach, which was around 10 percent in March, although trending down, is higher than what may be anticipated. Website use (reach) for Google+ has been more resilient -- 16 percent reach in March, similar level as seen a few months ago -- December".

As previously mentioned, Android smartphone Facebook app and website reach declined during the same time period Google+ web reach rose. Could it be -- and I don't have data from NPD -- that more Android users are choosing Google+ favoring or replacing it over Facebook?

Social networks have a timeless quantity in that something old becomes new when shared, as is case with February blog post "I 'get' Google+ Now and Apparently so do Others (Facebook May Have a Problem)" Plusing around this week. From the text:

How many people do I know in my friends list on FB. All of them. How many of them post content that I actually find interesting? Hardly any of them. Why? Because the list is built almost solely on physical contact from some point and time in life. None of it is based on interest in the content that they are posting or that I am posting. My stream is therefore a bunch of random noise about peoples lives. Sometimes there’s something interesting in there but most of it I could do without. I don’t exactly want to remove these people because it gives me a general idea of where they are in life and an easy way to contact them. But on a day to day basis I don’t care to see what they are saying...

Now contrast that to Google+. How many people do I know in reality on G+? Very few. How many of them post content that I actually find interesting? Almost all of them. This is because I have added people and have had people add me based on what they/I have to share rather than knowing me personally. I find chains of like minded and interesting people, NEW people, through conversations in comments. I add them and they add me without feeling awkward because there is no imposing idea of “friends” or any other association outside of sheer interest in content.

His experience mirrors my own. Does it yours? Certainly, there are Plusers who agree. Manny Otero posts: "Perfectly explains why I left Facebook and why I love Google+".

Still, any Google+ gains little diminish Facebook's huge presence: The larger social network accounted for 10 percent of all pageviews on Android smartphones in March, according to NPD. That's a stunning number.

The broader lesson is more than Google+ gains or even Facebook losses. For all three social networks, web reach exceeds apps -- for highly-engaged services. Cloud service developers targeting Android users should make mobile websites at least as compelling as apps.

iPhone meets its match

Posted: May 18th, 2012, 12:10pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Finally, initial sales of another smartphone smoke iPhone -- that is if leaked numbers prove true. Samsung Galaxy S III goes on sale in 11 days, but preorders reportedly already top 9 million. By comparison, the much-lauded iPhone 4S sold 4 million units, including preorders, during its first three days of availability. At this pace, Galaxy S III is poised to be the biggest smartphone launch to date.

Samsung announced the smartphone on May 3, when I asked: "Is iPhone 4S obsolete?" Surely someone thinks so, and their answer should chill the hearts of Apple apologists and investors. Samsung, not Apple, is the rising star in the cloud-connected device firmament. Perhaps iPhone 5 will change matters. But for now, Samsung, propelled by the Galaxy S brand, broad channel distribution and smart software innovation, is brightest star.

Samsung Sales eclipse Apple's

Many of you are among those early buyers. Four days ago I asked: "Will you buy Samsung Galaxy S III?" Among the 1,195 responses so far, 18.16 percent have preordered or plan to. Another 41.59 percent plan to buy within 3 months. Less than one-quarter, 24.02 percent, won't buy the S3. Granted, the responses represent more of a gadget audience and are unqualified -- meaning I don't know who you are.

But the numbers jive with other trends. Based on sales to end users, rather than shipments into the channel, Samsung snatched overall phone leadership from Nokia and smartphone top-ranking from Apple during first quarter. Samsung sold 38 million smartphones -- 86.6 million for all handsets -- to Apple's 35.1 million, according to Gartner. Something else: Samsung accounted for 40 percent of Android sales. That's right, four out of every 10 recent Android smartphone buyers got a Samsung.

Several factors work in Samsung's favor -- and that of Galaxy S III. While the handset will initially launch in Europe, Samsung plans to rapidly reach 296 carriers in 145 countries. Apple offers iPhone 4S through 230 carriers in 100 countries. Samsung marketing, particularly its make-fun-of iPhone users campaign, is effective. For example, the first two "Next Big Thing Commercials", which first aired November 22 and December 2, affected "iPhone’s consumer perception, sending it into decline around the time the first ad appeared and continuing now," Ted Marzilli, YouGov BrandIndex managing director, said then. "At the same time, Samsung’s perception has crept up gradually and just surpassed iPhone last week".

But it's Samsung's innovation in the absence of Apple's that makes the difference. Remember, iPhone 4S wasn't the big upgrade everyone expected. In some respects, neither is Galaxy S III. Sure there's a quad-core processor, LTE and larger display (4.8 inches to Galaxy S II's 4.3 inch or 4.5 inch). But Samsung chose to pack in the big benefits elsewhere.

Apple's Luck runs Out

For that, Apple execs should consider themselves lucky that Samsung doesn't have a marketing personality like Steve Jobs and worry there's no "reality distortion field" peddler for iPhone 5. Galaxy S III promises some truly innovative software features supporting the hardware, most of which would have received "My God, Apple has done it again" blog, news and social media response if introduced by Jobs. Much of Samsung's innovation extends from the foundation that Google laid with Android 4 "Ice Cream Sandwich". Meaning: Other Android licensees can do it, too.

Will you buy Samsung Galaxy S III?

Rather than blow out the hardware specs, Samsung focused on benefits that make the phone more responsive to the user. The original iPhone stood apart from all other handsets, not just smart ones, for its humanness. Touch, and its intimacy, and the way the handset responded to your proximity gave it a human quality. Suddenly the phone wasn't an inanimate object but more living thing.

Samsung seeks to bring this quality to Galaxy S III, and it's centerpiece to the product marketing. For example, the front camera detects whether the user is looking at the phone and keeps the screen lit. How many times has your display gone dark while reading a website or ebook? The phone also can automatically turn on, if recognizing your face. The feature, called "Smart Stay", is real innovation, not Samsung copying Apple. It's also stark example of Samsung out-Appling Apple by focusing on features that offer real benefits. This and other new features match responsive capabilities to hardware sensors.

Still, hardware-wise, Galaxy S III is no slouch: 4.8-inch Super AMOLED display (306 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution; 1.4GHz quad-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage (64GB in future), expandable with microSD card; HSPA＋ 21Mbps (850/900/1900/2100), 4G LTE, GSM/EDGE (850/900/1800/1900); 8-megapixel rear-facing and 1.9MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; NFC, Bluetooth 3.0; WiFi N; 2100 mAh battery; carrier locked; Android 4.0 and TouchWiz "nature" UI. Measurements: 136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6 mm, 133 grams.

The entire package definitely entices many of you. "The iPhone is a great phone to look at but looking at a phone quickly becomes boring", Roger Seabrook comments. "I have an S3 on preorder". Dallas Twiford: "I'll be buying this phone, it's a freaking beast".

I ask again: Will you buy Galaxy S III? Please answer in comments below and take the poll above, if you haven't already.

Photo Credit: Samsung

Will you make Mark Zuckerberg rich?

Posted: May 18th, 2012, 7:21am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Stated differently: Will you invest in Facebook? The third-largest IPO in history begins today. Facebook set a price of $38 share, which values the social network at about $104 billion. Twenty-eight year-old cofounder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg will be super wealthy, if Facebook gets its price (and likely much more) as I post ahead of the market's open.

Facebook makes available 421.2 million shares. Zuckerberg maintains voting majority, 503.6 million, which at $38 is $19.1 billion, making him the 29th richest person -- wealthier than Google's cofounders.

I wouldn't buy Facebook, even if I could. I can't for conflict-of-interest reasons. Investing in companies we cover is taboo. I go further, owning no stocks whatsoever. Too bad, as Apple looked like a real bargain to me in 2003. Will you buy Facebook? The stock symbol is "FB", by the way, as trading opens.

Facebook is one of the most profound success stories of the Internet era, along with Google. College students founded companies that transformed societies all without the typical barriers that often stifle innovation. Facebook shows the Web can be the great equalizer.

Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig makes the point in his review of movie "The Social Network". He uses Nantucket Nectars, founded by Tom First and Tom Scott, as vehicle for comparing the old and new worlds of starting a business in Massachusetts:

After graduating from Brown in 1989, they started a delivery service to boats on Nantucket Sound. During their first winter, they invented a juice drink. People liked their juice. Slowly, it dawned on First and Scott that maybe there was a business here. Nantucket Nectars was born. The two Toms started the long slog of getting distribution. Ocean Spray bought the company. It later sold the business to Cadbury Schweppes.

At each step after the first, along the way to giving their customers what they wanted, the two Toms had to ask permission from someone. They needed permission from a manufacturer to get into his plant. Permission from a distributor to get into her network. And permission from stores to get before the customer…

Zuckerberg faced no such barrier. For less than $1,000, he could get his idea onto the Internet. He needed no permission from the network provider. He needed no clearance from Harvard to offer it to Harvard students. Neither with Yale, or Princeton, or Stanford. Nor with every other community he invited in. Because the platform of the Internet is open and free, or in the language of the day, because it is a ‘neutral network,’ a billion Mark Zuckerbergs have the opportunity to invent for the platform.

Zuckerberg still isn't asking permission, as he seeks to rewrite societal attitudes about privacy. This not asking defines the social network and its disruptive nature.

Facebook is just eight years old, not even six open to anyone. I joined on Sept. 30, 2006 -- not that I have used it that much over the years. How about you? When did you join? But the most recent redesigns, including the Timeline, have me more interested in the social network, even as I spend much more time on Google+. Facebook is growing, maturing, and from that perspective is ripe for today's IPO.

But as Facebook is a disruptive force, it faces another. The IPO will change Facebook. Zuckerberg will no longer be able to do what he wants -- to act without asking permission. Even with controlling share, Facebook is a public company with all the pressures (and regulations) that brings. The social network is beholden to investors now and the quarterly pressures that come with it.

That's the price Zuckerberg pays for going public -- the risk he takes for the rewards.

Windows Phone reaches for the bottom

Posted: May 17th, 2012, 4:11pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Sometimes, BetaNews readers really amaze me. Three days ago I posted "The measure of Windows Phone failure is..." based on comScore US smartphone OS market share data. To me, it was a trivial story, because I was days late writing about the numbers and posted it more as filler, being short writers (because of holidays and emergencies). More than 220 comments later, Windows Phone is hot-topic of debate among you.

Yesterday, Gartner released first-quarter global phone sales data that puts to end any real debate about Windows Phone's present: Combined smartphone OS share with Windows Mobile was 1.9 percent, down from 2.6 a year earlier but flat sequentially. The quarter-on-quarter data suggests, in context of Nokia Lumia launches, that Microsoft's mobile operating systems have finally hit bottom -- that perhaps the things won't get much worse and could finally improve.

Glimmer of Hope

Day after I posted the, ah, "failure" story, Kantar Worldpanel ComTech released data downright hopeful for Windows Phone. During the first three months of the year, market share rose to between 3 percent and 4 percent in Britain, France, Italy and the United States and to 6 percent in Germany. That's up from about 2 percent in nine countries, sequentially. Problem: Kantar Wordpanel doesn't exactly measure sales, but uses consistent panels of users to calculate market share. The approach is still much more accurate than shipments, which is the measure most analyst firms use.

Today, I asked Gartner for clarification on Microsoft share: Is it Windows Phone only or combined with Windows Mobile? "Windows Phone makes up around 85 percent of the overall Microsoft numbers you see", Carolina Milanesi, research vice president, says. She adds: "With Nokia accounting for around 60 percent".

What about Windows Phone's future? She wouldn't be specific, but says: "We will see a lift from Nokia, coming from the products being available in China from April and then later in the year with the new version of the OS and new products at different price points".

America and China

China is linchpin, because of the market's size, smartphone sales delayed from Chinese New Year and Nokia's already large presence in the country. All work to Windows Phone's benefit. But the second reason is unexpected opportunity. Sales for all manufacturers fell year over year and sequentially, and China is one reason.

"Global sales of mobile devices declined more than expected due to a slowdown in demand from the Asia/Pacific region", Anshul Gupta, Gartner principal research analyst, says. "The first quarter, traditionally the strongest quarter for Asia, which is driven by Chinese New Year, saw a lack of new product launches from leading manufacturers, and users delayed upgrades in the hope of better smartphone deals arriving later in the year".

Those delays could be good for Windows Phone, as Nokia ships Lumias in volume to China and a well-regarded brand seeks revival. Meanwhile, Lumia 900 is now available in the United States, backed by big marketing campaigns.

Gartner's sales data won't reflect the smartphone in the United States, since AT&T didn't start selling Lumia 900 until April. However, shipments should show up in first quarter data from other analyst firms -- reflecting stock shipped for store shelves. Side note: Numerous commenters faulted my referring to Lumia March sales in an earlier post; that was deliberate since reported data was for shipments (and preorders started in first quarter). However, I should have made that point clearer, which is reason for clarifying now. For Windows Phone's future, second quarter will reveal more, particularly in the countries where, according to Kantar Worldpanel, share rose in Q1.

Is There Room for Three?

The larger question about Windows Phone: Can it be No. 3? Analyst Mike Feibus thinks so, writing for BetaNews: "Windows Phone will gain serious market share this year". He believes that Verizon supporting Windows Phone will hugely impact sales. I'm skeptical.

Gartner's phone sales data suggests otherwise. Apple and Samsung accounted for 49.3 percent of smartphone sales during Q1, sign that the market is consolidating around them. While Samsung sells home-grown Bada and Windows Phone devices the majority are Android. In fact, Samsung accounts for 40 percent of all Android sales. Conceptually, that should allow room for a third major operating system, but the market is heading elsewhere, as more Asian manufacturers adopt Android. More likely scenario at this juncture: Samsung accounting for most Android sales and the rest splitting among smaller manufacturers, particularly from Asia, leading to fragmentation for most of the remaining market not consumed by Apple and Samsung.

Nokia still stands in the way of that scenario, and much depends on its continued smartphone and Windows Phone transition. However, Nokia market share slumped from 25.1 percent year over year to 19.8 percent in the broader handset market, or a 22.7 percent decline. Meanwhile, smartphones languish.

"Smartphone sales are becoming of paramount importance at a worldwide level", Gupta says "Smartphone volumes contributed to approximately 43.9 percent of overall sales for Samsung as opposed to 16 percent for Nokia".

Remember, Nokia accounted 60 percent of Windows Phone sales during first quarter.

It's hard to imagine that Windows Phone can go anywhere but up. How far is the question.

4G LTE: 1 billion served by 2017

Posted: May 17th, 2012, 12:23pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Unsurprisingly, 4G LTE is the fastest growing cellular network technology, in part for what it delivers and deployment's timing. Strategy Analytics forecasts that 4G LTE will reach 1 billion connections, or 15 percent of all, by 2017. That compares to 12 years for GSM and about 11 years for WCDMA to reach as many.

But LTE isn't gain without pain. In the United States, Verizon by far and large has the most expansive 4G network, reaching 250 metro areas and 200 million Americans compared to 38 metros and 75 million people for AT&T. Adoption still is fairly low, perhaps because phone subscribers don't understand the value. Meanwhile, Verizon will axe grandfathered unlimited plans when subscribers upgrade to LTE. There's pain for the gain.

Attitudes are changing, particularly among carriers. "It has taken some time to warm up, but operator sentiment toward LTE has improved significantly over the last year," Phil Kendall, Strategy Analytics director, says. "The LTE smartphone market is providing this sudden lift, with LTE’s medium-term potential boosted by the much greater scale in today’s mobile market: WCDMA launched into a world of fewer than one billion mobile connections, whereas we have over six billion connections today".

Here in the States, more carriers offer LTE smartphones -- the majority Androids, a few Windows Phones and none iPhones. AT&T started with the HTC Vivid and Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket in November. Since, the carrier added nearly a half-dozen more. Verizon offers about 12 LTE smartphones, while, Sprint, which is in early-stage network deployment offers two, while US Customs bars a third, the HTC EVO 4G LTE, because of a patent dispute with Apple.

"The race is on for mobile operators to reduce cost per Gigabyte (GB) to match the rate at which revenue per GB is falling, Sue Rudd, Strategy Analytics director, says. "LTE is one of the key tools to deliver this improvement, with the early volume in LTE devices an encouraging sign for operators looking to maximize return on their LTE investments".

While carriers invest in LTE, one of the most popular smartphones doesn't support the technology. Apple fakes out iPhone users, after updating iOS to version 5.1 and changing the 3G to 4G, which satisfies AT&T marketing but not what is 4G. Fake 4G marketing -- from Apple, AT&T, T-Mobile and others leads consumers to believe they have something they do not, which dulls LTE benefits.

That's good for existing HSPA+ handsets, iPhone among them, but fosters confusion, as this Saturday Night Live parody so aptly illustrates.

Samsung accounts for 40% of Android smartphone sales

Posted: May 16th, 2012, 4:26pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

The figure is so important, I'm breaking it out from the long analysis posted mid-afternoon about the smartphone market consolidating around Apple and Samsung. The South Korean electronics giant is doing to Android on smartphones what Amazon does on tablets: Hugely fragment the market around a forked operating system. I warned about this three weeks ago in post "Google has lost control of Android". Now there is sales data to back it up.

Earlier today, Gartner released first quarter sales data for global handsets. Not shipments into the channel, but actual sales to end users. Market leader Samsung accounted for 40 percent of all Android smartphone sales, with no other manufacturer topping 10 percent. Sure Samsung's success lifts overall Android smartphone share -- 56.1 percent up from 36.4 percent a year earlier. But what's good for Samsung isn't necessarily in the best interests of the broader Android ecosystem.

Samsung Rises

Smartphones accounted for 43.9 percent of Samsung handset sales in Q1, according to Gartner -- that's out of 86.6 million handsets. Samsung smartphone sales rose 25.9 percent year over year to 38 million units. One OEM is largely responsible for overall Android sales gains. Based on recent gains, it's no longer a question of if but when one licensee accounts for half of all Android smartphone sales.

That would be great if Samsung shipped pure Android. Instead, the consumer electronics company skins the OS with TouchWiz UI, which customization will be greater on Galaxy S III than any of its companions. Samsung, and not Google, controls the Android user experience and when handset owners move up to the newest version; the majority still have Gingerbread and not Ice Cream Sandwich.

Additionally, Android's continued success largely ties to a single manufacturer whose priorities are broader and in some ways out of sync with Google's and the operating system's other licensees. For example, Samsung also sells smartphones with home-grown Bada and Windows Phone, all while paying Microsoft a patent bounty on every Android. Allegiance to Android isn't assured.

Fractured Android

This fragmenting -- no fracturing -- of Android isn't just confined to smartphones. Amazon started selling Kindle Fire in mid November. By end of December, the tablet already had captured 29.4 percent US share, based on number of unique devices, putting it ahead of the Samsung Galaxy Tab family (23.8 percent). Over the following two months, Kindle Fire took sales from every other Android tablet, ending February with stunning 54.4 percent Android tablet market share. Tab family ranked second followed by Motorola XOOM, with 15.4 percent and 7 percent share, respectively. So for each, Android smart phones and tablets, one manufacturer largely accounts for the majority market share.

That would be better for the larger Android ecosystem, if not for the forking of Android. Amazon more heavily customizes Android on Kindle Fire than anything Samsung does on smartphones. The online retailer attempts to create a curated experience, offering capabilities and extended services similar to Apple's. Samsung is moving that way, too, by bundling digital content stores with its devices, for example. However, should the Note platform succeed on smartphones and tablets, a truly forked Samsung Android would emerge as platform for developers creating apps exploiting pen and touch.

Forrester Research predicts that proprietary Android will surpass the Google Android ecosystem within three years. Frank Gillette writes in report "Tablets Will Rule The Future Personal Computing Landscape": "The popularity of these content-driven devices will cause proprietary Android share to surpass the installed base of Google’s Android ecosystem in 2015. This further fragmentation will challenge Android developers, customers, and especially enterprises, and hamper the creation of a shared ecosystem".

Looked at differently, according to comScore, Apple and Amazon accounted for 71.5 percent of the tablet market at the end of February. In smartphones, according to Gartner, Apple and Samsung had combined 49.3 percent smartphone share at the end of March. In both markets, leadership splits between two companies, Apple is one of them and a single Android-licensee is the other. Something else: All three seek to provide a curated hardware, software services.

Google's Nexus Response

Yesterday, Wall Street Journal reported rumors that Google would work with Android manufacturers to offer several different Nexus smartphones and tablets concurrent with release of Android 5 "Jelly Bean". Samsung produced the last two Nexus smartphones and HTC the first. That's absolutely the right thing to do. Google needs to regain control of Android from both Amazon and Samsung, while taking more leadership over the broader ecosystem and end-user experience.

Updating is where Google's Android control is weakest, and where the company lacks leverage to offer uniform experience across devices or to assure they have the latest OS version. Last month, Google engineer Jean-Baptiste Queru put doubts to rest about who's to blame: "The part that blows my mind is that some variants of the Google-engineered flagship devices still haven't received Ice Cream Sandwich (or are stuck with older versions of Ice Cream Sandwich) because of delays introduced by operator approvals".

The WSJ report claims Google would sell the Nexus devices direct, as it recently started doing with Galaxy Nexus smartphone. These Androids would stay up to date and be pure -- free of skins or other enhancements. Google wouldn't seek to replace cellular carriers but augment buying options -- and in process provide needed competition that might compel carriers to update Android versions faster.

The point: Google is doing the right thing, but took too long about it.

Photo Credit: Samsung

Smartphone market consolidates around Apple and Samsung

Posted: May 16th, 2012, 1:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today, Gartner put to end weeks of cellular handset debate. Apple apologists disputed Samsung's smartphone success over iPhone -- the presumption that the South Korean electronics giant benefits from greater shipments vs actual sales. Make no mistake: Samsung is the global leader overall and in the smartphone category, based on actual sales. Apologist arguments be damned.

That said, Apple's position is solid. Together, Apple and Samsung combined smartphone sales market share approaches 50 percent. Contrary to speculation that Windows Phone might appear as a third dominant mobile OS, the market is set to largely split between two vendors. As I explained three weeks ago in post, "Google has lost control of Android", Sasmung's rise isn't necessarily good for the broader ecosystem.

Sales vs Shipments

During first quarter, Samsung sold 38 million smartphones, compared to 33.1 million iPhones, decisively snatching back the top spot, according to Gartner. Meanwhile Samsung represented more than 40 percent of all Android smartphone sales, with no competitor topping 10 percent. Meanwhile, Samsung stole Nokia's crown, by becoming overall global handset sales leader.

Gartner's data is the most revealing, because it represents sales to end users rather than shipments into the channel. Since Samsung first boasted about 3 million Galaxy S II sales during the first 55 days, Apple apologists have disputed the figure, and others that followed. Gartner leaves little room for error. Apple claimed 35.1 million sold, but that's really shipped, given Gartner put actual sales 2 million units lower. Samsung no longer discloses sales data, but IDC reports 42.2 million smartphone shipments during Q1. Assuming Gartner and IDC numbers reconcile, that's 4.2 million more Samsung smartphone shipped into the channel than sold, which is a reasonable number for keeping store shelves stocked.

"Shipments are not sales, and therefore they present only a partial account of the success or failure of a product or an item", Stephen Baker, NPD's vice president of industry analysis, says. He makes the distinction regarding Kindle Fire, which unit shipments plunged from 4.7 million to 700,000 between fourth and first quarters, according to IDC.

Baker observes that Amazon filled the retail channel during Kindle Fire's launch quarter. Actual sales: 3.8 million then and 1.8 million during Q1. "If you add up those two sales figures you get a number almost exactly the same as IDC’s shipment number", Baker observes. "Looking at the numbers from that actual sales perspective the concept that Kindle Fire sales collapsed in Q1 becomes absurd". The point: Only actual sales figures are truly reliable.

Market Turbulence

Sales show Samsung rising above all other Android handset manufacturers as well as iPhone. All this before the hotly anticipated Galaxy S III ships in 13 days internationally. Strangely, in Apple, Samsung has a benefactor. US Customs has stopped importation of HTC One X and EVO 4G LTE -- two fearsome Androids -- clearing away two of the S3's biggest competitors available on these shores. Officials halted HTC shipments as they evaluate whether the handsets violate Apple patents.

Samsung's rise to dominance comes during an uncertain period for smartphones, which stands to solidify its position against Android rivals and even iPhone. Overall handset sales declined 2 percent year over year to 419.1 million units -- that's down sequentially from 476.5 million handsets.

"The lower results in the first quarter of 2012 have led us to be cautious about sales for the remainder of the year", Annette Zimmermann, Gartner principal research analyst, says. "As we are starting to update our market forecast we feel a downward adjustment to our 2012 figures, in the range of 20 million units, is unavoidable".

However, smartphone sales continued their strong upward trajectory, rising 44.7 percent year over year to 144.4 million. Though, sales fell from 149 million units sequentially.

The China Syndrome

To its credit, Apple capitalized on the Chinese New Year. iPhone 4S went on sale in China 10 days before the January 23rd holiday, leading to a sales surge in the region.

"It was an incredible quarter in China", Apple CEO Tim Cook said during calendar first quarter earnings conference call last month. "Part of this was the pent-up demand for iPhone 4S".

He emphasized: "Revenue was a record, at $7.9 billion in greater China, which is up over three times year over year and brings the first half revenue for greater China to $12.4 billion. That compares to a full year of last year of $13.3 billion". Stated differently, China accounted for 78 percent of Asia-Pacific region revenues during the quarter.

Samsung also makes huge inroads to China, but didn't have something spanking new to sell for the new year celebration. That will come with Galaxy S III, which is expected to reach the Mainland long before Apple ships iPhone 5 (or whatever it's named).

But Apple and Samsung aren't alone. "The continued roll-out of third generation 3G-based smartphones by local and regional manufacturers such as Huawei, ZTE, Lenovo, Yulong and TCL Communication should help spur demand in China", Zimmermann says.

Two Market Leaders

Looking ahead, Samsung and Apple look to sop up Nokia's remains -- and for Android to solidify an already strong position over every rival mobile operating system, including Apple's. Nokia market share slumped from 25.1 percent year over year to 19.8 percent in the broader handset market, or a 22.7 percent decline. Nokia is caught between a rock and a hard place -- declining feature phone sales and Windows Phone transition -- that puts it in worse position: The Apple and Samsung trash compactor.

"Smartphone sales are becoming of paramount importance at a worldwide level", Gupta says. "For example, smartphone volumes contributed to approximately 43.9 percent of overall sales for Samsung as opposed to 16 percent for Nokia". They're 100 percent for Apple.

Samsung global handset market share rose to 20.7 percent from 16.1 percent a year earlier, or 25.9 percent increase. However, Apple sales rose considerably more, up 96.2 percent, bringing market share to 7.9 percent from 3.9 percent a year earlier. While Samsung and Apple rank first and second, respectively, in smartphones, iPhone's maker moved into third place for all handsets. Should Nokia's decline continue, while Apple rises, something quite dramatic could occur within the year: Apple and Sumsung dividing up not just smartphone sales but the entire global handset market.

Samsung's rise pulls Android along. The operating system had 56.1 percent smartphone sales share during Q1 -- that's up from 36.4 percent a year earlier. As aforementioned, Samsung accounts for 40 percent of all Android sales. By comparison, iOS share rose to 22.9 percent from 16.9 percent. However, iOS lost share sequentially -- on overall market shipments, which accentuates the decline more than it appears. iOS share fell nearly 1 point, while Android gained more than 5 points.

However, Android share gains deceive, as commoditization increases. "Most players are finding it hard to break the mould", Gupta says. "At the high end, hardware features coupled with applications and services are helping differentiation, but this is restricted to major players with intellectual property assets".

The point is crucial as patent lawsuits, the most prominent lead by Apple, stifle innovation. Here on BetaNews, I've called Apple a patent bully and troll, accused it of litigating rather than innovating and called the lawsuits hypocritical.

As patent-warfare stifles innovation and Android licensees struggle to stand apart from one another, "price is increasingly becoming the sole differentiator", Gupta says. "This will only worsen with the entry of new players and the dominance of Chinese manufacturers, leading to increased competition, low profitability and scattered market share". That's good for Apple margins and market consolidation around the two leaders.

Frak, yeah, I'd use iPad if there was Google Chrome

Posted: May 15th, 2012, 10:48am MDT by Joe Wilcox

What timing. I posted my iPad for sale on Craigslist over the weekend -- and two people are jockeying to get ahead of the other to buy it today. But I'm suddenly unsure about selling, after seeing a Macquarie Capital report claiming that Chrome will come to iOS as early as this quarter. Hot damn!

I rarely make decisions based on rumors, nor should you. Besides, the "timing is unclear, but it could be as soon as Q2 and is very likely to be a 2012 event", according to Macquarie Capital. "Could" be this quarter and "likely" this year stink of pure speculation -- or big back door should there be no Chrome for iOS this year. In the end, I'll likely sell the iPad, but must convey this: Chrome would be a very good reason to buy an iOS device but be akin to Google cutting off one limb to save another.

Shine That Tablet's Chrome

Yesterday, Ian Betteridge and I bantered back and forth about Chrome and iOS on Google Plus. He called Google services on Apple devices a "pretty good experience", to which I responded: "I would agree about the Google ecosystem with iPhone (and iPad) if Chrome was option. That's the deal breaker for me, sadly. I'm seriously thinking about selling my iPad, for that reason -- and another: Galaxy Nexus is tablet enough for me, so far".

As expressed last week, "You can have iPhone 4S, I'll take Galaxy Nexus". But there's more. I find the Google and Samsung branded smartphone good enough replacement for my iPad, too. Chrome for Android is one reason, Galaxy Nexus' super sharp, 4.65-inch, 1280 x 800 resolution screen is the other. Repeating a sentiment from my Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ review: I'd by the phone just for Chrome, which currently is only available for Android 4 "Ice Cream Sandwich", in beta.

Presumably, Chrome would be available for the newest iOS version, which means broader distribution than Android, since Apple doesn't have the same fragmentation problem. Based on number of devices accessing Google Play during the previous 14 days, Ice Cream Sandwich accounted for just 4.9 percent of the Android install base on May 1. Chrome has limited reach at best on Android, while distribution could be enormous on iOS, assuming people using the browser on the desktop go mobile, too. There, Chrome is third-most used browser and closes on Firefox, according to Net Applications.

Chrome is a huge improvement over the stock Android browser. It's fast and flows, but sync capabilities, which include active tabs on the desktop, really stand out. Last week's huge Google+ for iPhone update shows that the search and information giant can deliver exceptional user experiences on iOS. Why shouldn't Chrome be same?

A TACtical Decision

The problem: Chrome for iOS, particularly iPad, removes an important reason to choose Android tablets over Apple's. Google gains in one area, while giving up somewhere else. If Google offered Chrome for iOS right now, I'd keep my iPad. How many other people considering Apple's tablet would choose it over an Android because of Chrome? You can help answer that question by taking our poll.

In April, with considerably smaller install base, iPad took decisive mobile browser usage share lead from iPhone, according to NetApps. More broadly, in the mobile device category, Safari has 63.84 percent usage share, compared to 18.87 percent for Chrome. Google's browser could make usage share leaps competing alongside Safari on iOS devices. The cloud-connected device era is all about mobile. Google should want Chrome on market-leading devices like iPad.

If Google made Chrome available for iPad and iPhone, how likely would you be to use it over Safari?

Then there are traffic acquisitions costs, which eat into Google search margins. Macquarie Capital: "If GOOG gains market share, it could reduce our estimate for Google.com TAC meaningfully". Google pays Apple to compete with Android -- and Chrome, for that matter -- via Safari's search bar. Google's TAC goes down when people use Chrome.

Something else: Google services have a cloudy future on Apple devices. There already are rumors Apple will ditch Google Maps for a home-grown option in iOS 6. I expect to see a Siri search service someday replace Google. Chrome for iOS would be an important anchor for Google services as Apple offers more of its own from the cloud.

Even then, Chrome faces hurdles placed by Apple. Based on the browsers currently available for iOS, Safari is default for mail and other services. So Chrome would be at disadvantage, as long as Apple only allows Safari to be default. However, surely Chrome could be default for Google services -- gulp, right?

From that viewpoint, Chrome will always be better on Android. That said, Chrome on iOS ought to be pretty good, and if Google is going to feed the hand that bites it, better to extend existing services rather than pay TAC to Apple.

My question for you: Would you use Chrome over Safari on iPad or iPhone? Please answer the question below and take our poll above.

iCloud, iOS 6 and other Apple leaks are all about Facebook's IPO

Posted: May 14th, 2012, 3:29pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Apple execs all follow the same party line: They don't talk about forthcoming products. But somebody often does, perhaps coordinated with public relations folks or even careful disclosure from someone on Apple's board. Whom isn't so much important as someone does. As I've observed for years, leaks' timings are fairly consistent -- either to lift the share price or steal some other company's thunderous announcement. I can't help but see both in several seemingly strategic leaks, starting with today's disclosure about iOS 6 features.

The Wall Street Journal reports that iCloud will get new photo- and video-sharing capabilities, which include comments and availability outside Photo Stream -- meaning people don't have to own a fruit-logo product to view them. Apple reportedly is extending photo capabilities, while adding video-sharing as feature set. Today's leak follows another -- this one from 9to5 Mac, claiming Apple will dump Google Maps for its own service in iOS 6. Both leaks communicate that Apple is serious about social cloud services and search, and I don't believe they're coincidentally timed, given Facebook's imminent IPO.

Apple's Social Network

Apple is successful for many reasons, but hype is among the most important. The company thrives on rumors and speculation about what's coming next, which helps keep the share price high. Now that Apple is an all-star market performer -- a dramatic change from just three years ago -- shares lift themselves fairly easily. That said, it's still a perception stock, regardless of performance merits. An atomic bomb will drop on the stock market later this week, when Facebook goes public. After seeming years of incessant chatter about Apple's next thing or whether or not shares will hit $1,000 or $2,000 (please, someone live in the moment and get a life), all techdom and business blogs and news sites will turn attention to Facebook.

There is no Apple social network. But iCloud could be the makings of one, should Apple take cues from Google and successful upstarts like Instagram. During last month's earnings call, company execs boasted about 125 million iCloud users. That's far below Facebook's 900 million but lots closer to Google+. Today, Apple's service is more about sync and storage, but the leaks suggest social sharing features will debut during next month's Worldwide Developer Conference.

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, the iCloud features leak comes the same day Facebook announced major mobile sharing photo enhancement -- 3X larger images. If you survey blog and news coverage given to the leak, rumored iCloud photo-sharing plans trump Facebook's real ones.

Facebook's Mobile Problem

As the IPO approaches, chatter about Facebook's mobile strategy increases. According to comScore, in March, US smartphone users spent 441.3 minutes on Facebook, which is more than the greater American Internet population spent from PCs (391 minutes). That's from 78 million unique mobile or about half the total number of unique visitors (159 million).

In an amendent to its IPO, filed last week, Facebook conceded:

We do not currently directly generate any meaningful revenue from the use of Facebook mobile products, and our ability to do so successfully is unproven. We believe this increased usage of Facebook on mobile devices has contributed to the recent trend of our daily active users (DAUs) increasing more rapidly than the increase in the number of ads delivered. If users increasingly access Facebook mobile products as a substitute for access through personal computers, and if we are unable to successfully implement monetization strategies for our mobile users, or if we incur excessive expenses in this effort, our financial performance and ability to grow revenue would be negatively affected.

The problem should be obvious to any Facebook user: Where would mobile ads go? In the desktop browser they're visible but to the side. On mobile there's little place else other than the newsfeed, although I see promise in contextual ads based on searches or location-based services. But they're not really there today. Mobile isn't an opportunity for Facebook but a liability. For now.

Search, Social, Storage, Sync

That's not the case for Apple, which profits from selling devices. Advertising isn't a necessity. An Apple social network, leveraged from iOS devices potentially is a serious threat to Facebook. Surely the investment community remembers what MySpace looked like in the mid-Noughties, before Facebook opened in 2006 to the public. MySpace is now a phantom of its former social self. Then there's the hype factor behind anything Apple does and presumption it will be better.

But there's something really rotten in Apple social. During the same earnings call, Apple execs said that cumulative iOS device sales reached 365 million at the end of first quarter. Based on both numbers, either a whole lot of those devices are no longer in use or iCloud adoption is fairly modest (just 34 percent) -- likely a combination of both.

Clearly sync and storage isn't good enough, hence the social push that's sure to directly compete with Facebook. Granted, the social network is bigger, but Apple matches Facebook feature-for-feature on key platform aspects, leveraged from iOS and iCloud -- photos and video sharing (soon with comments), messaging/chat, video calling, apps, games and more. Social would make Apple a perceptual competitor with Facebook.

Today's leak shares similarities to Friday's about Apple dumping Google Maps in iOS 6, as the company takes on its two biggest post-PC competitors. There must come a point where Apple places Siri as replacement for Google search. Perhaps iOS 6, or its successor. It's Apple's four Ses of the apocalypse: Search, social, storage and sync.

Apple Manipulates

For the here and now, the leaks communicate Apple plans to take on Facebook and Google -- and artfully done as the social network's IPO approaches. Make no mistake, timing is deliberate. Apple's typically tight-lipped product development approach generally keeps software and services leaks to a minimum. Hardware is harder, because so many third parties are involved in the supply chain. For this reason, rumors about forthcoming software or services -- the latter where no outsiders are involved -- are more suspect at being deliberately leaked.

Apple effectively manipulates bloggers and journalists, particularly at a time when readership -- as measured in pageviews -- means so much more than subscribers did during the news print era. They're willing participants.

Leaks are nothing new. In Washington, D.C., during the late 1960s and 1970s, the Nixon administration crafted leaks into a state of art. It's a wonder that Washington Post reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward uncovered the Watergate scandal with so many journalists chasing Nixon White House leaks for the next big scoop.

In the 2000s, more tech companies use leaks and special events to grab free marketing and to boost perceptions about their products and even their share price. Apple has effectively used this kind of guerrilla marketing for years. But there was a qualitative change in 2008 and more so in 2009, particularly in managing news about CEO Steve Jobs' medical leave, liver transplant surgery and departure as CEO before his untimely death.

Apple's effective media manipulation -- and bloggers and journalists seem all too willing to be manipulated -- makes anything not officially announced suspect. The more coincidental the timing to something a competitor announces, the more suspicious.

Photo Credit: 1000 Words / Shutterstock

The measure of Windows Phone's failure is...

Posted: May 14th, 2012, 11:16am MDT by Joe Wilcox

There are many measures, but one piqued my attention last week. According to Nielsen, Windows Mobile US smartphone market share, based on install base not unit shipments, is considerably higher than its successor -- 4.1 percent versus 1.7 percent for newer Windows Phone. Interpret however you like: Windows Mobile is so good, many Americans stick with it; Windows Phone isn't doing well after two version releases and 18 months of sales.

Nielsen's numbers are for first quarter, when Android share reached 48.5 percent, effectively from zero three years ago (the OS debuted on one smartphone from one carrier in Q4 2008). The next two places go to iOS and BlacBerry, with 32 percent and 16 percent share, respectively. In second quarter 2011: Android, 39 percent; iOS, 28 percent; BlackBerry, 20 percent; Windows Mobile/Phone, 9 percent. So Microsoft's overall share measured by both operating systems is down by one-third in just three quarters.

Twelve days ago I asked: "Is there hope for Windows Phone?" based on modestly encouraging data from comScore that showed a brief arrest in declining market share. The analyst firm puts Microsoft's smartphone share at 3.9 percent, based on subscribers, which is flat quarter on quarter. That's actually an improvement.

BetaNews reader Christopher Micallef is puzzled by the negative reporting about Windows Phone: "Why do people always assume that falling sales with Windows Mobile means that Windows Phone is failing? Of course they are going to have falling sales, they cancelled a whole platform".

Analyst Mike Feibus opined for BetaNews last month: "Windows Phone will gain serious market share this year". He believes that Verizon supporting Windows Phone will hugely impact sales. I'm skeptical.

BetaNews reader Brandon Mills follows Feibus' reasoning:

To me, the real story is that the decision of who is going to be the third power in the cellphone wars seems to have been made by the carriers -- it's Windows Phone. Blackberry is pretty much up a creek without a paddle at the moment. They don't have a giant OS monopoly to push their platform forward with...

The writing is on the wall. RIM is gone. With less doubt about who the third power is going to be, along with leveraging Windows 8 itself and taking advantage over Android fragmentation frustration, I think Windows Phone is positioned to at least gain a moderate share in the next two years. I don't think it's going to knock Android or iOS out, but I think it'll gain enough share that it will become the established third power.

Commenter aretzios blames Windows Phone for Microsoft's misfortunes: "Microsoft signed its death warrant in the mobile space since the day it decided to abandon WinMo 6.5 to move to a totally incompatible system...From 25 percent of the market, Microsoft's share declined to 1.5 percent as WinMo users moved en mass to Android. Sometimes, when one breaks backward compatibility, there are consequences".

During the Bill Gates era, and even during Steve Ballmer's early tenure as CEO, Microsoft made backward compatibility a top-design priority. But the company started backing away from that tenet with Office 2007. Where there are dramatic UI changes, like Windows Phone, Windows 8 and Windows RT, backward compatibility isn't assured at all.

Reader Dan Goldberg is a Windows Phone fan: "I have used iPhones, Androids and now Windows Phones. I gotta say my windows phone rocks! It is quick (without having a hundred cores), better battery life, and more stable. Facebook and Twitter is integrated into the phone and is very fast to read and post messages. Don't forget my screen is much larger (4.7 inches ) and easier to read vs the iPhone".

But aretzios disagrees:

There is no or little hope for WinPhone 7/7.5/8. The reason is simple. Humdrum specs, humdrum hardware going against amazing devices such as the HTC One X/S and the Samsung Galaxy SII/SIII. Those who think that WP Phone is better than Android 4 are simply kidding themselves. Android 4 is extremely good and can provide anything that WP7.5 does and much more on top of that. In addition, most of the devices out there offer much more than any Windows Phone. And just wait, the iPhone 5 is not even out!!

Commenter keymaker remains optimistic about Windows Phone: "I think it's too early but one thing is for sure though, almost all customers reviews are all positive and these things being dirt cheap also helps a lot".

Photo Credit: Microsoft

Will you buy Samsung Galaxy S III?

Posted: May 14th, 2012, 9:45am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Eleven days have passed since Samsung unveiled Galaxy S III, which goes on sale internationally on May 29. Galaxy S III and HTC One X are arguably the hottest Android smartphones currently available, thanks in part to quad-core HSPA+ models. But HTC One X is dual-core for LTE variants hitting these shores, subsidized from carriers; no final word yet on S3. I often ask buying questions like this one right away but waited to see what pricing would pop for Galaxy S III. Expansys-USA is taking preorders in pebble blue or white for $649.99. Pricing isn't available for 32GB or 64GB models.

I call out Expansys USA, because pricing is the best I've seen so far, and it's lower than expected. The $799.99 seen most elsewhere is more in line with unlocked Galaxy S II and Galaxy Nexus when they launched internationally. Through Amazon, Techno Trading House (a new reseller to me) lists the pebble blue model for $824, available June 2, although it's only $744 purchased direct. My simple question: Will you buy? Either unlocked for no-contract price or lower locked price from a carrier with contractual commitment -- the latter an option available in Europe before Stateside?

For anyone thinking of the yet unannounced iPhone 5, Galaxy S III is the alternative to strongly consider. On May 3, I ask: "Is iPhone 4S obsolete?" Hell yeah, if S III lives up to the social software refinements.

BetaNews commenter ctkatz goes further, by comparing iPhone 4S to Galaxy S II: "I thought the iP4S was obsolete when compared to the SGS 2. Apple really hasn't introduced any new game-changing features since the first iPhone was released. It just took time for everyone else to catch up, and when everyone else caught up they have blown apple away in terms of features and enhancements".

Samsung isn't the world's No. 1 handset maker overall and in smartphones by lark. Apple is known for focusing on delivering benefits that matter, sometimes at the expense of hardware capabilities, and truly aspirational marketing. Galaxy S III evokes these qualities, with something more: real benefits without sacrificing hardware capabilities while using software to enrich the human experience.

Battery is one important area of no-compromise. GSMArena has conducted tests, and they do impress:

10 hours 20 minutes talk time (iPhone 4S is 7 hours 41 minutes)
10 hours 1 minute video playback (iPhone 4S is 9 hours 24 minutes)
5 hours 17 minutes web browsing (iPhone 4S is 6 hours 56 minutes)

Standby time also is excellent, according to GSMArena: "You’d need to charge the monstrous smartphone once every 43 hours if you do an hour of 3G talking, video playback and web browsing per day". Of course you'll do more than that.

Galaxy S III specs: 4.8-inch Super AMOLED display (306 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution; 1.4GHz quad-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage (64GB in future), expandable with microSD card; HSPA＋ 21Mbps (850/900/1900/2100), 4G LTE, GSM/EDGE (850/900/1800/1900); 8-megapixel rear-facing and 1.9MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; NFC, Bluetooth 3.0; WiFi N; 2100 mAh battery; carrier locked; Android 4.0 and TouchWiz "nature" UI. Measurements: 136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6 mm, 133 grams.

Will you buy Samsung Galaxy S III?

But the big benefits are software and services. Among them:

Front camera detects whether the user is looking at the phone and keeps the screen lit. How many times has your display gone dark while reading a website or ebook?
The phone can automatically turn on, if recognizing your face.
You're in the middle of texting someone and decide to call instead. Lifting the phone to your face places a call to the recipient.
Facial recognition identifies friends, tagging their social networking accounts. Right, Facebook and Twitter.
Voice commands are available in 8 languages.

Redwan Huq: "All these new features sound incredible. It's the first true innovation we've seen in smartphones in ages. But their fidelity remains to be tested once the phone is released".

Reviewing comments to our S3 stories, few of you expressed your buying intentions, which is reason enough to ask.

Reader ctkatz is "not getting the SGS 3...because I still like my SGS 2, and it still does what I want. This phone looks sexy as hell, too bad I'm not in the market for a new device yet".

The whopping 4.8-inch screen is too much for some people. David Jonas: "I wouldn't buy this if you paid me to, so sick of these big phones".

So the question remains: Will you buy Galaxy S III? Please answer in comments below and take the poll above.

Photo Credit: Samsung

Yahoo ousts CEO Scott Thompson, and I ask: 'What the frak?'

Posted: May 13th, 2012, 4:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

So let me see if I understand rightly. It's okay for CEOs to lie, steal, cheat, take ungodly salaries and -- worse -- huge bonuses while companies flounder, commit insider trading and abuse shareholder trust in just about every way possible, but lie on the résumé and it's adios, baby? Somebody wake me from this nightmare -- or perhaps Scott Thompson, who is out as Yahoo chief executive.

Yahoo tacitly confirmed Thompson's exit today, in an announcement about Ross Levinsohn assuming position of interim CEO: "Levinsohn replaces Scott Thompson, former chief executive officer, who has left the company". That is one big middle finger. There is no explanation -- not even a fine he left for personal reasons -- or praise for his short time running Yahoo. Thompson leaves with a big stake in his heart implanted from behind.

A Little Accounting

Before defending Thompson, appropriate disclosure: I've never lied on a résumé, generally because being honest is a personal philosophy and falsehood gives an employer easy grounds for dismal later on -- well for lowly minons like me, and perhaps you, who don't pull in 7-figure incomes (or more) for high-finagle executive positions. I expected Thompson to weather this insignifiant scandal just fine. His ouster for something so petty, when many CEOs do so much worse, is simply outrageous.

So what if Thompson's bachelor degree is in accounting not computer science? Surely, given Yahoo's financials, he should be faulted not for what he claimed, but what he didn't. Yahoo could use a little more accounting right now, and a numbers guy doing it. C`mon, Thompson didn't claim that his degree is from Harvard rather than Stonehill College. It's a little thing.

Some companies would reward such behavior. In the video clip above, Kevin Bacon interviews for an advertising job in John Hughes movie "She's Having a Baby". Bacon lies on his résumé and gets caught doing so: "Aside from your social security number, there isn't one piece of information in there that is true. You have set new standards for lying in the job market". But Bacon's résumé creative writing skills and desperation to work gets him the job anyway. He's hungry, and the employer likes that.

What's wrong with Yahoo shareholders and board of directors? Is Thompson not hungry enough for you? You can't trust him because of a little white lie on his résumé? Get a life! Losing Thompson less than six months on the job, when Yahoo is struggling so much, is disastrous. Someone else thinks so, too. Shares are down nearly 2 percent in after-hours trading. Will it be bloodbath when markets open, or will shares rise in support? Or perhaps no real change whatsoever? No matter what shareholders feel, Thompson's departure -- eh ouster -- is bad by most any measure.

We Can Lie, Just Not You

Now if only there was an example here -- public companies putting CEOs on notice for bad behavior. There's little chance of that. These execs practically get away with murder (surely some do). Sadly perhaps the lesson is something else: Don't get caught, and Thompson did.

So that's really the crime here, not that Thompson lied on his résumé but that Yahoo is embarrassed and made vulnerable by the public disclosure -- that some shareholders wanted Thompson gone. Ties are severed to protect corporate image and deflect liability from shareholder retaliation (you know, lawsuits). Thompson hangs in the wind, so Yahoo can go on.

But it's Yahoo hanging in the wind, beret of leadership. Worse, Yahoo caved to a shareholder group, by granting seats on the board of directors. If there is an example here, it's a bad one: Bully enough and Yahoo caves. Hedge Fund Third Point uncovered Thompson's résumé white lie and used it in a proxy battle for the Internet giant. As part of today's stunning Thompson departure, Roy Bostock is out as chairman of the board (replaced by Fred Amoroso), while four other members depart, too. Joining the board, as part of a settlement to the proxy fight, Third Point CEO Daniel Loeb, joined by Harry Wilson and Michael Wolf.

I'm awestruck. Eleven days ago, Yahoo said in a statement that Loeb was unqualified:

The board continues to believe that Mr. Loeb himself does not bring the relevant skill set and experience to the board, particularly in comparison to the candidates selected by the board. In addition, we believe that, based on the specific qualifications of Third Point's nominees relative to Yahoo!'s business and opportunities, the candidates nominated by the board's Nominating and Governance Committee are significantly superior to those proposed by Third Point.

So, what? It's okay for Yahoo to lie about Loeb's qualifications to serve on the board but Thompson is grossly negligent for fibbing on his résumé?

Mom is a Google girl

Posted: May 13th, 2012, 11:34am MDT by Joe Wilcox

I never expected my 70 year-old mother to ride the cutting edge of technology, but she's there, living in the cloud, which she embraces enthusiastically. What's that saying about not teaching old dogs new tricks? Perhaps you can.

Mom's daily tech is way out there, and you can blame or credit me for lifting her there. But she's a willing participant, happily adopting new habits, which in the end wasn't so difficult once she recognized the benefits. Perhaps your mother will, too, if you give her the chance. Mom uses Android phone (Samsung Nexus S), Chromebook (Google Cr-48) and Google TV (Logitech Revue). She lives in the cloud via these Google-powered devices and associated services.

Lifestyle Choice

Technology is all about lifestyle, but more highly pronounced in the cloud-connected device era, driven in part by vendors' product philosophies and marketing strategies. Choose any product company at the height of its dominance, and for some even after, there is lifestyle behind them -- Ford, Harley Davidson, IBM, Kodak and Sony, among many, many others. People choosing Linux or Macintosh during the 1990s and early 2000s made lifestyle choices different from the DOS/Windows majority. BlackBerry and Palm Pilot presented connected lifestyles during the past decade. Examples abound.

For mom, the Google cloud lifestyle works well, although it's nowhere near where she started. I bought mom her first computer, a refurbished Gateway laptop, in 1999. She used Windows PCs through 2008, when I shipped her the last iMac G5 produced by Apple (released October 2005). I did this because the Windows lifestyle wasn't working for either of us. She had a terrible experience where in November 2006 Microsoft's "Genuine" tool wrongly flagged her HP PC -- that I had set up and shipped -- as having pirated Windows XP (it most certainly did not). Occasional malware and other problems led me to offer the iMac.

The Apple lifestyle worked well for mom, and she often expressed how much she loved her Mac. It worked for me, too. I received much fewer tech-support calls from her. But in other ways, the Apple lifestyle fit poorly. She didn't own iPhone, iPod or digital camera. The Mac wasn't her hub for digital lifestyle -- as Apple cofounder positioned the platform at the start of the Millennium. Mom played a few games on her Mac, but largely the web browser defined her digital lifestyle.

Shining Chromebook

Last year, the iMac's graphics card started to fail. Mom badly needed a new computer, being in a wheelchair and relying on the Mac for information and connection to others. She gets out most every day during summer months, but she is more apartment-bound during long New England winters. A new Mac didn't fit either of our budgets. Apple demands too much to join the Mac club -- $1,200 starting price for a desktop PC.

I considered the Cr-48 Chromebook, and we discussed it as an option for about two weeks; she was lukewarm. Then my niece visited her grandmother, and to my absolute surprise she had used a Chromebook at work. That sold mom, who proactively asked me to send the Cr-48. Chromebook isn't a perfect fit, in part because mom moved from a 17-inch to 12-inch display.

Mom also had to learn new habits, even though she already spent most of her life in the browser. She also switched from Yahoo to Gmail, which better suited using an Android phone. All in all, she has expressed satisfaction with the change, with one caveat: Netflix streaming is sometimes choppy. That's more a hardware problem than issue with Chrome OS.

I'm considering a new Chromebook for her, which should solve that problem. Acer Chromebooks start at $299. Timing is right, particularly with desktop-like UI motif coming to Chrome OS. Google didn't initially release "Aura" for Cr-48, but it's available now. She must not have the motif, or I would have heard about it. I'll ask today.

Chromebook fits mom's lifestyle -- and mine, too. Google frequently updates Chrome OS, which development closely tracks with the web browser. I've had one tech call from her in 10 months, and neither of us worry about viruses. All her stuff stores in Google's cloud, so there's less concern about losing valuables in the event of hardware failure. Setting up a new Chromebook will be as easy as logging in with Google ID.

Going Google TV

In December, mom got some unexpected Social Security money and used two-thirds of it to buy a 46-inch television. What an opportunity for Christmas: I upgraded her PC with Google TV. Mom's vision isn't so good, and it seemed to me that doing email and the Web on a big-screen would be better. Plus she could stream Netflix to the television -- more sensible locale than the computer. I sent her the discontinued Logitech Revue, because of the PC-like keyboard.

Google TV was easier for mom to grasp than Chromebook for two reasons that I would never have guessed: Apps and Android. Her Android phone experience made Google TV more intuitive than Chrome OS, which surprised me; I reasoned that the browser would be the more familiar interface. Perhaps, but if you're looking for more out of any computing device, apps and customization matter more -- and these attributes made Google TV easier to use and more familiar to her.

Revue instantly appealed, and now mom moves among Google-OS devices -- Android, Chromebook and Google TV -- depending on context. The stuff that matters to her is available on any of them.

Mom lives in the cloud now. She doesn't have a digital camera; Nexus S is it. Unlike iOS, Android presents sharing options with each photo. So she can snap and share to Facebook, which is her primary social network, because that's where her kids and grandkids hang out. Or wherever else. She doesn't use Chrome for Android beta, but I need to change that. Browser sync across devices is another benefit she could use.

Mom embraced something new, and benefits greatly from changing her habits. She was always pretty flexible and adaptable, generous and good natured. She deserves better than I can give her. I remember her for lots of things this Mother's Day, but they're not tech enough for BetaNews. Her Google lifestyle is, though, which is why I write about it.

Now if I could only interest mom in Google+. :)

You can have iPhone 4S, I'll take Galaxy Nexus

Posted: May 11th, 2012, 1:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

During the last six months, I've had the privilege to use three exceptional smartphones: iPhone 4S and two Galaxy Nexus variants -- one LTE and the other HSPA+. You can't go wrong buying either Android or iOS handset, although Galaxy Nexus supports more carrier networks here in the United States. Differences that matter are more than hardware (such as size, appearance or battery life) or software (apps and operating systems). Taking Galaxy Nexus or iPhone 4S is much more. Either is a digital lifestyle choice that many buyers won't grok before paying their hard-earned cash.

I can't emphasize this aspect strongly enough. In the days before Android and iPhone, early smartphone buyers also made digital lifestyle choices, such as BlackBerry users and persistent email or Windows Mobile buyers wanting mobile Office. But today, with differentiated, connected cloud services, digital lifestyle matters more than ever, and both handsets offer similar yet drastically different experiences. You're not just buying a phone but a way of life.

Quick background: Samsung makes Galaxy Nexus for Google, with which it co-designed the smartphone. I bought the Verizon Galaxy Nexus LTE model in December and loved it. But by mid-February, I could see that my regular monthly bill would be half that for four other lines on AT&T. So, I made the hard choice: Sold Galaxy Nexus LTE for two dollars less than Verizon's early-termination, which I paid off. I then bought iPhone 4S from AT&T, as compromise and to test. But late last month, unexpectedly, Google started selling Galaxy Nexus HSPA+, which supports AT&T's network. I bought the phone and received it one week ago. I sold iPhone 4S a few days ago, via Craigslist for $500, which more than covers the new Galaxy Nexus.

I never really wanted to give up Galaxy Nexus and nothing about using iPhone 4S for two months swayed me away from the desire. For me, as it may prove true for you, Galaxy Nexus is as much about digital lifestyle as hardware, operating system, apps or cloud services.

Cloud Lifestyle

Setup. From the moment you set up the smartphones, the digital lifestyle journey begins, signing in with either Apple or Google ID, unless you need to make one. Apple ID sets up sync with iCloud. Same is true for Google cloud services, although there's no fancy name for them. From there the differences manifest, deriving from heritage -- device for Apple and cloud for Google. Apple's legacy is the desktop and extension to iPad, iPhone and iPod. Apple syncs content among your devices -- and quite seamlessly, I should emphasize. Google, which legacy is the cloud, keeps your stuff there, while syncing to the device and offering extended services.

Services. I chose Galaxy Nexus over iPhone 4S for many reasons, with digital lifestyle being among the most important. Google+ is my preferred social network, which greatly increased using Google Talk as chat client. I also use Gmail and YouTube, frequently, and many other Google services -- all which either tightly tie to Android 4.x out of the box or after installing separate apps.

Something, which I can't over-emphasize: Galaxy Nexus feels like an end-to-end product, like any iPhone. Hardware, services and software integration is tight and smooth. Google services seamlessly and broadly extend the user experience -- far beyond anything Apple offers, in part because it relies so much on Google services. Google's cloud services stack is wider and deeper, and tight integration extends them not just from the device but from you.

Sync. People with more than one Apple product are better candidates for iPhone 4S, and they won't be disappointed by iCloud's capability to sync content among devices. Buy an app or song and, poof, it appears on your devices where auto-downloading is enabled. iCloud also can sync content from your computer, such as contents of the documents folder. Google simply keeps documents in the cloud. Both services can sync and store photos, but iCloud makes them immediately available to all devices. Google sync stops with mobile.

Digital lifestyle in the cloud varies in other ways. For example, if you take photos and use any other service but Apple's or Twitter, sharing requires going to a separate app, such as Facebook, Tumblr or WordPress. Android presents sharing options for all supported apps with the photo, which is more convenient and practical, while reflecting an important philosophical difference between the platforms. iPhone is all about Apple's way, while Androids are more about your choice, which also reflects in the desktop, where live-content widgets can be installed on Android.

Surprisingly, browser choice fits in. If you live the Chrome digital lifestyle, Galaxy Nexus is for you. Chrome for Android beta is exclusively available for Ice Cream Sandwich, and sync leads stand-out features. The browser essentially captures the state of desktop Chrome, right down to open tabs. Safari offers nothing comparable and is an inferior browser, even though they share common engine. I'd buy Galaxy Nexus just to get Chrome for Android.

Hardware Lifestyle

Specs. Many hardware differences are immediately apparent, with size and screen most obvious. But others demonstrate deep digital lifestyle differences that won't be obvious to most buyers. Specs are a good starting place. What review would be complete without them?

iPhone 4S: 3.5-inch multitouch display with 960 x 640 resolution (800:1 contrast ratio); 1GHz dual-core processor; 512MB RAM; 16GB, 32GB or 64GB storage (I tested 32GB); GSM/HSPA+; 8MP rear-facing and VGA front-facing cameras; LED flash; image stabilization; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; Bluetooth; WiFi. Measurements: 115.2 x 58.6 x 9.3 mm, 140 grams.

Galaxy Nexus: 4.65-inch multitouch display with 1280 x 720 resolution (100,000:1 contrast ratio); 1.2GHz dual-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB (HSPA+) or 32GB (LTE) storage; GSM/HSPA+ or CDMA/4G LTE; 5MP rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; Near-Field Communication (NFC); Bluetooth; WiFi. Measurements: 135.5 x 67.94 x 8.94 mm, 135 grams.

Size. While Galaxy Nexus is a tad lighter than iPhone 4S, the physical size difference is monstrous. I actually prefer the Apple smartphone's smaller size; the handset is more comfortable to hold, more easily pocketed and more comely held against the ear. Galaxy Nexus looks weird -- bulky placed against the face. iPhone 4S small size works by comparison in part because the screen resolution is so high for the available display real estate.

Size is a digital lifestyle choice. Which matters more to you: Having a more pocketable phone or one with larger display, which granted is better for viewing websites, photos or videos? Do you use handset-to-face rather than wired or Bluetooth earphones and does the appearance against the head matter to you? I find Galaxy Nexus larger size advantages to matter more. However, I would feel differently if screen resolution was lower than 1280 x 720.

Screen. The displays are different in ways that also impact digital lifestyle. Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 4S render pixels differently. There's more pixelation with the Android's PenTile display than the Apple's. But contrast is deeper and colors richer, delivering better visual experience with photos or videos. However, for people on the go who look at the phone outdoors, iPhone 4S display is vastly more viewable in direct sunlight than Galaxy Nexus.

Style. I find iPhone 4S to be the more attractive phone, not that either overly excites or that Galaxy Nexus is unappealing. Style isn't just about physical appearance but extending the hardware. There, I concede, iPhone 4 and 4S have huge advantage over Galaxy Nexus. Handset owners can choose from many more cases or add-ons that extend iPhone 4S utility, such as the iPhone Panorama Lens, Glif Plus holder and the fisheye, macro and wide-angle lens set sold by Photojojo.

This is one of the few areas where iPhone 4S appeals to me more than Galaxy Nexus, but not enough to pull me back. Broader choice of add-ons is something many iPhone 4S buyers won't consider when choosing a handset but that will greatly enrich their lifestyle choice later on.

Shutter. For people living the digital photography lifestyle, the above add-ons favor iPhone 4S. By the specs, so does the camera. But specs are deceiving. While iPhone 4S wins on megapixel count (8 versus 5), Galaxy Nexus is the more convenient shooter. Photos are actually quite comparable. Some differences: iPhone 4S colors are warmer, while Galaxy Nexus occasionally over exposes. When it doesn't, shadows and areas of dark and light are a tad more defined than iPhone 4S.

For me, one difference stands out: Galaxy Nexus zero-lag shutter delivers. I'm more likely to catch that quick shot with Android than the Apple, which surprises me because iPhone 4S smaller size feels better in the hand. However, composition-wise, Galaxy Nexus' larger screen is better -- well, as long as sunlight isn't too strong.

Staying Power. Battery life is exceptional, which is paramount for any mobile digital lifestyle. Galaxy Nexus LTE and iPhone 4S are comparable, in my testing, easily going more than 24 hours with heavy usage. That's actually a knock against iPhone 4S, since there's no extra battery drain from LTE. When Galaxy Nexus launched, pundits circled around pecking about how LTE drains battery faster. I didn't believe them.

Now that I have Galaxy Nexus HSPA+, I must concede it's true. The Verizon LTE phone has 1850 mAh battery and HSPA+ 1750 mAh. On my first full recharge of the HSPA+ phone, with heavy usage, I had 31 percent charge after 20 hours. The phone finally finished somewhere above 38 hours (while I slept). On the second full recharge, Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ got to 55 hours and 7 percent left before I had to plug in -- that's with moderate use. I'm on third recharge now, where I've used the device just for Google+, email and four phone calls. Charge is 71 percent after 44 hours.

So based on this unscientific test, my HSPA+ model gets considerably longer charge than Galaxy Nexus LTE and demolishes iPhone 4S, for which longest charge with moderate-to-light usage was about 42 hours.

Support. What happens if your phone malfunctions or, gasp, you break it, such as a drop that shatters the glass? Verizon charges a hefty monthly fee with deductible to cover damage or theft. I've got nothing at all, buying Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ direct from Google. By contrast, Apple has over 300 retail stores worldnwide, is known for replacing troubled handsets on the spot and offers an extended warranty called AppleCare+. For $99, within 30 days of purchase, Apple will extend standard warranty to 2 years and replace a busted iPhone 4S for $49 -- up to two times. Absolutely, replacement protection is another digital lifestyle choice.

Connected Lifestyle

Galaxy Nexus is gateway to the purest Google lifestyle. The phone comes with the newest Android version, which is 4.04 for HSPA+ models, and there is no carrier bloatware added. These things separate Galaxy Nexus from nearly all other Androids. iPhone 4S already is purest Apple lifestyle.

Speed. As a connected-lifestyle device Galaxy Nexus exceeds iPhone 4S, starting with carrier support. AT&T, Sprint, Verizon and a few regional carriers sell the Apple handset. Verizon and Sprint sell Galaxy Nexus LTE, while the HSPA+ model available from Google works on any GSM carrier, and that includes AT&T and T-Mobile. You can't get iPhone for T-Mobile, but you can use Galaxy Nexus and get big bandwidth for data. By the way, for those people living the contract-free lifestyle, unlocked Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ is the way to go.

Data availability is another lifestyle consideration, particularly for those people frequently on the go with no WiFi access. There, Verizon's Galaxy Nexus is superior choice, because the LTE network is available in most major markets and it delivers. In my neighborhood: 27Mbps. Sprint's LTE is under construction, and its CDMA network slow -- and that applies to iPhone 4S. Sprint offers unlimited data, which doesn't mean much if you can't get it.

In my testing, on AT&T, Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 4S deliver equally disappointing HSPA+ performance. AT&T's HSPA+ network did much better before 4S launched last year. I have yet to top 3.5Mbps on either smartphone, in recent testing.

Search. Apple would have you believe that Siri is the be-all, end-all personal assistant. But in my testing Galaxy Nexus speech and search capabilities consistently outperform iPhone 4S. Siri's presentation is better, Google gets the job done.

Simple example: One of my favorite local restaurants is Bahn Thai. When listening to my request for the phone number, iPhone 4S and Galaxy Nexus equally understand, one doesn't deliver. I've tried different variations using Siri: "Phone number for Bahn Thai"; "Phone number for Bahn Thai, University Heights"; "Bahn Thai, University Heights"; Thai restaurants, University Heights"; among others. The latter used to work, showing two Thai eateries nearby. Now all answers lead to a list of Thai restaurants in San Diego, and none the one I want. By comparison, simply asking Galaxy Nexus for "Bahn Thai, University Heights" brings up Google search page with Yelp review and phone number top result.

From mapping to location services and more, Galaxy Nexus is superior to iPhone 4S. Google services are simply better and better exposed. If getting information is part of your digital lifestyle, the choice is clear. Some people will argue that iOS apps easily fill in the gaps. But tight services ties, the ability to run widgets and get alerts in more real-time fashion give Galaxy Nexus edge.

Social. Two days ago, a new Google+ for iPhone version released, and it's vastly superior to the Android counterpart. Perhaps, but that app also borrows capabilities and fit-and-finish already available on Galaxy Nexus.

For example, recent activity shows up in contacts -- a feature that works best if they're on Google+. Google Hangouts also got its mobile start on Galaxy Nexus. The aforementioned photo-sharing capabilities are superior as are messaging and chat. Then there's option to text an incoming caller. It's all about connecting, staying social, with people.

Overall, I am much more connected to others using Galaxy Nexus than iPhone 4S -- and that hugely fits better with my digital lifestyle. While the design doesn't reach out and grab me, the incredible display gives the appearance edge to Galaxy Nexus. I find Galaxy Nexus to be more responsive than iPhone 4S, while Android 4 visually appeals more than iOS 5. More significantly, the Google phone better fits my digital lifestyle.

Pull it all together and for me, Galaxy Nexus is the superior choice, and that's stopping the comparison short (I never got around to apps, for example). This post is 2,400 words, which is more than long enough. I've come back to the phone I didn't want to give up in the first place (and for anyone asking, I'm not interested in Galaxy S III). You can have iPhone 4S, I'll take Galaxy Nexus.

Unfair maybe, but Microsoft has the right to bar browsers from Windows RT

Posted: May 10th, 2012, 3:29pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Suddenly, the new Microsoft doesn't look all that different from the old one. During court proceedings for the 1998-2001 antitrust trial, government lawyers accused Microsoft of playing favorites by providing its developers access to information not available to third parties -- thus giving Internet Explorer unfair competitive advantage over Netscape. The company's browser policy regarding Windows RT isn't just much the same, it's much more. IE gets hugely exclusive access. The question: Is it anticompetitive?

The answer isn't as simple as some people might think. For example, look at Apple. Is it anticompetitive that the company effectively bars competing browsers from iOS? It's a Safari-only platform, lest browser developers work by proxy, like Opera does. Windows has an acquired monopoly on Intel-based PCs. Apple imposes one in part, by controlling everything on its platform, which is exclusive to its own hardware. Something else to ponder: Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on ARM as it does on x86. There's no position of market dominance to exert anticompetitive behavior, as could be defined under US antitrust law. Microsoft is within its rights to shut out Chrome, Firefox and other browsers while favoring Internet Explorer. But that doesn't make it right.

'Dark Ages'

"For Windows on X86, Microsoft is giving other browsers basically the same privileges it gives IE", Asa Dotzler, Firefox marketing community coordinator, says. "But on ARM chips, Microsoft gives IE access [to] special APIs absolutely necessary for building a modern browser that it won't give to other browsers so there's no way another browser can possibly compete with IE in terms of features or performance".

Microsoft's Windows RT browser censure isn't something new, but Mozilla general counsel Harvey Anderson brought the plan to the forefront with yesterday's "Windows on ARM Users Need Browser Choice Too" blog post. For good reason. Microsoft's US antitrust oversight ended last year and the company complies with a European order requiring a Windows version without Internet Explorer. Then there is the aforementioned ARM, which is outside the monopoly market defined by the courts. The court of public opinion is Mozilla's only recourse now. Anderson uses it effectively; the topic is easily meme of the day.

Windows RT's main user interface is the tile-like Metro, but there is classic desktop mode, too. Anderson explains:

Windows on ARM prohibits any browser except for Internet Explorer from running in the privileged 'Windows Classic' environment. In practice, this means that only Internet Explorer will be able to perform many of the advanced computing functions vital to modern browsers in terms of speed, stability and security to which users have grown accustomed. Given that IE can run in Windows on ARM, there is no technical reason to conclude other browsers can’t do the same...Quite simply because Windows on ARM, as currently designed, restricts user choice, reduces competition and chills innovation.

Essentially, Microsoft restricts desktop access to its own software. Anderson calls the restriction an "unwelcome return to the digital dark ages where users and developers didn’t have browser choices".

Broken Promises

But is it really? One could argue Apple is there today, by refusing Google, Mozilla and other browser developers admittance to the App Store. Windows RT will emulate much of Apple's iOS strategy: focus on touch and tablets; built-in app store; operating system available on devices only; priority given to the OS developer's apps; and platform curation, among other things. Windows RT is the least partner-friendly Microsoft operating system ever based on what little published information is available (I exclude embedded and smartphone OSes).

Dotzler accuses Microsoft of breaking its promise to developers made with the "Windows Principles" unveiled in July 2006. He has a point, although I didn't think much of them at the time. I wrote for the now defunct Microsoft Monitor blog: "Most of these principles derive from concessions Microsoft made as part of its US antitrust trial". That was then, when Microsoft was subject to government oversight. There is none now and no onus, other than bad publicity that will pass in a few days, to follow them.

Strangely, the link to the 12 principles (organized into three main categories) is dead, although the press conference luncheon transcript still exists. Dotzler provides an off-Microsoft site archive link to the principles. By my reading, Windows RT breaks the first four under the first heading and first under the second heading -- important to developers like Mozilla because it pertains to APIs.

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said during the July 2006 luncheon:

We're committing today that we will document and disclose all the APIs in Windows that are called by any Microsoft application, whether it's middleware or a standalone application like Microsoft Office or one of our Web services like Windows Live. In effect, this ensures that the rest of our industry is able to use the same technology building blocks in Windows that Microsoft's own developers are able to use.

Microsoft's browser prohibition breaks that promise, but only as applied to Windows. In a citation CNET's Stephen Shankland has, and that I can't corroborate, Microsoft Deputy General Counsel David Heiner tells Anderson that Windows RT "isn't Windows anymore". The name surely implies so. But playing Microsoft semantic games, assuming Heiner is properly quoted third hand, those Windows Principles wouldn't apply. Microsoft has an out and not the only one -- the other being no monopoly position on ARM processors.

By the way, I asked Microsoft's legal team for comment, since this all started with "Mozilla's general counsel, who raises customer choice and anticompetitive concerns. I haven't received response yet.

Like a Fox

Moral: Once a fox always a fox (no disrespect to Firefox). Microsoft changed its behavior while caged by the US government. Set free, it's true nature returns. But I see that nature differently than do the Mozilla folks. Microsoft isn't looking to gain advantage over Chrome or Firefox in a new browser war but compete better against iOS devices.

This is all about Apple, and Microsoft preserving its platform's relevancy in the connected-device -- post-PC, if you prefer -- era. There are reasons why so much of Microsoft's approach to Windows RT so resembles iOS. Microsoft is locking down the platform in ways so similar to Apple, with the browsing engine a key component of the strategy.

Earlier I asked if Apple's Safari exclusivity is anticompetitive. Under US law the answer is almost certainly no. I must apply the same conclusion to Microsoft's IE-favoritism. But what a platform vendor has a right to do and what's right to do are very different. Microsoft is wrong to alienate development partners, as is Apple. But Apple shows Microsoft how easily wrong means nothing. App Store and iOS are hugely successful without browser choice and restrictions placed on app approval. Microsoft is more concerned with preserving its platform for all developers rather than negative reactions from a few along the way.

The negative publicity will pass, Mozilla will get no redress and Microsoft will have its way. Should Windows RT be a non-starter -- a total, market flop -- none of this matters, however. Microsoft doesn't restrict Windows 8 the same way, so developers have a huge, and arguably more open, development platform.

RT doesn't matter if Windows 7 entrenches like waning XP.

Don't be phished by tweet: 'Hey some person is saying horrible things about you'

Posted: May 10th, 2012, 10:58am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Does reputation matter to you? Are you concerned what people say about you when you're not around? Perhaps you want to know what crap anonymous commenters post about you across the InterWebs? If the answer is "Yes" to any of these, you might be vulnerable to this tweet: "Hey some person is saying horrible things about you". Resist the temptation.

I got this one Monday and again yesterday. I started to ignore the tweet, but it came as direct message. So I clicked the shortened link, which brought me to the Twitter home page with message log-in failed. Immediately, I panicked, intuiting this likely was a phishing scam. Sure enough, Chrome revealed the fake URL and I backed off. But some other people haven't been so lucky, as Gartner analyst Mark McDonald confesses today. In reading his post, I realized it would be public service to share a bit about his experience and to warn others.

Most successful phishing attacks are socially engineered. Like an old-time grifter, the phisher tricks you to willingly act on his or her behalf. You give your trust on the belief there will be a benefit or some other gain. Here, the lure is compelling. Who really wouldn't want to know that "some person is saying horrible things about you"? Phishing exploits like this one abuse your trust in someone else. The two direct messages I received came from a George Washington University student; we're mutual followers, so the tweet seemed believable enough.

Something else: URL shortening masks the link's true destination. Matters could have been worse, such as drive-by Trojan planted simply by going to the fake and poisoned website. URL shortening is convenient for keeping to Twitter's 140-character limit, but it's a security liability long overdue for massive exploit. This new attack isn't the first, but surely someone someday will unleash a far-reaching Twitter phishing exploit using URL shortening to mask the destination.

What happened to McDonald could to you, if it hasn't already. Once reaching the fake site and being logged out, he braved ahead:

That should have sent off warning lights as I was already logged into Twitter and the log-in screen I was taken to was a different color than traditional Twitter blue. In the desire to find out what others were saying, I barreled ahead and proved that I was really a bit of a twit, in the UK term of less than normally intelligent person. The hook was set, the virus spread and I was there dangling at the end of the line.

McDonald essentially gave up his Twitter log-in credentials, which were exploited with some cunning and quite differently than email viruses that spread by spamming everyone in the address book:

The virus sent a few messages to a few people out of my Twitter account. The virus sent a similar direct Twitter message to about a dozen people from my follower list. The people selected were randomly distributed and it appeared to be just a few people. This spread the virus through a network of loose and more casual connections rather than processing a list of people...The viral messages did not start right away...Delay not only allowed incubation, but it inoculated itself against instant recognition.

Two hours passed before he realized what happened: "It was only when I saw a tweet saying that I lost 20 lbs by using acai berries that I knew something was up. I hate acai berries".

I received the second tweet from the same person about 12 hours ago, which means that as late as last night he didn't know about the account hack. I'll direct message a link to this story soon as it posts.

How can you easily tell if your account is compromised? Check your direct messages.

Photo Credit: Ivelin Radkov/Shutterstock

Google+ puts iOS ahead of Android

Posted: May 9th, 2012, 4:13pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

May 9 is, in a way, a watershed day for Android -- and that's not necessarily a good thing. Many developers I communicate with repeatedly say they confront the same quandary: Android or iOS first? Maybe they choose to develop for iOS, only to ask: Android or iPad next? Google is a software developer, too, and this day put its priorities in order with a stunning iOS-first update. The new iPhone app for social network Google+ is stunning, breathtaking, immersive and makes the already great experience on Ice Cream Sandwich seem outdated -- although some of the best visuals migrate to iOS.

In a way, Google sets the wrong example for its development partners by putting iOS ahead of Android. But why not? The iOS install base is larger than Android (365 million to 300 million at last reveal); countless analyst surveys show that iOS device users are more connected and engaged; and fragmentation isn't a problem since the majority of the iOS install base is on the newest version (versus about 5 percent of Androids). Google wants Plus to succeed in a big way, so improving the experience everywhere should be a priority. But iOS first, for the next big thing, is the priority.

From another perspective, the move is rather genius, even if pricks like me complain as I do above. Google likely will get more free marketing as bloggers and journalists -- and that's not just the Apple Fan Club of apologists -- drum on about the visually stunning iOS app. Buzz would be considerably lower for an Android app. Vic Gundotra, Google senior vice president of engineering, says that "the Android update is coming in a few weeks (with a few extra surprises)". So there's another chance to beat the InterWebs and in doing so generate some more free Google+ buzz. As marketing, the iOS-then-Android approach is brilliant.

Bleeding Edge

The visuals are so strong they're almost overwhelming, and I can't but wonder if Google borrowed a little something from Windows Phone and the Bing mobile app. Google+ for iPhone (version 2.0.0.5888) uses full-bleed photos and then some. Pretty much everything about Google+ bleeds the edge of the screen. The effect is immersive. You just want to scroll and scroll -- and you will since so much less content fills the screen now. It's a trade-off that works best when there is a smaller number of people in the selected circle.

"We’re embracing the sensor-rich smartphone (with its touchable screen and high-density display), and transforming Google+ into something more intimate, and more expressive", Gundotra says.

He emphasizes: "Full-bleed photos and videos are cool. But you know what’s really cool? Content so immersive it remakes your mobile device into a rich carousel of beloved memories and breaking news. That’s the Google+ experience we aspire to, and today’s release helps us get closer".

Companies so overdo the marketing hype, it's startling for an executive to express something seemingly so that actual is not. Gundotra remarks:

Today’s update pays special attention to fun and performance:

Conversations fall into view as you move forward and backward in time

Optical cues (like parallax) help the mind linger on individual posts

Important actions like +1 now float atop the stream, making it easy to endorse all your favorites

The end result -- we hope -- is an app that brings you closer to the people you care about, and the stuff you’re into; an app with sense and soul.

I can't disagree. "Sense and soul" is about right.

A Fool and His Android

The timing has me laughing at myself (although many of you already do; hey, I read comments). In February, I grudgingly gave up Verizon Galaxy Nexus, used since late December. My Verizon bill for the one account turned out to be half that of four other lines on AT&T. I just couldn't justify the expense. So I sold the phone, paid off my Verizon early-termination fee and chocked up the loss on the device to my Christmas money.

I then returned to AT&T by buying a black, 32GB iPhone 4S. Contrary to some BetaNews comments, I'm fairly platform independent. Rather than go Android again, I spent time using Siri and getting up to date with newer iOS apps. Then something unexpected occurred. Two weeks ago today, Google started selling Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ direct. Two months of iPhone 4S was enough for me. I bought another Galaxy Nexus, which I covered by selling the Apple smartphone (yesterday for $500 locally).

I'll be clear: Google+ is my preferred social hangout, and the tight integration, along with other things Google, with Android 4 hugely appeals. I received the phone Friday only to get to Wednesday and this -- Google+ getting a huge, enticing makeover for iOS. But not Android. I'm a klutz for timing.

By the way, I briefly tested the new Google+ app on an iPad late this afternoon. To be clear: It's not native iPad but works as you would expect from any iPhone app. Tiny or 2X.

If you haven't used Google+, the iPhone app is good reason to try. If you Plused and gave up, there's reason to go back. Facebook is suddenly so last century compared to this user experience.

Something else, well two things: Immersive is a word often used to describe using iPad. Google brings it to iPhone, and hopefully soon Android, and in a big way. What app is more appropriately immersive than one where you engage others.

That other thing: Google is betting big on mobile, which it should as a leading cloud-to-device provider. You may have thought you knew this, as did I, but Google+, in context of other recent product and service redesigns, foreshadows much more: Sensors, screen and soul.

Is Adobe Creative Cloud a good value?

Posted: May 9th, 2012, 12:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

It's the question I've asked myself since Adobe unveiled the subscription service in late April; it launches May 11. For me, $49.99 a month is steep. But $29.99 strongly tempts. I'm eligible for that lower pricing, and you might be, too. But to get either price, Adobe requires 12-month commitment -- and gets 50 percent still, if you cancel early. Month-to-month option is $79.99 per 30 days, or $959.88 yearly versus $599.88 for standard annual subscription pricing.

You get a lot regardless of pricing plan -- more than 20 products now and others planned (I'm waiting for Photoshop Lightroom 4.x, Adobe), offering huge savings that surely will appeal to someone. For starters: student, sole-proprietorship or small business. Among the included products and list price, if purchased (rather than subscribed): Acrobat Pro ($499), After Effects ($799), Flash Pro ($599), Illustrator ($599), Photoshop Extended ($699) and Premiere Pro ($799).

Five Questions

There are seven stand-out questions to ask when evaluating Creative Suite's value:

1. Do you qualify for lower, $29.99/month pricing? If a student or licensee of Creative Suite 3, 4 or 5, or one of the individual apps, yes -- as long as the software is registered with Adobe. That works out to $359.88 for the first year, which is an introductory offer.

2. What can you afford now? If you need, or want, lots of Adobe apps, annual subscription -- standard or discounted -- will cost less and monthly payments are easily budgeted. Meanwhile, the additional outlay is much less than buying any single app.

3. Which of your existing applications are eligible for discounted upgrades? For example, Adobe charges $399 for the Photoshop CS6 Extended upgrade from versions 3, 4 or 5 (the older two only through end of this year). If you qualify for the discounted subscription, annual payment would be less than just Photoshop.

4. What more do you need than what you have now, if any, Adobe creative apps? Most major single applications at full price will cost more than paying $49.99 per month, should you want to add something else. Meanwhile, you also get access to the newest versions of the products already purchased.

5. How often would you otherwise upgrade? Buying software gets you a perpetual license. Subscription means the software deactivates after you stop paying. Do the math: Adobe released Creative Suite 5 two years ago, and CS6 went on sale this week. Assuming, new versions every two years, would you upgrade that soon?

Subscription through May 2014 costs $1,199.76 at the standard subscription rate, with annual commitment, assuming Adobe doesn't raise prices. So at the start of the next upgrade cycle your cost commitment would be $1,799.64, spread out in monthly payments over three years but actual investment in CS6 about $600 less. Standard Design is lowest-cost edition, at $1,299. Your two-year cost would be about $100 less than the six-app bundle and you get access to more 20 products total.

Subscription vs. Perpetual License

Creative Cloud is a surprising offering from Adobe. Subscription software is by no means new -- anti-malware providers like Symantec have done this for years. But Adobe offering subscriptions to products of this caliber and pricing, primed for the cloud, is atypical outside of volume-licensing plans. The difference: Your right to use the applications ends when you stop paying, as aforementioned.

From one perspective, Adobe is taking a huge risk, given just how much Creative Suite or individual apps sell for. CS is among the costliest productivity apps that mere mortals -- meaning anyone outside the lords of corporate IT -- can afford. Microsoft Office, which arguably is used differently, sells for considerably less outside of volume-licensing. The point: People choosing subscription over perpetual license will pay less, which could cut into Adobe revenue and even margins.

On the other hand, laws of volume could work greatly to Adobe's advantage if monthly payments open up a huge number of students, sole-proprietorships and small businesses to buy into Creative Suite who otherwise couldn't justify the expense. Or worse: Who would pirate the software. The scheme also stands to woo satisfied customers running older CS versions, who either can't afford or don't see value paying for, to upgrade by taking a subscription. Perhaps most valuable to Adobe: The prospect of perpetual customers among buying segments less likely to pay for a big suite.

It's for these reasons I ask the question the headline poses.

I'm seriously considering signing up for 12 months, perhaps after Adobe adds Lightroom 4.x to Creative Cloud. But if the $29.99/month intro plan disappears in 2013, I likely wouldn't renew. On my budget, $360 is a huge value. Now. In a year, $600 likely won't be, as I look at the impressive, rich touch apps available for smartphones and tablets. Expect sudden maturation of cloud-connected device hardware and apps over the next 12 months -- good enough to displace most of what most people need PCs for today.

Photo Credit: Galushko Sergey/Shutterstock

The personal cloud is all about context

Posted: May 8th, 2012, 3:11pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Gartner is back thumping about how the cloud will replace the PC as personal hub by 2014, and, whoa, that's not exactly so far away. I wrote the "ding dong, the PC's dead" last month. After identifying five trends then, the analyst firm today highlights three things cloud vendors had better watch out for.

Simply stated: "Mobility and location"; "platform independence"; and "seamless synchronization". That aptly describes what the cloud-connected -- oh, post-PC, if you insist -- era is all about: Personal computing anytime, anywhere on anything. However, many cloud offerings fall short of that definition and the three must-have characteristics Gartner defines.

"The personal cloud isn't a single offering, but a reflection of consumers' expectation that their content will flow seamlessly as the result of a combination of services that overlap the consumer, business and government domains", Michael Gartenberg, Gartner research director says. "It encompasses content storage, synchronization, sharing and streaming, as well as context-based access".

Context? That's a fourth attribute, and hugely important. Cloud computing is all about context, if you ask me. Not that you did, but hey. That's topic for after the discussion of the other three attributes.

Mobility and location is by far the easiest for cloud vendors, providing people access to their information -- and stuff that matters most to them -- from anywhere they can connect to the Internet. Gartner views this attribute as foundational, and claims it "will affect how other connected screens fare in a given ecosystem".

Related, many service providers focus on the wrong things, such as providing backups in the sky but not much else. "Consumers are confused about the nature of the personal cloud", Gartenberg says. "This will not be helped by many vendors continuing to equate personal cloud services simply with online storage and neglecting their additional features and potential".

Platform independence is related, and this is where I see lots of vendors coming up short. Again by my longstanding definition of cloud-connected devices, they should provide access to what matters most to you anytime, anywhere and on anything. That's difficult to impossible when vendors build cloud silos around platforms, such as Apple devices and iOS.

Openness is crucial as cloud services come to augment the personal PC and replace it as major personal hub. Again, Gartner predicts by 2014. The PC doesn't go away, but simply becomes one of many devices connected to the cloud rather than being the hub for everything.

Gartner's statement: "The core purchase driver for consumers will shift from the operating system to the nature and function of the personal cloud services available to a platform. Platforms will not be judged solely by number of apps, but also by the availability of core personal cloud services for business and personal needs, for both content creation and content consumption".

This prediction represents a fundamental shift in connected-device perception and presentation today, particularly from Apple and "there's an app for that" marketing of its hardware, software and services. The future Gartner sees is more in line with Google's "open" philosophy, but by no means completely.

While writing this post I got to thinking about a 1965 Rolling Stones song, which chorus fits the approach taken by cloud silo vendors like Apple:

I said, Hey! You! Get off of my cloud
Hey! You! Get off of my cloud
Hey! You! Get off of my cloud
Don't hang around 'cause two's a crowd

Amazon takes similar approach around Kindle Fire, although its cloud services are broadly available among devices. Samsung closes on the Apple model with newer Androids, TouchWiz UI and supporting media services. Facebook is another silo, although of a different kind. Facebook service meets the anytime, anywhere on-anything standard, but it's a private club personal cloud once you're there. As I opined in September 2007: "Facebook is an operating system in the cloud".

Synchronization is what I've repeatedly called the killer app for the connected world, starting in 2006. But I typically refer back to March 2008 post "Do IT simply with sync": "Synchronization is today's killer application. It's either kill or be killed. If Microsoft doesn't strike the deadly blow first, Google will".

Gartner's statement: "Seamless synchronization will be essential for success". Apple has got seamless down but not platform independence. Too bad, because Apple has long been the sync leader, in terms of a meaningfully-implemented technology -- and that goes back to iTunes after iPod shipped in late 2001. Problem: iTunes proved to be the wrong place for sync, particularly businesses and for consumers as cloud adoption escalated late in the last decade. Last year, Apple rightly shifted its sync hub from iTunes to iCloud. Problem: It's a silo syncing content mostly among iOS and OS X devices.

Again, Google stands apart from the cloud, which isn't surprising. Apple and Microsoft, for example, share desktop legacy, which relevance they seek to protect. While Microsoft's cloud approach is less a silo than Apple's, it's nowhere near as platform independent as Google's. That said, Google has started to offer more cloud benefits in Chrome than other web browsers, shifting its cloud more to the silo from open skies.

Context, and not content, is king. How we use devices, access information, consume content or otherwise use technology to entertain or conduct business is all about context. Cloud-connected devices create all kinds of contextual scenarios.

For example, mobile devices make people more available to family, friends, coworkers and (gulp) bosses. You might shift context at the park with the kids to account manager because of one text, email or phone call. Location doesn't change, but context does. You go from parent uploading photos of the kids playing to executive collaborating on a shared document. All in the cloud, from the same device. Use of the cloud and connected device changes with context.

A very different contextual example: You're traveling and decide to rent a movie to watch on your smartphone or tablet. In that context, the smaller screen is acceptable, even though at home you have 55-inch TV. You don't finish the film and want to resume it at home on the television. Context and device change, but content stays the same. Seamless sync allows you to resume where you left off.

"Consumers will define their own sets of personal cloud services with regard to communication, collaboration and media consumption, despite vendors trying to control the digital ecosystem", Gartenberg says. Context defines usage.

The contextual cloud works best when there is access anytime, anywhere and on anything -- or as Gartner puts it: "Mobility and location"; "platform independence"; and "seamless synchronization".

Photo Credit: Digital Storm/Shutterstock

Android rises over fallen iPhone

Posted: May 8th, 2012, 11:13am MDT by Joe Wilcox

I must really be asleep at the wheel. How could I have possibly missed this nearly week-old sales data: iPhone's fourth-quarter sales surge against Android was a blip on the screen. Chock it up to iPhone 4S launch combined with the saddest of sales motivators: Rock star's death halo, where album sales soar following an artist's death, or in this case iPhone following Apple cofounder Steve Jobs' tragic passing. Perhaps you have another reason. Regardless, sales don't lie.

Android smartphone OS market share, as measured in actual sales to people (and not shipments to stores), reached 61 percent during Q1 compared to a measly 29 percent for iOS/iPhone. That's a dramatic turnabout from fourth quarter when Android led by a narrower margin -- 48 percent to 43 percent. Still, like fourth quarter, the top-three selling smartphones were iPhone, iPhone and iPhone, as in 4S, 4 and 3GS in that order.

"After some release of pent-up demand from customers adopting the iPhone 4S, coupled with the company's strength in the holiday season, Apple's share fell in the first quarter, as we've often see it do in the quarter following its introduction of a new handset", Ross Rubin, NPD executive director, says.

Ah, yeah, but declines were never this steep nor iPhone coming so close to finally catching Android. In fact, historical data contradicts earlier projections that both iPhone 4 launches would bring huge share gains. For example, according to comScore, from August to November 2010, iPhone US subscriber share rose less than one point -- to 25 percent. This was during the post-iPhone 4 launch period. Over the next year, iPhone nudged up to about 27 percent average share, while Android soared, whether measured by install base or new purchasers.

Different now: Distribution, particularly availability of lower-cost older models, to a new market of buyers, combined with broadened carrier availability. "Now that the iPhone is available on Sprint, though, the increased carrier coverage has created a higher baseline for Apple's share than we have seen in the past". Baseline is higher, but so is size of the US smartphone market and strength of Android's resurgence. iPhone sales drop was greater compared to Androids' but didn't fall as far.

Nielsen presents smartphone data differently -- market share based on ownership. By that measure, Android is 48.5 percent to iOS/iPhone's 32 percent. That data point validates Rubin's contention about baseline.

Historical perspective: Android share was 39 percent in June 2011 compared to 28 percent for iPhone, says Nielsen. Android share reached 40 percent in July, compared to 28 percent for iPhone. At end of third quarter, 43 percent for Android and 28 percent for iPhone. At the end of December: Android 44.5 percent to iPhone's 25.1 percent share.

Android sales may have crushed iOS smartphones during first quarter, but as measure of install base iPhone is stronger than it has ever been. Meanwhile, Android no longer gains share like Pac-Man. But neither is iPhone nearly as strong as the Apple Fan Club boasts.

For more perspective there is Samsung's continued gains against Apple. During first quarter Apple was top-selling smartphone maker, according to NPD, with 29 percent sales share. But Samsung closes in, at 25 percent share.

"Samsung is the only market leader from the feature phone era to transition to market leadership in the smartphone era in the US", Rubins observes. "Its broad carrier support and advertising, particularly in the ascendant pre-paid segment, have helped it achieve the highest market share among Android handset providers".

Samsung has a three-operating system strategy, which includes home-grown Bada and Windows Phone, but Android is flagship. Samsung's rise counterweights iPhone's increased baseline. Samsung also benefits from far greater distribution and choice of handsets. Then there is Galaxy S III, which launches internationally on May 29 with features eclipsing iPhone 4S.

No matter who rises above whom, competition is good for consumer choice.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

The mobile web is dead

Posted: May 7th, 2012, 1:24pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today, comScore released startling data about the mobile web, which bodes poorly for the browser. In March, the web browser accounted for just 18.5 percent of time spent online among US smartphone users. Mobile apps accounted for the rest. Now we know why Safari for iOS capabilities advance so sparingly: Apple sees it as irrelevant. Stated differently: Safari is to mobile what Internet Explorer 6 was to the desktop 10 years ago. Apps matter more to both developers.

Qualifying that one country does not the whole world make, the US data nevertheless foreshadows future trends and illuminates the past, demonstrating the wisdom of Apple's 2008 turnabout. When iPhone launched in June 2007, cofounder Steve Jobs couldn't say enough about Safari as a key user benefit. But by early 2008, Jobs and company shifted emphasis to the App Store, which launched in July of that year. In essence, Apple bet against the web after foaming at the mouth about open standards. Apps better fit Apple's "our way or the highway" approach to end-to-end hardware, software and supporting services. Only Google can save the mobile web now.

Apple and Microsoft singing in a Tree

Apple and Microsoft command the dominate web browsers in their respective platform markets. Following IE6's release more than a decade ago, Internet Explorer usage share exceeded 90 percent. Microsoft won the browser wars only to abandon browser development, presenting a barrier to the web competing with Windows as a platform for applications. Microsoft only reinvigorated browser development after Mozilla started earnestly working on Firefox, which released in December 2004. Microsoft's choice letting IE lay fallow proved costly, following the start of a new browser war supported by search profits. By April 2012, Internet Explorer usage share had fallen to 54.1 percent, according to Net Applications.

Apple's situation is somewhat different, but it's reasons for Safari's sorry state aren't far removed from Microsoft protecting its core platform. Apple sees more direct benefits, particularly hardware sales, from apps tied to its platform. Jobs' short Safari lovefest ended quickly. Open isn't in Apple's DNA -- that despite releasing WebKit to open source. The company thrives where it contrives.

But Apple's app-centric push, like Microsoft's, succeeds largely in part because of browser success. Safari overwhelmingly leads the mobile browser market, with 63.8 percent usage share in April, according to NetApps. Android is distant second, with 18.9 percent usage share. Stale Safari offers capable-enough browsing, holding the mobile web at bay, while apps advance.

iOS Apps gape Safari

The strategy is overwhelmingly successful. For example, visitors to Apple sites from smartphones spend 99.7 percent of their time there in an app, according to comScore. That's right, almost no one uses the browser. The number hugely validates Apple's app approach over Safari, since there is no real alternative on iOS. Apple doesn't approve competing browsers for the App Store, lest, like Opera Mini, they use a proxy method to function.

In an April 2010 analysis, I explained how "Apple, Google battle for the mobile Web". The post offers context relevant to what has happened two years later; give it a refresher read. This paragraph sums up the main point:

In approaching the mobile Web, Apple leverages its strengths as an end-to-end hardware/software developer. By comparison, Google already offers services in the cloud via the browser. Apple's worldview is more applications-centric while Google's is more Web-centric. Apple wants to pull computational and informational relevance to applications, while Google seeks to shift relevance to the Web.

Apple's lackluster Safari development persists on the desktop, too, where the emphasis is keeping apps more relevant. Google revs a new Chrome version every six weeks. And Safari? Apple generally only makes major, new features available when releasing new operating systems -- as does Microsoft.

Google pushes apps and the browser on mobiles, with increasing emphasis on its services. In February, Google extended its Chrome commitment to mobile, by releasing a compelling beta for Android 4. It's a superb mobile browser, and I'd buy an Android phone just to get Chrome.

Google bets on Both

But Google isn't betting a one-horse race. I observed two years ago: "There also are hints Google is directionally changing towards Apple. Google is unifying applications and services and offering more mobile apps for different mobile platforms. Google also is integrating apps and services around Android handsets". That's exactly the situation today, as comScore reveals.

In March, US smartphone users spent 81.1 percent of their time on Google sites in an app. While considerably lower than Apple, browser still accounted for less than 20 percent of the time. Google's hybrid approach, of apps and browser, closely tied to its services pays off in time spent online. Including top-ranked Google Play, the top four Android apps go to Google services and six out of the top 10. By comparison, top-ranked iTunes (which includes apps) is the only Apple app to make the top 10. Apple doesn't offer the same breadth of disparate cloud services as Google, but I find the data unbelievable. Surely Apple's mail app ranks highly, as Gmail does on Android.

What I wonder, how much do Wikimedia sites account for all smartphone browser engagements, since 99.8 percent of the time spent there in March was in a browser. That despite dedicated Wikipedia apps for Android and iOS as alternatives.

So outside Wikipedia, the mobile web is dead. It's mostly apps now. That said, Google continues aggressive browser development despite Apple's lackluster Safari commitment. Imagine if Chrome came to iOS how the mobile web's fortune might change. Surely in some, wayward alternate universe it has, but here.

Photo Credit: Jannis Tobias Werner/Shutterstock

Google+ gets a killer app

Posted: May 7th, 2012, 9:59am MDT by Joe Wilcox

What do you get when Google+ and YouTube reproduce? Hangouts on Air, which today is available globally -- well, if that's how you view 20 countries (or so it looks from the list I see). My question: What does this mean for the future of services like USTREAM? Given Google's reach with search and video services, and the growing social network, coupled with Google Plus Your World, my answer is "uh-oh".

Google+ debuted nearly 11 months ago in beta, with the Hangouts video-sharing service being one of its stand-out, and stand-apart-from-Facebook, features. Hangouts lets Google+ users video chat with up to 10 people. In September 2011, Google+ opened to the public, with big upgrades to Hangouts: "On Air", which allows watching beyond the 10 participants; mobile broadcasting for Android 2.3 and above; and collaboration, which reached beyond YouTube to shared screens, sketchpads and Docs. Today's broadened availability is all about enabling millions of self-broadcasters to reach wide audiences at low cost.

The concept isn't by any means new. Services like BlogTV, Livestream, Qik, USTREAM and even YouTube, among others, enabled anyone to self-broadcast, long before Hangouts on Air. Professionals use these services but also many individuals to reach broader audiences. Now anyone with a cell phone can broadcast live from major events, as we saw from protests during the Arab Spring, or hold concerts in their living room. Hangouts on Air evolves the concept by combing social context with Google's massive reach.

Google+ has many differentiating features going for it, like Circles, compared to Facebook and other social networks. What it doesn't have is a killer app, until now. Facebook's compelling appeal is size, not any one feature or even many. With more than 850 million users, most anyone knows someone who's there. Google+ has over 100 million users, commendable for a social network not even a year old, but hardly proven success.

Over the weekend my daughter told me: "Me and my friends all tried out Google+. It just didn't stick". Her word usage surprised me, because "sticky" is industry lingo used to describe certain products or services. The stickier, the more likely people are to adopt and stay. Facebook and Tumblr are sticky to my daughter, because that's where her friends hangout. What? Do you go to a new, fancy restaurant to eat alone or do you march down to the greasy spoon where your friends go? Google+ is that new eatery.

Less than two weeks after Google+ private beta launched, in early July 2011, Facebook added video calling capabilities -- but one-to-one rather than Hangouts' up to 10 people. Skype provides the video capability to Facebook. Social distinguishes Hangouts from Facebook's service and now the ability to self-broadcast. Sure, Skype standalone allows video chatting among groups, but there's no broader social network context. Still, established services like USTREAM or startups like Spreecast make social video or self-broadcasting available to Facebookers.

But Hangouts on Air is slicker, integrated with the social network and leverages YouTube's enormous reach coupled with Google search. What good is any self-broadcast if no one can find it? YouTube's pull cannot be understated. Continuing a longstanding trend, Google sites, largely because of YouTube, topped the US online video rankings in March by the three criteria comScore measures: unique viewers (146.1 million); number of videos (15.7 billion); and, most importantly, average time online per viewer (7.1 hours). No other site or service comes close. Self-broadcasting tied to Google+ adds social context (e.g. hanging out together) and big reason for people to go there.

Google+ isn't the only place to consume or present On Air broadcasts, but it anchors the service -- and you'll need related Profile. Chee Chew, Google engineering director, explains:

With just a few clicks, you’ll be able to:

Broadcast publicly. By checking "Enable Hangouts On Air", you can broadcast your live hangout—from the Google+ stream, your YouTube channel or your website -- to the entire world.

See how many viewers you’ve got. During your broadcast, you can look inside the hangout to see how many people are watching live.

Record and re-share. Once you're off the air, we’ll upload a public recording to your YouTube channel, and to your original Google+ post. This way it's easy to share and discuss your broadcast after it's over.

If you're planning an upcoming public broadcast using Hangouts on Air, please link in comments. Only safe for work or school content, please.

Google Galaxy Nexus first-impressions review

Posted: May 6th, 2012, 1:46pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Two days ago, May 4, I received the Samsung Galaxy Nexus -- the 16GB HSPA+ model Google started selling direct last week. I'm not alone. Many of you ordered this phone, too. This first-impressions post extends my December review of the 32GB Verizon LTE model.

I will say straight up that out-of-box experience on AT&T is nowhere as good as Verizon. Network is huge factor. Audio quality is crisp and clear on Verizon compared to occasional hissy-fits on AT&T. Data speed isn't comparable, so far -- that's round and about San Diego and communities East and South, La Mesa and Lemon Grove, respectively. I expected at least 10Mbps HSPA+ data speed, based on my wife's Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket (before AT&T turned on LTE service here). I've yet to top 3.5Mbps on AT&T HSPA+ compared to an average 20Mbps over Verizon LTE. If data throughput is a priority, Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ -- over AT&T anyway -- is not for you. However, if you want a GSM network phone that is unlocked and contract-free and offers the best of Android, Google Galaxy Nexus is an exceptionally good choice. But expect to make a few compromises.

Buying Google Direct

Samsung manufactures Galaxy Nexus, which Google co-designed, and it shows. Unlike every other Android phone touching my hands, Galaxy Nexus responds as if it's an end-to-end product. Like iPhone, where Apple controls hardware, software and services, Galaxy Nexus is tight. But make no mistake, cellular carriers add value, too, as I experienced from Verizon and some BetaNews readers report about Sprint, which now offers the smartphone. I would appreciate international readers who bought the HSPA+ model through a carrier to report about their experience, particularly data speed, Android update experience and battery life.

In the United States, and sometime soon in other countries, Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ is available from Google Play, formerly Android Market. The store uses Google Wallet for purchases, which is how I made mine. Base price is $399, but I paid $440.42 after two-day shipping and California tax. I placed the order on May 2 at 5:01 pm PDT, which interestingly shows up as GMT on the receipt, making it technically the next day. Google claims two-day processing and shipping but did better. The order-shipped email arrived at 10:01 pm same day and UPS delivered the smartphone on May 4 around 2 pm PDT. There is 14-day return policy, with 15 percent restocking fee. I'm satisfied with the purchase experience.

Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ once sold for more than $799, unlocked, on these shores, soon after international sales started in November. Prices have since come down considerably -- it's $449.99 from Amazon. The retailer's return policy is more generous than Google's, but some buyer reviewers report problems applying updates to the international models sold there. I forgot to check the Android version shipping on my phone, which prompted a system update within 20 minutes after powering up. Android 4.04 runs now, whether shipped that way or updated.

Owners of the Verizon model rightly complain about infrequent updates, which is contrary to the promise of buying a "pure Google" phone. Verizon finally is delivering the 4.04 update, after skipping others. The phone Google sells direct should be better, based on predecessors Nexus One and Nexus S.

Many Compromises

Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ offers only 16GB storage, compared to 32GB for the Sprint and Verizon models. None offers expandable storage. Late last month, Google Drive debuted, offering free, 5GB storage. That, combined with Gmail, Google Music, Google+ (for photos) and YouTube, makes the more-limited space better -- as long as your device is connected. Still, for 400 bucks, I'd rather have twice the storage or ability to expand it on device.

As much as I do like the HPSA+ model, it's a step down from the one I had from Verizon, mostly for the aforementioned reasons. Sadly, I sold the LTE smartphone on Craigslist recently -- for $2 less than Verizon's ridiculous early-termination fee. I simply couldn't justify paying about half as much for one phone on Verizon as four other lines on AT&T. The nation's second-largest carrier offers a huge benefit: Sign up for unlimited text messaging and calling is free to any cell phone, regardless of carrier. So the family plan on AT&T is low number of minutes, since we mostly call cell phones. Absent this benefit, I needed a considerably costlier plan from Verizon. If the nation's largest carrier offered similar calling option, I would be a customer still.

After receiving Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ on Friday, I drove down to the local AT&T store for a newly-provisioned SIM card. That proved problematic. AT&T's system wouldn't accept the IMEI number, offering BlackBerry data plans. Finally, the rep chose a generic 3G plan that supposedly is HSPA+, without visual voicemail. AT&T provides the feature on Android phones it sells, but I'm out of luck on Galaxy Nexus. Sprint offers Google Voice integration, which is helluva nice option. Verizon charges an extra $3 a month for visual voicemail, which is simply outrageous nickel and diming. I'm not convinced the phone is properly provisioned for data, based on my lousy performance. I'll update this section should I find out something or some smart reader (there are lots of you) provides a solution (assuming one is needed).

Perhaps this smartphone's biggest benefits aren't features: No contract, unlocked. This is a GSM world phone -- in the truest sense for Americans, because T-Mobile is supported. To access the carrier's HSPA+ network handsets must support both 1700MHz and 2100MHz frequencies, as one is used to send and the other to receive. More broadly, unlocked offers many options, such as being contract free, using a pre-paid plan or choosing lower-cost regional carrier.

Is This the Right Droid for You?

Before getting into some of the nitty-gritty usage stuff, alternatives deserve consideration. When I reviewed Galaxy Nexus LTE in December, there were no other Android 4 phones. That's finally changed. For example, HTC One X went on sale today from AT&T, and it's a beast. Samsung Galaxy S III goes on sale internationally May 29 and, based on Samsung product page info, it's headed to all four major US carriers this summer. I'm all but certain AT&T will carry the S3. During my visit to the carrier's store on Friday, customer next to me bought the Galaxy S II. One rep remarked to another that S II is "discontinued", presumably to make way for the S3. So to compare:

Google Galaxy Nexus HSPA+: 4.65-inch Super AMOLED display (315 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution; 1.2GHz dual-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB storage; HSPA+ 21Mbps/HSUPA, 5.76Mbps (850/900/1900/1700/2100), EDGE/GPRS (850/900/1800/1900); 5-megapixel rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; NFC; Bluetooth 4.0; WiFi N; 1750 mAh battery; carrier unlocked; Android 4.0. Measurements: 135.5 x 67.94 x 8.94 mm, 135 grams.

Samsung Galaxy S III: 4.8-inch Super AMOLED display (306 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution; 1.4GHz quad-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage (64GB in future), expandable with microSD card; HSPA＋ 21Mbps (850/900/1900/2100), 4G LTE, GSM/EDGE (850/900/1800/1900); 8-MP rear-facing and 1.9MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; NFC, Bluetooth 3.0; WiFi N; 2100 mAh battery; carrier locked; Android 4.0 and TouchWiz "nature" UI. Measurements: 136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6 mm, 133 grams.

HTC One X: 4.7-inch Super IPS LCD2 display (312 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution; 1.5GHz dual-core processor (LTE) or 1.5GHz quad-core (HSPA+); 1GB RAM; 16GB storage (US model); HSPA+ (850/900/1900//2100), 4G LTE (some markets), GSM/EDGE (850/900/1800/1900); 8MP rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; Bluetooth 4.0; WiFi N; 1850 mAh battery; carrier locked; Android 4.0 and Sense UI. Measurements: 134.36 x 69.9 x 8.9 mm, 130 grams.

Small differences set apart the phones and many depend on your priorities:

HTC One X and Samsung Galaxy S III are locked phones with carrier contractual commitments; Google Galaxy Nexus is unlocked and carrier free.
HTC and Samsung skin Android 4, while Google serves up pure Ice Cream Sandwich.
Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ will get Android updates as they come out, while the other phones will lag months behind.
One X and S3 are LTE, for Stateside buyers, while Galaxy Nexus is hobbled HSPA+.
One X international model and S3 (also, possibly only international) are quad-core. Galaxy Nexus is dual-core all the way.

Now for the Good Stuff

So how does Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ handle the road? I've only had the smartphone for about two days, but do benefit from experience using the largely similar LTE model for about three months. The first question anyone should ask about every cell phone: How's the battery life? I found the Verizon LTE smartphone to be simply exceptional. So far, the HSPA+ model's battery life is well above average but not in the class of its LTE sibling. Twenty hours after the first full recharge and a day of heavy usage, battery level is 31 percent, which is actually above average for this class of phone. I've got no complaints.

However, on Friday, I did order a spare 2000 mAh battery, which includes new back cover to accommodate extra thickness, from Expansys USA. If you do likewise be careful. There is similar kit for Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ and LTE models and they are different because the batteries are: 1750 mAh and 1850 mAh, respectively. I also ordered a spare charger (grumble, grumble). Verizon Galaxy Nexus and S II Skyrocket share the same charger as they use same 1850 mAh size battery.

Android 4 is a more modern, flexible operating system than iOS. There are many customization options and the ability to run widgets from the desktop. I recommend Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ for people living the Google lifestyle. Integration with other Google products or services is tight. Gmail, G+ and Google Talk are among the many associated services that sing on this handset.

But it's Chrome that inspires me most. Ice Cream Sandwich ships with the stock, Adobe Flash-supporting Android browser. However, in early February, Google released Chrome for Android beta, which only supports Ice Cream Sandwich. The browser is fast, fluid and fun -- and there is browser and open tab sync with Chrome desktop. Suddenly, I'm much more interested in browsing again than apps. I'd buy an ICS smartphone just to get Chrome.

Regarding apps, Android isn't as appealing a platform choice now as when I reviewed Verizon Galaxy Nexus. As I explained in late February, Apple is winning the mobile platform wars. In just two quarters, the company shipped more than 70 million iPhones, but it's new iPad's sales success that pulls developer attention. Sure, there are plenty of good Android apps, but typically newest go to iOS and more and more new ones are iPhone and iPad. Meaning: Developers who first created iPhone apps and asked next whether they should do iPad or Android have answered by making Google's platform third priority. Still, Android app selection is largely satisfying.

Overall device performance is indistinguishable between the HSPA+ and LTE models. Galaxy Nexus is plenty fast and responsive enough. Apps load quickly, animations quick and videos crisp and colorful. I much prefer the Android phone's responsiveness and visuals to that of iPhone 4S.

This display is gorgeous, benefitting from its large size, high resolution and deep contrast. But it washes out some in sunlight, which is disappointing but not unbearable.

Many people will want to compare Galaxy Nexus camera to iPhone 4S or Galaxy S series and wonder about lower 5-megapixels compared to the others' 8MP. Megapixel count is not the measure of a good camera. Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 4S take surprisingly similar photos. In my testing, the Android will sometimes overexposure images in select situations, while the iOS phone produces warmer colors. However, Galaxy Nexus stands out for zero shutter and settings that you can adjust -- lots of them compared to iPhone 4S. Zero shutter lag is killer capabilty.

Wrapping up, about 2,000 words later, based on my experience so far, I highly recommend Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ -- this despite my experience on AT&T's cellular and data network. The phone isn't right for everyone. But for me, and perhaps for many of you, Galaxy Nexus HSPA+ is a keeper.

Is iPhone 4S obsolete?

Posted: May 3rd, 2012, 6:51pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I repeatedly ask you questions in headlines, because I ask myself. This one is top of my mind following today's Samsung Galaxy S III announcement. My eyes bugger at the differences in size, features and most importantly benefits -- the majority of those coming from Samsung skinning Android 4 into seeming oblivion. It's hard to discern a way that Galaxy S3 isn't superior to iPhone 4S. If iOS 5 looked antiquated before, and it surely did, Samsung's TouchWiz-modified Ice Cream Sandwich makes it suddenly ancient.

But the question is bigger than hardware or software. Samsung isn't the world's No. 1 handset maker overall and in smartphones by lark. Apple is known for focusing on delivering benefits that matter, sometimes at the expense of hardware capabilities, and truly aspirational marketing. Galaxy S III evokes these qualities, with something more: real benefits without sacrificing hardware capabilities while using software to enrich the human experience. Then there's the aspirational marketing, as seen in the embedded video. Samsung does something Apple-like, only better.

Note: When I first started writing this post, I embedded the commercial from Samsung's YouTube; since, the video was made private. Fortunately, other people grabbed the video and uploaded to their YouTubes.

The Hardware

Colleague Tim Conneally serves up Galaxy S III basics in today's news report. I want to drill down a wee further looking at them in context of iPhone 4S -- and Galaxy Nexus, too. I include the other Android phone, as it's the only pure Ice Cream Sandwich model available, Google now sells it direct and in context of GN I asked last year: "Are iOS 5 and iPhone 4S already outdated?" Today's question goes further.

Let's start with the hardware, which also sets the bar for iPhone 5.

Galaxy S III: 4.8-inch Super AMOLED display (306 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution; 1.4GHz quad-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage (64GB in future), expandable with microSD card; HSPA＋ 21Mbps (850/900/1900/2100), 4G LTE, GSM/EDGE (850/900/1800/1900); 8-megapixel rear-facing and 1.9MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; NFC, Bluetooth 3.0; WiFi N; 2100 mAh battery; carrier locked; Android 4.0 and TouchWiz "nature" UI. Measurements: 136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6 mm, 133 grams.

iPhone 4S: 3.5-inch multitouch display (326 ppi) with 960 x 640 resolution (800:1 contrast ratio); 1GHz dual-core processor; 512MB RAM; 16GB, 32GB or 64GB storage; UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz), GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); 8MP rear-facing and VGA front-facing cameras; LED flash; image stabilization; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; Bluetooth 4.0; WiFi N; 1432 mAh battery; carrier locked; iOS 5. Measurements: 115.2 x 58.6 x 9.3 mm, 140 grams.

Galaxy Nexus: 4.65-inch Super AMOLED display (315 ppi) with 1280 x 720 resolution (100,000:1 contrast ratio); 1.2GHz dual-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage; HSPA+ 21Mbps/HSUPA (4G LTE from Sprint or Verizon), 5.76Mbps (850/900/1900/1700/2100), EDGE/GPRS (850/900/1800/1900); 5MP rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; NFC; Bluetooth 4.0; WiFi N; 1750 mAh (HSPA+), 1850 mAh (LTE); carrier unlocked; Android 4.0. Measurements: 135.5 x 67.94 x 8.94 mm, 135 grams.

From a straight hardware perspective, Galaxy S3 outclasses iPhone 4S in most ways. Faster processor, LTE, front camera HD recording, memory expansion and more. Difference are much less compared to Galaxy Nexus or newer Androids, however.

Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 4S are available now. Galaxy S III launches on May 29 in Europe and over the summer in other geographies. Americans waited a long time for Galaxy S II. Samsung best not repeat later launch here and in China. Apple offers iPhone 4S through 230 carriers in 100 countries. Samsung promises 296 carriers in 145 countries. Distribution is everything -- well that, perception and marketing. Much depends on how quickly S3 launched globally compared to Apple releasing iPhone 5 -- or whatever it's called. New iPhone wouldn't surprise now, given third-generation iPad naming.

Almost Human

Apple and Samsung are engaged in a bitter patent dispute, with the iPhone maker alleging, among other things, copying. Not that Apple is a stranger to this. From a mid-1990s cofounder Steve Jobs interview: "Picasso had a saying, he said: 'Good artists copy, great artists steal'. We have, you know, always, ah, been shameless about stealing great ideas". I preface this next section such, because of what Samsung has done remarkable here to out-Apple, well, Apple.

The original iPhone stood apart from all other phones, not just smart ones, for its humanness. Touch, and its intimacy, and the way the handset responded to your proximity gave it a human quality. Suddenly the phone wasn't an inanimate object but more living thing. Apple extended humanness with each new model. Siri is best representation in iPhone 4S. Samsung seeks to bring this quality to Galaxy S III, and it's centerpiece to the product marketing. These human characteristic also derive from Ice Cream Sandwich and Galaxy Nexus.

(Well, hell, when I got to this point writing, Siamak Masnavi submitted: "5 things you should know about Samsung Galaxy S III". He draws out much of what I planned to here, but in different way. His story, as background for you, actually helps me to focus more on what these things mean in context of increased humanness.)

Other than Siri, Apple did little to add humanness to iPhone 4S. Still, Siri provides personality and responsiveness for those people who use it. Samsung promises much more, by extending different sensors' functionality around stunning software enhancements. Galaxy S III responds to your movements, seemingly anticipating your needs.

Responding to You

During today's launch event, Samsung Mobile tweeted what succinctly describes the product design and marketing approach. Galaxy S III "is effortlessly smart and intuitively simple, and is a phone that sees you, listens to you and understands what you want". I'll highlight just a few examples, many from the commercial embedded up top.

Smartphone proximity sensors turn off the keyboard when the device approaches the face, a capability that set apart iPhone in June 2007. It's standard feature everywhere now. Galaxy S III adds new responsiveness. For example, the front camera detects whether the user is looking at the phone and keeps the screen lit. How many times has your display gone dark while reading a website or ebook. The phone also can automatically turn on, if recognizing your face.

These is two related capabilities would make tech headlines everywhere, if introduced by Steve Jobs. They also add the kind of human responsiveness that once set iPhone apart from every other handset.

Something else: The feature, called "Smart Stay", is real innovation, not Samsung copying Apple. It's also stark example of Samsung out-Appling Apple by focusing on features that offer real benefits -- that are magical and truly useful rather than making a checklist of hardware components priority. Software development is an Apple hallmark, a differentiator coupled to hardware design. Samsung can do, too.

Another example: You're in the middle of texting someone and decide to call instead. Lifting the phone to your face places a call to the recipient. Or perhaps you take a photo of someone, Galaxy S III enhances your social life using facial recognition capabilities to identify friends and link to their social networking account. Right, Facebook and Twitter.

There's much more, but I'll end with S Voice, which is as close to a Siri competitor as you'll find right now -- and it understands 8 languages! You can wake the phone by voice command ("Hello, Galaxy" is changeable default). Sure Apple could, ahem, copy Samsung add something similar to iOS. But it's little touches to detail like this one that once defined Apple design.

Demos are one thing, real world usage is another. But from the perspective presented today, Samsung makes the S3 more human, more responsive to you, all while adding practical benefits useful to you and the people important to you. What's iPhone done for anyone since App Store opened in July 2008?

Photo Credits: Samsung

New iPad extinguishes Kindle Fire

Posted: May 3rd, 2012, 11:22am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Yesterday, colleague Ed Oswald gave four very good reasons why Target is dumping Amazon ereaders and tablets. For Kindle Fire, perhaps there is another: It's not selling. Today, IDC reports that Amazon tablet shipments collapsed during first quarter, all while iPad lapped them up.

"Apple reasserted its dominance in the market this quarter, driving huge shipment totals at a time when all but a few Android vendors saw their numbers drop precipitously after posting big gains during the holiday buying season" said Tom Mainelli, IDC research director. Apple's media tablet share rose to 68 percent from 54.7 percent during fourth quarter. Kindle Fire's shipments collapsed -- from 4.7 million to around 700,000 quarter on quarter. Amazon's share dropped from 16.8 percent to 4 percent, placing it third to Samsung.

The dramatic change undercuts one of the major tenants of my weekend post: "Google has lost control of Android". Amazon's success, with customized, curated Android and supporting app store, hurts the entire ecosystem, because Kindle Fire accounts for more than half of market share. But Amazon is only a threat if Kindle Fire succeeds, and first quarter set it back, which is good for all Android licensees and Google.

According to IDC, Kindle Fire and iPad accounted for 71.5 percent of all tablet shipments during fourth quarter. Strangely, the number was higher during Q1, 72 percent, but dramatically different. iPad share gains almost entirely came from Kindle Fire -- the one adding 13.3 points and the other falling 12.8 points.

"Apple's move to position the iPad as an all-purpose tablet, instead of just a content consumption device, is resonating with consumers as well as educational and commercial buyers", Mainelli says. "And its decision to keep a lower-priced iPad 2 in the market after it launched the new iPad in March seems to be paying off as well".

Apple also benefitted from new iPad's high-resolution display, a distinguishing characteristic from all available competing tablets. Kindle Fire's appealing price, $199, couldn't compete with Apple's one-two punch -- the other being $399 iPad 2.

Lenovo moved into fourth place during the quarter, as Samsung solidified a recaptured second. Barnes & Noble rounded out the top-five. Lower pricing distinguishes iPad's Android competitors.

"It seems some of the mainstream Android vendors are finally beginning to grasp a fact that Amazon, B&N, and Pandigital figured out early on: Namely, to compete in the media tablet market with Apple, they must offer their products at notably lower price points", Mainelli says.

"We expect a new, larger-screened device from Amazon at a typically aggressive price point, and Google will enter the market with an inexpensive, co-branded ASUS tablet designed to compete directly on price with Amazon's Kindle Fire", he emphasizes. "The search giant's new tablet will run a pure version of Android, whereas the Fire runs Amazon's own forked version of the OS that cuts Google out of the picture".

As I've repeatedly expressed, a Nexus tablet is more about Amazon than Apple, and realigning the Android ecosystem.

Still, the overall tablet market is volatile, as Kindle Fire demonstrates and something else: Overal shipments declined 38.4 percent quarter on quarter -- to 17.4 million units from 28 million. That's 1.2 million devices below IDC's forecast.

Looking ahead, Windows 8 tablets are expected to debut during fourth quarter, and it's anyone's guess their impact.

"The worldwide tablet market is entering a new phase in the second half of 2012 that will undoubtedly reshape the competitive landscape" Bob O'Donnell, IDC program vice president, says. "While Apple will continue to sit comfortably on the top for now, the battle for the next several positions is going to be fierce".

Big picture: "Throw in Ultrabooks, the launch of Windows 8 and a few surprise product launches, and you have all the makings of an incredible 2012 holiday shopping season".

Break out your Christmas list.

Who will buy Galaxy Nexus from Google?

Posted: May 3rd, 2012, 9:45am MDT by Joe Wilcox

While we wait for Samsung to unveil its new smartphone in a few hours, for your waiting pleasure I've got answers to the question posed last week: "Would you pay Google $399 for unlocked, HSPA+ Galaxy Nexus?" The search and information giant ended April with a May flower: Direct sales of its flagship, Android 4.0 smartphone, presumably because AT&T and T-Mobile aren't doing so.

Google's got a good thing going here for Android enthusiasts, but I've got a problem with the direct sales thing. What Apple offers that its rival can't: Service. People buying iPhone can get defective replacement at local Apple stores. They also can purchase, granted for an extra 99 bucks, AppleCare+, which extends the basic warranty and provides discounted replacements. If you drop and break iPhone 4S, Apple will replace it for $49, up to two times. What's Google going to do for you, if Galaxy Nexus goes bust or you bust it up?

Still, $399 for an unlocked, contract-free smartphone running Ice Cream Sandwich is tempting. The process is simple enough, if you have a Google Wallet (formerly Checkout) account. Galaxy Nexus is available from Google Play (what all used to call Android Market). The process is quick, and Google claims two business days to process and another two for shipping. But I'm hearing it's much faster -- hours from ordering to shipping. Final cost is more than $440 depending on tax (if applicable) and shipping.

"Yes, and I just did", Nizar Senussi replies yesterday. Has Google shipped already, Nizar? Daniel Garcia: "Heck yeah! This phone is freakin' amazing. Google's #1 handset that'll get the very first updates to Ice Cream Sandwich (and beyond). Definitely the best phone I've ever owned -- the first Android that makes iPhone look boring.

"I would, and did", Keith Heard responds five days ago. "I am planning on switching from $80/month on AT&T to $30/month on T-Mobile's Monthly 4G plan (100 minutes, 5GB HSPA+), and so will make back the extra money spent vs. getting a subsidized phone in only 4 months".

Some quick math: Verizon sells Galaxy Nexus for $199.99, with two-year contract. The 2GB per month data commitment is $720, bringing price to around $920. However, if you're planning to get data anyway, and don't mind the contract, the subsidized phone costs $200 less over the time period. Galaxy Nexus price through AmazonWireless, for Verizon, is even better: $49.99 for new line, or $149.99 for existing one.

Some people pay much more. Kent Karlsson: "Should I buy a $200 phone on a $4,000+ 2-year contract or an unlocked $400 phone on a $40/mo plan. Let me think about that -- bought it yesterday".

spicymeatball:

Please buy the galaxy nexus and support this business model. Most smartphones are overpriced because that's how the manufacturers and carriers have it rigged. They want to force you to be in a 2-year contract. If we weren't being forced into contracts then the smartphone price off-contract would drop down to $399 or less. That's how inflated the phone prices are. On T-Mobile I can save $50 a month and not have to be a slave to the carrier. I have 5 phones and 3 data plans and pay $150/month. It's this cheap because of the off-contract non-phone subsidizing plan I'm on. Buy a Galaxy Nexus and switch to T-Mobile and start saving and getting on a great data network.

Jon Langevin "ordered the Galaxy Nexus from Google last Wednesday, got it Friday. Loving it. Glad to not have carrier lock or subsidized contract (still working off contract on my prior phone, HTC G2...). This phone is better than I can get through T-Mobile, and cheaper than T-Mobile currently offers me due to my already subsidized plan. I'm already thinking about ordering a second Galaxy Nexus, for my wife".

"I want to buy it", Tony Tasmaly comments. "But I hate to be limited to just 16GB, and no SD card [is] bad move on Google Side!" The subsidized, contract commitment Galaxy Nexus models from Sprint and Verizon have 32GB storage. Owners can't expand it, but surely 32GB appeals more than 16GB.

Storage capacity doesn't bother Ali Muzaffar, who ordered Galaxy Nexus: "16GB is more than enough because I'm not much of a mobile gamer and don't listen to music much. I basically use it for email, Google Maps and Kindle Reader. It's light, cheap and does everything you would want from a phone! It has a 720p screen, which no other phone for this price has! No reason not to buy it!"

"I would jump on it when it opens for purchase in Canada", Dong Liang. "It is a bargain for that price at here. Most carriers lock us in for 3 years for huge monthly fee". Google initially only offers Galaxy Nexus direct in the United States, but indicates expansion to other countries.

Ming C adds about the great up North: "Here in Canada, the same phone costs CND$600+ at no-contract price. Furthermore, the GN sold in Canada are yakjuux, which means Android updates are being controlled by Samsung, not Google. Therefore, at $399 for a takju model, even after taxes and shipping, is a bargain".

"It's a great phone", Conrado Gomes brags. "This is a developer phone through and through, it's an awesome phone, and great coverage in my area. I had the Samsung galaxy S II, but decided to get this one, and I love it so far".

Is there hope for Windows Phone?

Posted: May 2nd, 2012, 12:29pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

That's the question I'm asking after looking over comScore US mobile subscriber data for the three months ending in March. After years of steady, steep declines, Windows Phone subscriber share held steady from February to March, which perhaps not coincidentally is when Nokia Lumia 900 went on sale. Could it be...

comScore measures subscribers 13 years and older. Microsoft mobile share among smartphone subscribers held steady at 3.9 percent month-on-month, the first real stop in drop in years. How mighty is Microsoft's fall? Market share was 19 percent in September 2009, for example. So 3.9 percent is nothing to skinny, but staying there rather than going down is small, but notable improvement.

Marketing and Timing

Microsoft, Nokia and partners are pumping mucho bucks into marketing Lumia 900, which joins HTC Titan 2 as the first LTE Windows Phones available here. Never underestimate the effects of marketing or timing.

"I was surprised in talking with my Dad that he was aware of the Lumia 900", BetaNews reader mshulman comments last month. "He's clueless when it comes to this stuff, yet he was aware of it and interested in it". That's marketing.

As for timing, there undeniably is a segment of smartphone users (you'll find some of them in BetaNews comments) who tire of iPhone and find iOS 5 dated compared to fresh, fluid Windows Phone.

Last month, Jeff Flahaven told readers why "I traded iPhone 4 for Lumia 900". iKing_5 responds: "I actually applaud Microsoft for producing a unique-looking OS instead of the me-too, iPhony OS that is Android". Flahaven compares his experience using both smartphones, as do many commenters, whose responses are worth reading, too.

Two weeks ago, analyst Mike Feibus opined for BetaNews: "Windows Phone will gain serious market share this year". That's helluva prediction.

Reader AS147 responds: "WP7 with half decent support has only been out a few months (before that they had no or very little telco, sales, developer or hardware vendor support). Now that there are sales incentives, 80,000+ apps, growing telco support and finally one hardware vendor on board things may turn around".

Android and iPhone

Still, Apple kicks Microsoft's ass across the smartphone arena. Apple smartphone subscriber share was 30.7 percent at the end of March, that's up from 30.2 percent in February and 24.1 percent in September 2009. But Google's Android is the real ass-kicker, with 51 percent smartphone subscriber share, up from 50.1 percent and 2.5 percent during the same time period.

That's right, Android shot up from less than Windows Phone's market share today to over half of US smartphone subscribers in little more than two years.

Android and iPhone aren't taking share from one another but everyone else, with BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Phone the big losers. Where then will Windows Phone share gains come from? Then there is the measure of one market, the United States.

"One of the biggest drivers of Windows Phone sales will be the release of Windows 8; with its possibility of providing Windows on phones, tablets and desktop", Richard Beck comments.

BetaNews reader Dougau doesn't see much changing: "Windows 8 may give Microsoft a small 'window of opportunity' (pardon the pun) to drive Windows phone sales but Microsoft seems to screw up everything they touch these days so Google and Apple really have nothing to fear".

Chrome marketing is exceptional

Posted: May 2nd, 2012, 8:45am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Love makes the world go round, and, c`mon, who doesn't love a good relationship story? But love stories aren't easily told -- one reason there are so few classics. But Google has done just that in 90 seconds. Take a moment to watch the embedded video over your morning coffee and bagel, donut or scone and tell me if you agree.

I don't even recall where I saw the commercial -- it was during some program I had recorded then watched on Monday evening. But as I fast-forwarded through the adverts, something about this one caused me to stop. Perhaps it's subliminally related to the long length, seeing as most TV spots are no longer than 60 seconds. I actually rewound and watched a second time. Now that's marketing.

Effective advertising is familiar, aspirational and, when about products, shows the benefits. Who can't relate to unrequited love or desire to make a relationship work. Familiar and aspirational.

Google effectively does something else: Shows the benefits of multiple Google services, not just Chrome. There's Gmail, in the message Mark sends Jen, and Google Docs in the plaintive request he makes to her. The commercial also shows YouTube, Picasa Web, Google Translate, Google Maps, Google Spreadsheets and Google Plus, which all tidily fit longstanding Chrome marketing tagline: "The web is what you make of it".

The same can be said about relationships. Love is what you make of it.

This story has no ending. We don't know if Jen and Mark meet for coffee, or get back together. That's how it should be. In this case, closure would take a way from the story.

Samsung smartphone shipments soar stunning 267%, trouncing iPhone

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 6:49pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Apple apologists' brief respite is over. Late last week, IHS iSuppli and Strategy Analytics released first quarter data putting Samsung handset shipments ahead of Nokia, ending the Finnish company's 14-year reign. But the analyst firms couldn't agree on smartphones, with Strategy Analytics positioning Samsung ahead of Apple, but IHS giving the nod to iPhone. The Apple Fanclub clung to the "We're No. 1!" data, unsurprisingly. But the last word comes today from IDC, which corroborates Strategy Analytics, crowning Samsung king in both categories.

"The halcyon days of rapid growth in the smartphone market have been good to Samsung", Kevin Restivo, IDC senior research analyst, says. "Samsung has used its established relationships with carriers in a mix of economically diverse markets to gain share organically and at the expense of former high fliers such as Nokia".

Strategy Analytics puts Samsung's Q1 smartphone shipment at 44.5 million, compared to Apple's 35.1 million, IHS says 32 million for the South Korean electronics giant. IDC's number is way closer to Strategy Analytics, but not as high: 42.2 million. Samsung ended the quarter with 29.1 percent share to Apple's 24.2 percent, according to IDC. Market share rose a stunning 267 percent, lifting Samsung from fourth to first place year over year. However, in the broader handset market, change was 35.4 percent. Apple rose 88.4 percent broadly and 88.7 percent in smartphones.

Together, Apple and Samsung accounted for all the growth in smartphones among the top five during the quarter, dramatically taking it from all the major vendors, including HTC, Nokia and Research in Motion. However, the "other" category grew by 59.6 percent, lifted by some Chinese name and white box manufacturers.

"The race between Apple and Samsung remained tight during the quarter, even as both companies posted growth in key areas", Ramon Llamas, IDC senior research analyst, says. "Apple launched its popular iPhone 4S in additional key markets, most notably in China, and Samsung experienced continued success from its Galaxy Note smartphone/tablet and other Galaxy smartphones".

He emphasizes: "With other companies in the midst of major strategic transitions, the contest between Apple and Samsung will bear close observation as hotly-anticipated new models are launched". Samsung will beat Apple to new model launch, during an event scheduled for Thursday in London.

Disaster wouldn't strongly enough describe Nokia's quarter. Handset sales plunged 23.8 percent year over year and more severely for smartphones -- 50.8 percent. This tremendous share loss comes during the first full quarter of Lumia Windows Phone sales. Last month, I wrote "Nokia does the Windows Phone death dance". Nokia's Q1 performance makes my analysis look faint.

Emerging markets, China among them, where Nokia once was overwhelmingly dominant, greatly contributed to share declines. Apple and Samsung saw strong sales growth, particularly in China.

Research in Motion and HTC loses were severe, even if less than Nokia's -- 29.7 percent and 23.3 percent, respectively. An early leader among Android licensees, HTC can't keep pace with Samsung. The manufacturer had a particularly hard quarter in the United States, which Asia-Pacific performance somewhat overset.

Broadly, global handset shipments declined 1.5 percent during first quarter -- 398.4 million units from 404.3 million a year earlier. By comparison, smartphone shipments rose 42.5 percent year over year but nowhere as strong as the holiday quarter's 57.4 percent. Growth beat IDCs forecast by 1 percent. Manufacturers shipped 144.9 million smartphones compared to 101.7 million a year earlier.

Android 4 share soars

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 3:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I don't know how cellular carriers or device makers could move any slower serving Ice Cream Sandwich to their customers. Still, someone is making progress, seven months after Google formally unveiled the OS and six after the first device with it shipped. Android 4.0 share jumped dramatically from mid March to mid April, granted from a small base. It's about time.

This morning I wrote a mobile browser usage story and checked official statistics on Android usage, which is based on the number of devices connecting to Google Play during the pervious 14 days. That number: 2.9 percent. Hours later, when doing a second browser story -- on desktops -- I double checked, more as formality. To my surprise, Google updated the data as of today: 4.9 percent.

From the perspective of availability to today, Android 4.x's showing is abysmal. Most iOS and Windows Phone users get immediate access to major updates. The Android Army sits on its behind waiting and waiting and waiting. This situation is one of many why over the weekend I asserted that "Google has lost control of Android". Google cranks out hot new tech that the partner bottleneck squeezes away from end users and the broader ecosystem.

But looked at differently, that's a 69 percent increase month on month. Even from a small base, it's a number not worth raising your nose at. That's up from 1.6 percent on March 5. Any progress is meaningful right now.

Still, at the end of first quarter, cumulative iOS sales reached 365 million, according to Apple. The most recent number from Google about Android is 300 million. The majority of Apple devices are eligible to receive iOS 5.x, and presumably most users have updated since Apple makes it so easy. By contrast, the majority of Androids are ineligible to receive Android 4.x right now, and cellular carriers or hardware manufacturers make the process hard, if for no other reason than making users wait.

Even Galaxy Nexus users get stiffed. The so-called "pure Google" device is supposed to get updates as soon as they're available. That's true for the international HSPA+ model, but not Verizon's LTE Galaxy Nexus. Yes, the carrier is problem.

Right now, the majority of Android devices run Gingerbread -- 64.4 percent. While that 69 percent month-on-month increase is encouraging but less than March to April's 81 percent, Ice Cream Sandwich has a long ways to go before displacing Gingerbread. Gosh, could Android 5.0 come first?

Internet Explorer rises from the dead, and, whoa, that's not good for Firefox

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 2:02pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

What seemingly started as a fluke, suddenly is a trend. In April, Internet Explorer gained usage share for the fourth consecutive month, reversing a long, steady decline. That's the view presented by April browser usage data Net Applications released today. IE share rose to 54.09 percent -- that's up from 53.83 percent in March and 51.87 percent in December. The question: Are these gains sustainable? Can IE rise up, after loosing more than 40 points of share over 7 years?

I'm wondering if Internet Explorer's share rise is coincidence or convergence. Recent gains coincided with Chrome's stunning setback. In January, following a minor paid-link scandal involving a third party promoting Chrome, Google responded by treating itself like other advertisers, by reducing Chrome's search PageRank for 60 days. The effects were immediate. In January, the browser's usage share fell, ending 14 months of consecutive gains. Meanwhile, IE usage share rose.

By that scenario, Chrome growth should recover following PageRank restoration, which it did in April but not March. Usage share was 18.85 percent and 18.57 percent, respectively. That's well below December's high of 19.11 percent. Chrome has taken share away from Firefox, which now is assaulted from above and below. In April, Mozilla's browser reached its sixth consecutive month of usage share declines. Continued gains by both Chrome and Internet Explorer foreshadow further erosion and Google's browser eventually taking second place.

In a way, Chrome already has. For some months now, Google's newest Chrome -- and the browser refreshes about every six weeks -- consistenly ranks above Firefox. In April, IE8 and IE9 led, with 26.22 percent and 15.91 percent share, respectively. Chrome 18 and Firefox 11 followed, with 13.97 percent and 11.35 precent respective usage share.

There is also the convergence theory -- that IE benefits from multiple factors all happening around the same time, such as Windows 7 adoption, lingering and perhaps permanently debilitating effects of Chrome PageRank reduction and weakening Firefox enthusiasm, among others. I outlined some of these factors a month ago today.

Microsoft has access, as a paying NetApps subscriber, to data I don't. In a blog post today, Roger Capriotti, Microsoft's director of Internet Explorer product marketing lays out browser usage share for Windows 7:

Internet Explorer: 35.5 percent
Chrome: 21 percent
Firefox: 15.4 percent

There's another example of Chrome already ahead of Firefox -- and considerably so.

Microsoft took a risk by releasing Internet Explorer 9 for Windows Vista and 7, but not XP, nearly three years ago. Even now, the Windows XP install base is greater than Win7's. Firefox and Google stuck with XP, which helped their respective browsers. But, finally, Windows 7 is gaining real momentum, with more than 500 million licenses sold and 40 percent deployment among enterprises.

document.getElementById("na634714836187772611").src="http://www.netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?qprid=1"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpcustomb=0"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpf=16"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpwidth=600"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpdisplay=1111"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpmr=10"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"site="+window.location.hostname

Interestingly, Google follows Microsoft's example, by releasing Chrome for Android, which now is beta, only for Ice Cream Sandwich. At least for now, the browser isn't available for older Android versions. As of today, ICS is on 4.9 percent of Android devices that accessed Google Play within the last 14 days.

Microsoft's IE9 strategy may finally be paying off with increased Internet Explorer -- timing that converges with Chrome's search penalty, Mozilla's struggle to keep Firefox appealing and an aggressive and compelling "Beauty of the Web" marketing campaign. Then there's Microsoft's adoption and advocation of emerging web standards.

For the convergence theory, there's this: IE8 and IE9 both gained share month-on-month March to April, which indicates something bigger than Windows 7 pull going on here. Could it be perceptions about Internet Explorer are changing? You tell me.

Photo Credit: Fer Gregory/Shutterstock

iPad leaps ahead of iPhone browser usage, Opera Mini collapses

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 9:48am MDT by Joe Wilcox

New iPad tipped the mobile web browsing balance, according to April data Net Applications released today. Apple's tablet now exceeds iPhone for browser usage share among mobile devices. That's 33.7 percent to 27.4 percent, after being neck and neck for the previous three months. iPad had nudged in front during February and March, but in April leapt ahead of iPhone.

Considering how much larger is iPhone's install base, or Android's for that matter, iPad's ascension is quite remarkable. Cumulative iOS device shipments reached 365 million during first calendar quarter -- nearly 67 million of them iPads. In all, iOS devices give mobile Safari tremendous usage share in the category: 63.84 percent, that's up from 52.36 percent in June 2011.

Mobile Safari gains have largely come at Opera Mini's expense. The browser's usage share fell from 15.39 percent to 12.05 percent between March and April. Android browser ranks higher, and second to Safari: 18.87 percent share. Android browser and Mobile Safari gained usage share for five consecutive months, while Opera declined during the same time period.

Chrome for Android is interesting, with just 0.3 percent usage share, which is far more significant than the number reveals. Google debuted a beta version in early February. Chrome for Android is only available for Ice Cream Sandwich. As of April 2nd, only 2.9 percent of Android devices ran the mobile operating system.

Google follows Microsoft's example on the desktop, where Internet Explorer 9 supports Windows 7, but not XP, which remains more widely used -- in April, 46.08 percent to 38.67 percent, according to NetApps.

Circling back to mobiles, and looking at operating systems, iOS and Android shares closely align with their browsers -- 63.19 percent and 19.27 percent, respectively. This says something about NetApp's methodology and its limitations, since the number of cumulative Android devices, the majority phones, exceeds 300 million (according to Google). The data doesn't reflect this, however. Assuming, for easy math's sake, total cumulative smartphone and tablet sales of 1 billion, combined share for the two operating systems should be just a little more than NetApps reports for iOS.

I make this distinction because of consistent misreporting (don't believe everything you read on the web) about how high iOS share is or references to usage share as market share, which it is not.

NetApps makes the latter more problematic by referring to "total market share" in its charts. There is no total market share in a category where people might use two things instead of just one. This is more likely on the desktop, but still in mobile users could install Opera Mini on their iPad or iPhone and use it in addition to Safari. Typically market share refers to the finite -- X widgets shipped over Y months. NetApps measures usage share.

How big is Apple? [infographic]

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 8:32am MDT by Joe Wilcox

A week ago, Apple reported record fiscal 2012 second quarter earnings. Profits soared by 94 percent to $5.99 billion, or $6.40 per share, from $39.2 billion revenue. In long missives that followed, I took to both sides of the company's performance: "Apple is better off without Steve Jobs" and "There is no Apple without Steve Jobs". Yeah, I argued with myself.

But what do the numbers mean? The accompanying infographic distills them in tidy fashion, and I won't repeat them here but simply add that during the first half of fiscal 2012, Apple generated more revenue ($85.83 billion) than all fiscal 2010 ($65.23 billion). The company's net income for first fiscal half exceeds that of fiscal 2009 and 2010 combined and is surprisingly close to all of fiscal 2011. By measure of financial performance Apple isn't the same company it was three years ago.

How does Apple profit compare to Google revenue? How much does China contribute to Apple revenue, in just two years? How much cash does the average Apple Store generate per square foot? Have a look at the infographic below, which is courtesy of businessdegree.net.

By the way, by my math, I don't agree with all the numbers, but they're acceptable for perspective.

What the frak is CISPA?

Posted: April 30th, 2012, 4:51pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

There's something really troubling about CISPA. While the Internet rallied against SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and Protect IP, including boycotts, there is near silence about the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. This lack of interest hits BetaNews, too. For more than three weeks, I've asked writers here to do a CISPA story. No one wants it. Am I the only one scared witless about this thing?

I got to thinking about CISPA, again, this afternoon after the info graphic accompanying this story dropped in my mail box. It's a tidy explanation of what is CISPA that sheds some light on why the Internet isn't in uproar about it. Where's Anonymous? Who muted the Reddit outrage?

In its purest form, CISPA seeks to better protect Internet companies, the United States and its interests from cybercriminals and terrorists. But the bill as proposed and even as passed also gives government unprecedented power to collect your personal information in the process.

A House Not Divided Enough

I've loosely followed CISPA's progress, and several events had me thinking BetaNews writers should show more interest (and everyone else, too):

CISPA bill sponsors Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) amass amazing number of supporters -- more than 100 co-sponsors.
Facebook, Google and Microsoft work behind the scenes supporting CISPA (we all boycotted Go Daddy for doing less).
Microsoft backs away from CISPA (well, hell, that's got to mean something).
White House signals that President Obama would veto CISPA in its current form.
US House passes the bill by a 248-to-168 vote.

Legislators debated about 7 hours before the bill passed the muster. CISPA is not actually as bad as before, while in other respects it's worse. What concerns me, and really should you, is how much: authority CISPA gives government to collect personal information; freedom for companies to share your information; protection companies receive against civil lawsuits when they violate your privacy rights (well, that's assuming you have any after CISPA).

Some of my peers raise broader concerns: Ted Samson says CISPA "could kill the cloud". Matt Ingram compares CISPA to SOPA: "So is CISPA as bad as SOPA? Probably not".

With the House vote behind, divisions increase, with an interesting cast of characters in either camp. Declan McCullagh's CISPA FAQ is must-read to understand the current issues as the bill heads to the Senate and to better understand what separates advocates from opponents.

The Silence is Deafening

But if there's a loud outcry against CISPA, I haven't heard it. Have you?

There are several reasons why CISPA moves along without much response. Sadly:

SOPA opponents declared victory. Game over. They won. (But, of course, they didn't).
What's hot topic today is forgotten tomorrow. Stated differently, the Internet has a short memory.
As such, social media buzz isn't high volume. It's the "Hey, we've been there, done that" problem.
CISPA rewards Internet companies rather than punishes them (as Protect IP and SOPA would have) -- and even promises to protect them from lawsuits -- mollifying opposition.
Internet companies would be better empowered to fight cybercriminals and terrorists, by more freely sharing information.
People worry more about freedom to share content (pirated or not) than their privacy. Taking away someone's ability to link to (or download) Justin Bieber or Will Smith content bothers more people than giving up nefarious personal information.
There is no Enemy No. 1. Who doesn't despise Hollywood and record label moguls? They were Protect IP's and SOPA's biggest backers. There are no obvious ogres behind CISPA to rally the masses against.
Before Friday's House vote, there wasn't much to rally against, since it wasn't yet clear how bad CISPA would or would not be. Now with one version of the bill complete and another coming, we know.

Slowly, the Internet is beginning to wake, like a sleeping giant. The tone of some opposition is different. While last time, people cried, "Save the Internet from SOPA", others blame us. AVAAZ calls its "stop CISPA" petition: "Save the Internet from the US". As I write, nearly 782,000 people have signed it.

I ask this simple question about CISPA: Does it put the majority of people's privacy at risk to protect everyone from a small number of criminals? That's for you to answer in comments.

Microsoft, Barnes & Noble teach Apple and Amazon a lesson about educational ebooks

Posted: April 30th, 2012, 8:52am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Nobody partners, or negotiates deals, like Microsoft. That's evident from today's stunning agreement with Barnes & Noble, which is sure to turn the ebook market on its head. The two will jointly invest in Newco, temporary name for ebook venture that incorporates B&N's digital and College business divisions. B&N gets partner in Microsoft, which invests $300 million, for 17.6 percent stake; both parties end ongoing patent disputes, largely related to Android; and Microsoft launches Windows 8 with native Nook Reader application. All around it's win-win, after losing a decade ago.

That's right, Barnes & Noble and Microsoft have been here before, in pioneering ebook ventures that failed. Both companies jumped on ebooks back when Amazon, which makes the popular Kindle, was still just a struggling Web 2.0 startup. Microsoft Reader led the first big ebook push at the turn of the century, and Barnes & Noble launched its original e-bookstore using the software. I bought my first ebooks there about 12 years ago. But by late 2003, it was over; Barnes & Noble gave up on ebooks -- a market later re-entered only after Amazon's Kindle success. Microsoft kept producing Reader software, but that's done, too, when the software retires on August 30.

Starting Behind

The newer initiative is hugely strategic for the companies. Amazon and Apple have taken early leadership in standard and educational ebooks. For example, Amazon rents e-textbooks, while Apple offers software and service for making and selling them -- and both companies tout aggressively low prices compared to printed textbooks. B&N offers Nook Study, which lets students rent or buy e-textbooks.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has fallen way behind in tablets, a market it shepherded a decade ago only to see Apple and Amazon snatch it away in just two years. According to IDC, the two companies commanded 71.5 percent of the global tablet market in fourth quarter. At the end of February, in the United States, Amazon led Android tablets, with 54.4 percent share, according to comScore.

Windows 8, and its touch-oriented Metro user interface, is Microsoft's platform for regaining tablet momentum. The partnership assures availability of a native ereader app and hungry partner. Both companies are hungry, and ready to compete hard against Apple and Amazon.

"The formation of Newco and our relationship with Microsoft are important parts of our strategy to capitalize on the rapid growth of the Nook business, and to solidify our position as a leader in the exploding market for digital content in the consumer and education segments", B&N CEO William Lynch says. "Microsoft’s investment in Newco, and our exciting collaboration to bring world-class digital reading technologies and content to the Windows platform and its hundreds of millions of users, will allow us to significantly expand the business".

Read Me

But Microsoft is in the midsts of a major architectural shift that competitively is ill-timed. "Because the Metro user experience also includes new software architecture and the new Microsoft Store for apps, it will take time for the developer ecosystem to build", Forrester Research analyst Frank Gillette writes in report "Tablets Will Rule The Future Personal Computing Landscape", published last week. "As a result, it will take most of 2013 for the Microsoft ecosystem to create a fully capable Windows Metro experience for customers, pushing sales acceleration to 2014. Once rolling, however, we expect Microsoft will be a significant player, but one chasing a leader with a multiyear head start". That leader is Apple.

Gillette forecasts that tablet shipment compound annual growth rate will be 46 percent through 2016, when global number will reach 375 million, up from 56 million last year. He estimates that the tablet install base will be 760 million tablets, compared to 2 billion PCs. He predicts that by the time Windows tablets begin to make significant share gains in two years, Apple and Amazon will both have aggressively expanded the platforms to enterprise software developers. Other than education, Amazon's focus is all consumer today.

"Our complementary assets will accelerate e-reading innovation across a broad range of Windows devices, enabling people to not just read stories, but to be part of them", says Microsoft mobile chief Andy Lees. "We’re at the cusp of a revolution in reading". That's the key point for the software giant. Tablets and ereaders are products sure to converge, as Kindle Fire, iPad and even Nook demonstrate.

But there's something else: Android. Today, Nook runs a customized Android version, not Windows anything. The deal effectively ends Microsoft patent litigation against Barnes & Noble and leaves Google's Motorola Mobility subsidiary as last major Android licensee not to cut a deal with Microsoft.

What's that saying? Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer? Microsoft cuts deals with competitors as easily as partners -- and they're often one in the same -- for monetary or strategic gain, which is both here.

Photo Credit: Tischenko Irina/Shutterstock

Google has lost control of Android

Posted: April 28th, 2012, 4:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

There was great news on the Android front this week. Samsung reported blow-out earnings, with smartphones -- the majority running Android -- accounting for nearly three-quarters of profits. Meanwhile comScore data spotlights the growing US Android tablet market. Additionally, Google started selling Galaxy Nexus direct, with no carrier contract, for $399. But all three share something in common -- what they foreshadow. Google has lost control of Android, and must swiftly act to regain it.

Forrester Research predicts that proprietary Android will surpass the Google Android ecosystem by 2015. Stated differently, Google's open-source mobile platform risks fracturing into multiple fatally fragmented Android ecosystems. Not one but many. There is little time for Google to demonstrate decisive leadership that can keep the ecosystem largely intact.

Only a miraculous Google I/O developer conference can take back Android, but challenges remain. Big ones. Google's problem: Two partners are overwhelming successful, while the majority limp along, and one hurts the entire Android ecosystem. Apple is now the least of concerns. Putting Amazon and Samsung in their place is more important.

Burning Platform

In February 2011, Nokia CEO Stephen Elop wrongly called Symbian (and Meego, too) a "burning platform". The term better applies to Android on tablets, where Amazon's Kindle Fire is in process of burning down the ecosystem. I've repeatedly warned this could happen. In December, I explained how Google's forthcoming tablet would be a year too late, as Amazon fills the leadership vacuum left by the search and information giant. In March, I focused on the Amazon problem in context of the broader Android platform. Earlier this month, I explained that, contrary to some popular punditry, Google's forthcoming tablet is more about Amazon than Apple.

comScore data released Thursday deeply troubles any future Android ecosystem analysis. Amazon started selling Kindle Fire in mid November. By end of December, the tablet already had captured 29.4 percent US share, putting it head of the Galaxy Tab family (23.8 percent). Over the following two months, Kindle Fire took sales from every other Android tablet, ending February with stunning 54.4 percent market share. Tab family ranked second followed by Motorola XOOM, with 15.4 percent and 7 percent share, respectively.

Other numbers also forebode. During fourth quarter, Android tablet share reached 44.6 percent, up from 32.3 percent three months earlier, according to IDC. Kindle Fire largely accounted for overall Android share gains. Looked at differently, two tablet makers, Amazon and Apple, accounted for 71.5 percent of shipments. Stated another way, the majority of tablets shipped during fourth quarter run iOS and Amazon Android.

I make an important distinction, because Amazon has largely customized Android, right down to the web browser and offers its own app store. The retailer is building its own ecosystem separate from the larger one Google leads. Amazon's objectives are contrary to Google's. For example, if I type the web address to Google Play into the Silk browser on my wife's Kindle Fire, Amazon's Android app store opens instead. On other Android tablets, Google Play is default but there is option to sideload from other stores, including Amazon's.

Kindle Fire's continued success is good for driving up Android shipments against iPad, but it's bad broadly, coming at the expense of the larger Android ecosystem.

"The Barnes & Noble Nook tablets are another example of proprietary Android tablets, which don’t support all Android functionality and thus according to Google cannot be labeled an Android device," Forrester analyst Frank Gillette writes in report "Tablets Will Rule The Future Personal Computing Landscape", which published this week. "The popularity of these content-driven devices will cause proprietary Android share to surpass the installed base of Google’s Android ecosystem in 2015. This further fragmentation will challenge Android developers, customers, and especially enterprises, and hamper the creation of a shared ecosystem". (See Forrester Research chart directly below.)

Blueprint for Imitators

Amazon's success is blueprint for other Android licensees, particularly as tablets spread across the planet. Forrester Research sees tablets displacing and eventually replacing PCs, with iPad market leader in most geographies, including China, for at least four more years. Tablet shipment compound annual growth rate will be 46 percent through 2016, when global number will reach 375 million, up from 56 million last year. The analyst firm predicts install base of 760 million tablets, compared to 2 billion PCs.

"Forrester believes that emerging markets will account for 40 percent of tablets sold in 2016, and that Apple will do well in these markets due to strong product and brand appeal", Gillette observes. "Despite Android plays from low-price local vendors such as eBen, as well as the retail footprint of Lenovo, Apple market share in China will remain above the global average. Even in 2011, 17 percent of metropolitan Chinese online adults 18 and older reported owning a tablet, versus 11 percent of US online adults".

What that means: There will be as much, if not more, competition among Android tablet makers than with Apple. That's good for customer choice but risks fracturing Android into multiple ecosystems. Microsoft prevented this with Windows by, for years, limiting how much OEMs can customize the operating system. Android's open-source license, and Google's listless leadership, allows OEMs incredible freedom, and perhaps too much.

Amazon uses that freedom wisely, as do other tablet makers -- and even more so smartphone OEMs (more on that in next section). Unlike other Android tablet manufacturers, Amazon takes complete control over the entire stack. Kindle Fire features the aforementioned Amazon-customized version of Android 2.x, its own Android app store, music and movie stores, ebook store, web browser and customized media consumption software and services. Sony is closest, followed by Samsung, among Android tablet manufacturers.

Amazon is creating a curated experience that matches Apple's and, in some respects, exceeds it. Consumers can buy Kindle books for Fire, but read them on their iPhone, Android handset or other device. Amazon allows movies and music on Kindle Fire or other devices. From Apple it's just devices supporting iTunes Store. People buying into the Amazon lifestyle get Kindle Fire plus something else. That's an added benefit not available from Apple or other Android tablet vendors -- okay, Sony is closest.

Amazon prioritizes features and pricing that matter for living one digital lifestyle around its cloud-connected services, rather than offering the latest, hardware and software. Like Apple, Amazon offers a stack of content and services. Kindle Fire isn't about techie features but a digital lifestyle around Amazon products and services.

Other OEMs are sure to imitate Amazon's success, which really copies Apple's, by doing much more than just skin Android, as Samsung does today on tablets and smartphones with TouchWiz UI. Samsung, not Google dictates, the Galaxy Tab user experience. Not surprisingly, many users upgrading Galaxy Tab 10.1 to Android 4.0 (aka Ice Cream Sandwich) can't much tell the difference, because TouchWiz UI is so pervasive. Samsung also offers a curated experience, just not as deep or as leveraged (because of Amazon.com) as Kindle Fire.

Samsung's huge success with Galaxy Note, first on smartphones and potentially tablets, is foundation for yet another vertical Android platform, with customized apps and competing ecosystem. That's great for competition and customer choice, but not necessarily good for Android.

A Galaxy Far, Far Away

Still, Samsung is a bit player in the tablet market compared to Amazon and Apple -- even with first-to-market advantage over Kindle Fire. But in phones, Samsung is king. During first quarter, the South Korean electronics giant broke Nokia's 14 year reign as global handset market share leader, according to IHS iSuppli and Strategy Analytics. The latter firm puts Samsung ahead of Apple in smartphone shipments -- 44.5 million to 35.1 million.

Samsung offers three operating systems -- Android, homegrown Bada and Windows Phone. The majority of Samsung smartphones ship with Android, customized with TouchWiz UI, and led by Galaxy S II variants' stunning sales success. Next week, Samsung plans to launch its next flagship smartphone in London, presumably further outclassing iPhone 4S.

Like tablets, Samsung, not Google, controls the user experience on all but the Nexus series smartphones. At least Samsung adopts the newest Android eventually, unlike Amazon, but TouchWiz skinned. So those international Galaxy S II owners lucky enough to get Ice Cream Sandwich upgrades won't see much of it behind Samsung's skin.

Samsung does make Galaxy Nexus for Google, but shipments aren't great -- nor broader upgrades from this and other OEMs. According to official Google stats, just 2.9 percent of Android devices, including tablets, ran ICS on April 2nd.

Updating is where Google's Android control is weakest, and where the company lacks leverage to offer uniform experience across devices or to assure they have the latest OS version. Verizon is shocking example of what's wrong. The nation's largest carrier started selling Galaxy Nexus in December, but has since fallen behind updating what's supposed to be a "pure Google" phone. The moniker refers to Android without alteration, and also promise of frequent and fast upgrades. Verizon Galaxy Nexus owners aren't getting them, unlike users of the HSPA+ international models.

This week, Google engineer Jean-Baptiste Queru put doubts to rest about who's to blame: "The part that blows my mind is that some variants of the Google-engineered flagship devices still haven't received Ice Cream Sandwich (or are stuck with older versions of Ice Cream Sandwich) because of delays introduced by operator approvals".

Samsung isn't exactly rushing either, based on Android 4.0 update schedules released this week -- nor HTC and Motorola. Samsung and HTC have little incentive, as they get more benefits from skinning Gingerbread and using that, additional apps and cloud services to differentiate phones between them, among other Android licensees and from iPhone.

Google Play to Win

Android 4.0 is many ways classier than iOS 5. ICS feels more fluid and modern, but few people get to experience it. What's that saying about a tree falling in the forest? Few people can appreciate Google's good work or ICS advantages if they can't get it, or if they do, have a skinned experience. Google is right to sell Galaxy Nexus direct, particularly with Verizon shunning updates and limited carrier adoption (here in the United States, no AT&T or T-Mobile).

Punditry fills the InterWebs about Android fragmentation. The problem is bigger: Platform fracturing into competing ecosystems. That's a scenario Google should seek to prevent, but the success of Amazon and Samsung push that direction.

Google could take full control of Android, by not releasing future versions to open source and changing licensing terms. The logic: Android is too big to fail, that OEMs would have no other choice but align their customized platforms with the broader Android ecosystem. But so doing also risks alienating Android licensees willing to go elsewhere. For example, Google wouldn't want to lose Samsung, which can fall back on Bada and Windows Phone.

I see the search and information giant moving down another path, and it's perhaps riskiest of all but with the biggest potential payoff. It's what the company should have done long ago. Renaming Android Market to Google Play, Ice Cream Sandwich's tighter ties to broader Google services -- G+ among them -- and greater cross-integration of cloud and search services, with social as center, is part of a larger, rebranding effort. What Amazon does right, like Apple, Google seeks to do: Sell a digital lifestyle.

All roads lead to a heavily branded, Google lifestyle around, search, social and mobile that's good for the company and the broader Android ecosystem. Another piece in place: Google Drive launched earlier this week, and the service is clearly primed for tablets.

Like Amazon and Apple, Google also increasingly offers a curated experience. Galaxy Nexus feels like an end-to-end device, even though Samsung makes the hardware. Now that Google owns Motorola Mobility the next Nexus phone may be homegrown. Certainly the Nexus tablet should be, whether or not it is.

Google may not unite the overall Android ecosystem but at least provide a place for the smaller licensees and swath of other partners to find stability -- even if Amazon and the like offer fractured platforms.

If CEO Larry Page and his top managers have any sense, Google will pull the digital lifestyle push together for the I/O developer conference in June. Already, some marketing is in place and really appeals, such as TV commercials for Chrome and Google Plus. What I'd really like to see for I/O:

Nexus tablet
Chrome 1.0 for Android
Chrome beta for iPad and iPhone
Android 5.0 preview for "pure Google" devices
Smartphone trade-in program, for unlocked, Galaxy Nexus -- for, say, $199
Co-marketing program for carriers and OEMs offering newsiest Android version

There is plenty more Google could do to excite developers and other partners, and lift the market to the newest Android version and in process take control by demonstrating more leadership. If not, Android's biggest enemy won't be iOS, but itself.

Snapheal is super easy, but not heroic [mini-review]

Posted: April 27th, 2012, 2:31pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Relationships are so flighty these days, you don't know who will dump whom next. The defriended person or ex-lover may be out of your life, but how do you get them out of your photos? Or perhaps you have a simpler problem, one I frequently encounter: People get in the way and ruin your special snapshot. How to get rid of them?

There are plenty enough free photo apps out there, but many also are fairly complicated to use or offer too few capabilities. Others provide more features, like Adobe Photoshop Elements, but they're pricey and confounding to newbies. C`mon who really wants to fuss with layers? Enter Superheal, which the folks at MacPhun asked me try, touting its magical -- say isn't that how Apple describes iPad -- photo-editing capabilities, such as removing unwanted objects, or people, from your pics. The app also removes facial blemishes or other unsightly distractions.

Snapheal's logo features a cape and "S" logo and MacPhun uses "superhero" to describe the app. So I put it to appropriate test, removing unwanted objects from a photo of Supergirl taken during Comic-Con 2010. Supergirl is perhaps the most popular photo in my Flickr stream, but serious background distractions take away from her beauty. Look at the original and judge for yourself. Between Supergirl's legs are those of someone else walking behind her. She's a mutant! To the right, there is some guy with gaping mouth -- is he yawning or gawking at the caped heroine? Behind him there is a woman bent over, with skirt pulled up enough to show her underwear. These are super distractions!

Besides expected formats like JPEG and PNG, Snapheal also can open RAW files. I used the Leica X1, which saves images as Adobe DNG, to shoot Supergirl. The app easily opened photos I had taken in Canon and Nikon RAW, and even from Fujifilm's FinePix X100, which is my current camera. RAW support is a real differentiator in this class and price of software.

Uncluttered, Uncomplicated

Snapheal ticked me off almost immediately, by changing file associations without asking my permission. Suddenly, all images, including RAW files, open the photo-editing app. The behavior is simply unacceptable and reason enough to recommend against Snapheal.

Snapheal's ease of use definitely is a distinguisher. The user interface, while cartoonish for my tastes, is uncomplicated and uncluttered. I had little difficulty discerning what does what. For my test, I went immediately to the main removal tool, which delivered mixed results. I'm to blame for some of that, since I'm not the most adept using a mouse to highlight objects to erase. Let's just say I'm confounded to draw a straight line.

Like apps with similar capabilities, Snapheal uses the surrounding background to cover objects brushed for removal. This worked out acceptably, but by no means perfectly under close examination, removing the legs between Supergirl's. I had much more trouble removing Mr. Gaping Mouth and Ms. Panties. The app removed the guy's sneaker but then pasted part of it elsewhere. Then the jeans from his pants filled the erased area; not exactly the right mask. A second swipe and wipe did better, as long as there's no close examination.

Because I didn't get quite as super result as hoped for, the final image crop is tighter than preferred. But at least the distractions are gone, putting more emphasis on Supergirl. I could have done more to the image, such as adjust contrast, exposure, shadows and such -- the kind of capabilities once pro-class that are standard fare in consumer photo apps. There's also background blurring capabilities, which I found to be overly cumbersome for what they do.

MacPhun emailed today about a weekend special -- the software discounted by 50 percent to $9.99, which was the price when I started the review. Hours later, Snapheal is even less, just $8.99. I probably wouldn't pay 20 bucks for the app, but $9 is just about tempting enough. If you're a Mac user, Snapheal is worth a look. There's a free trial available, or you can buy it from the Mac App Store.

The King is dead -- Samsung snatches crown from Nokia and Apple

Posted: April 27th, 2012, 9:15am MDT by Joe Wilcox

On this solemn Friday morning let us bow our heads in a moment of remembrance. The once mighty Nokia has fallen, after reigning supreme over the cellular handset market for 14 years. Apple succumbed in only three months over smartphones. Long live the king. Samsung leads both markets, according to Strategy Analytics.

I warned you, as did many others. Last week: "Nokia does the Windows Phone death dance". Two weeks ago: "Don't cry for me, iPhone". Samsung shipped 93.5 million phones during first quarter, easily eclipsing Nokia's 82.7 million. Nearly half of Samsung's shipments were smartphones -- 44.5 million, compared to 35.1 million for Apple.

While Nokia's fall is uncontested, IHS iSuppli disputes Apple's crown, putting Samsung smartphone shipments even lower --- just 32 million. WTH? That's some difference in counting! Neither firm measures sales to end users, just shipments into the channel. Gartner will settle the dispute when issuing Q1 phone sales data.

Nokia's global handset market share fell from 30.4 percent to 22.5 percent year over year, while Samsung's rose to 25.4 percent from 19.3 percent, according to Strategy Analytics. IHS presents quarter-on-quarter data, which is beyond dismal for Nokia. Shipments sank a startling 27 percent for the once mighty king, in just three months, all while shipping the first Windows Phones in volume. Still, Samsung handset shipments also declined, by 13 percent. The manufacturers shipped 83 million and 92 million units, respectively.

"Samsung’s surpassing of Nokia for cellphone market leadership represents not only a changing of the guard among handset brands but also a fundamental shift in the structure of the wireless market", Ian Fogg, IHS senior principal analyst, says. "Cellphone market growth is now being generated exclusively by the smartphone segment, and not by the feature phones, entry-level cellphones and ultra-low-cost handsets".

He emphasizes: "Samsung has successfully ridden the wave of smartphone adoption to attain market leadership. Meanwhile, Nokia is in the midst of transitioning its smartphone strategy, resulting in declining shipments for the company".

What Timing!

Both reports couldn't come at a better time for Samsung, which announced earnings today ahead of plans to unveil its next-generation smartphone in London next week. Samsung first quarter operating profit reached 5.85 billion won ($5.15 billion), with handsets generating 4.27 billion won, or nearly three-quarters of profits.

Samsung's "investments in smartphone hardware and software R&D are paying off", Wayne Lam, IHS senior analyst, says. "The company is not only cashing in on the market’s shift to smartphones, but is also succeeding in other cellphone product categories, allowing it to capture the overall market lead".

That leaves the question of Apple.

"Apple achieved its highest ever marketshare in the overall handset category, capturing 10 percent of global shipments during the first quarter of 2012", Tom Kang, Strategy Analytics director, says. "Demand for the new iPhone 4S model remained strong in the United States and Japan, while the recent launch of the 4S in China was a timely contributor to Apple’s rapid growth".

On Tuesday, Apple announced quarterly earnings, when CEO Tim Cook spent some time discussing China success with financial analysts. The country generated $7.9 billion in revenue, lifting Asia-Pacific above Europe as the second-most valuable region.

However, iPhone 4S looks considerably dated, in part for lacking LTE, compared to newer Android smartphones -- and Samsung's latest could apply the brakes on sales. "We expect Apple to grow further in the second quarter of the year, but the upcoming launch of Samsung’s new Galaxy S3 flagship model could slow iPhone’s growth in some regions if it is well received by operators and consumers", Kang says.

Lam agrees. "What makes Samsung’s performance even more impressive is that the company’s latest Galaxy S III handset has yet to be launched, with shipments set to start in May. This indicates Samsung is likely to make further progress in market share in 2012".

As for Nokia. The king is dead.

Tweet, tweet, Twitter for Android and iOS get big updates

Posted: April 26th, 2012, 5:01pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Suddenly mobile Twitter makes lots of sense to me, and I wonder what good the desktop or web clients are at all. Versions 3.2 and 4.2, available today for Android and iOS, respectively, improve discovery, search and, more importantly, interaction with others and topics that matter most to you.

Not that Twitter mobile was bad before, it's just whole lots better now -- and where you need it most. On the go. Most of the goodness is behind the Discover tab, which after being much of a wasteland before is now lively and filled with streaming content relevant to you.

For example, Twitter better presents the activity of people you follow, including in my stream today the folks they start following. This discovery method feels more like a social network and connects you to new people. That's what friends -- eh, followers -- are for, meeting new people. No surprise, you'll see who's retweeting what -- and also who's adding whom to lists.

There's more. "Now you can tap any story once to see Tweets about a particular trend or news article", Sung Hu Kim, Twitter product manager, says. "You can then read the entire story or join the conversation by replying, retweeting or favoriting related Tweets".

Search gets a decidedly modern makeover, with useful autocomplete and suggestions. I've gotten addicted to Google+ member autocomplete, a capability now available for Twitter in the Connect tab.

But it's better on iOS than Android. "We’ve also made a few improvements specifically for iPhone: when you tap the search box in Discover, you’ll see your most recent queries", Kim explains. "You can also go directly to someone’s profile when searching for a username in Connect".

Finally, and you'll love or hate it, push notifications now include Interactions. Yeah, don't you want to know when Jack Smugface disses you, so you can respond now rather than hours later? But some users may want to tone down this one's settings, particularly if people frequently retweet or favorite your 140-character musings. Hey, battery life is precious and too many notifications suck it up.

Sony serves some Ice Cream Sandwich to Tablet S

Posted: April 26th, 2012, 3:31pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

If you own Sony's Android tablet, the wait is over. Android 4.0 is available, starting today. The company says that users will be prompted to update the next time they connect to WiFi.

Sony's tablet packs one of the most customized versions of Android, from look and feel down to a plethora of apps, the majority focused on entertainment. Users can expect plenty of spit-and-polish tweaks and enhancements throughout its ICS iteration.

"There are a lot of cool new things you can do now with the firmware upgrade -- hellooo, single-motion panorama photo mode and direct access to your SD card", [Maya Wasserman explains] on the Sony blog. Other enhancements include the ability to unlock direct to camera, "small apps for multitasking", and easy switching browser from mobile to desktop mode.

Sony launched Tablet S in August, initially $499 for the 16GB model or $599 for its 32GB companion. The electronics giant temporarily discounted during the holidays, then made them permanent in January with $100 cuts. As Mother's Day approaches, another discount comes: $50 instant rebate plus free docking cradle.

Sony S comes with 9.4-inch display with 1200 x 800 resolution, Nvidia Tegra 2 processor, 5-megapixel rear-facing camera, 1GB RAM and as, previously mentioned, 16GB or 32GB storage, which is expandable with SD card.

There is no Apple without Steve Jobs

Posted: April 26th, 2012, 11:50am MDT by Joe Wilcox

That's essentially George Colony's contention. "Apple will decline in the post-Steve Jobs era", the Forrester Research analyst opines. The sentiment is stunning in context of Apple's first two quarterly results following Tim Cook's ascension to chief executive. The company generated more revenue ($85.83 billion) than all fiscal 2010 ($65.23 billion). Net income ($24.12 billion) exceeds that of fiscal 2009 and 2010 combined ($22.25 billion). That's hella good performance.

Yesterday, I argued that "Apple is better off without Steve Jobs", in part based on recent performance that derives from Cook's running logistics for the better part of three years. But I also believe that no one knows the future, and that good reporting is about looking from different viewpoints. So today I offer counterpoint to yesterday's prognostication. Yeah, I'll rebut myself, something I frequently do. You just don't see the process, and Colony's argument is good foundation.

Disruptive Risks

The question to start with: What is Apple? For many long-time Mac fans, Jobs is Apple. The two can't be separated. But for the hundreds of millions of people buying iPads, iPhones and iPods over the last decade, Apple is something else. According to a new report released today by NPD, one in three Americans owns an Apple product. The majority of newbies own iPhone or iPad, but increasingly the tablet.

Referring to iPad, NPD analyst Ben Arnold says that "one-in-five Apple owner households has one -- nearly equivalent to the number that own an Apple computer". These aren't Steve Jobs' people -- the so-called Mac faithful that worshipped him and his sense of style. Most of them probably didn't know who Jobs was until his tragic, well-publicized death.

But Jobs' influence over these Apple product owners is undeniable. His leadership led these products to market and define a style that Cook so far fails to exhibit: Disruptive risk-taking. Last year I wrote about decade-past Apple launches that are foundational. Three were huge risks, and Apple took them at a difficult time -- during a recession: OS X, Apple Store and iPod, in order of 2001 release. But the big pay-off risks came later: iPhone and iPad, particularly, and culminated others.

Apple launched iPhone on one carrier in 2007, moving into a market where it had no expertise, no experience. Then came iPad, which moved into a market where many other computer and consumer electronics giants had failed. Yet these risks paid big rewards. During fiscal 2012 second quarter, for example, iOS devices generated 76 percent of Apple revenue. iPad and iPhone generated $29.3 billion revenue, or 74.8 percent of revenue. These disruptive risks define Jobs' return as Apple CEO.

But who will take such risks now? Who will lead disruptive changes like these? Ponder those questions while reading the next section.

David Thinking

In December 2009, I posted here at BetaNews something taken from my personal blog months earlier: "Why Apple succeeds, and always will". I wrote:

Apple doesn't play by the rules. It reinvents them. Apple applies what I call 'David Thinking' to its broader business, product development and marketing. Apple is David to Microsoft Goliath -- and other ones, too. Goliath plays by one set of rules. David choses to change the rules, which favor his strengths rather than those of Goliath.

David thinking derives from research political scientist Ivan Arreguín-Toft conducted. In 2005 book, How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Tactics, he explains how seemingly weaker opponents can prevail against stronger ones by changing the rules of engagement. He produces excellent historical data showing that, in wars, when smaller rivals use such tactic they are more likely to win, even against mightier opponents. The Biblical example of David vs. Goliath is good analogy. Rather than fight like Goliath -- and almost certainly lose by dawning armor and sword -- David relied on his own strengths. A slingshot and stone kept him out of Goliath's reach but still on the offensive. I call this approach David Thinking.

But Apple has gone through dramatic transformation since I wrote that analysis. Apple is no longer David but Goliath. Apple's size and success makes it the status quo and encourages management decisions that seek to preserve what is rather than take forward-reaching risks. The higher Apple's stock price rises or the more customers it acquires, the less attractive risk-taking looks to management. Today's Apple, under Cook's leadership, is in jeopardy of losing the risk-taking, David Thinking that defined Steve Jobs' leadership. It's answer to the question I started with: What is Apple? A disruptive, risk-taking, rule-changing innovator.

Charisma vs. Competence

Apple is not a cult of Mac enthusiasts; they're a minority now. As stated earlier, most people buying the products today have never been influenced by the so-called "reality distortion field" -- the spell of Steve Jobs. Apple's cofounder spent little time on the keynote stage starting in 2008, because of his health.

Colony sees Apple for what it was, not what it is -- a business led by a charismatic leader:

In charismatic organizations, the magical leader must be succeeded by another charismatic -- the emotional connection of employees and (in the case of Apple) customers demands it. Apple has chosen a proven and competent executive to succeed Jobs. But his legal/bureaucratic approach will prove to be a mismatch for an organization that feeds off the gift of grace.

That's not Apple 2012, nor was it before Cook's ascension to CEO about eight months ago. There's a well-known management maxim that charismatic leaders often can't grow companies far enough because they micromanage too much. Many of the most successful startups required the charismatic leader to step back and put someone else in charge. Given Jobs' health situation and Cook largely running day-to-day operations, at least from January 2009, this leadership change effectively occurred at Apple years ago. Jobs continued to provide vision -- and good taste -- while Cook expanded the core business. As I asserted yesterday, Jobs' ego held back Apple. His declining health let Cook make competent decisions about manufacturing and distribution logistics that generated huge sales. Apple can design pretty products, but it means nothing if there is no place for people to buy them.

Meanwhile, the faithful decreased in numbers, particularly outside the company. That Apple shares soared, rather than collapsing, after Jobs stepped down as chief executive and then tragically died, says much about the myth and the man -- that the charismatic leader and company are one. They aren't.

Colony and I agree about something that is important to Apple's future: "When Steve Jobs departed, he took three things with him: 1) singular charismatic leadership that bound the company together and elicited extraordinary performance from its people; 2) the ability to take big risks, and 3) an unparalleled ability to envision and design products". I absolutely agree on the second, but question the other two -- how much is myth versus the man. Colony says that "Apple's momentum will carry it for 24-48 months", and without a charismatic replacement will decline like the company did after Jobs left in 1985 or following the departure of Polaroid and Walt Disney founders.

No Risks, No Gain

Apple doesn't need charismatic leadership. The company requires someone with vision to think like David, to constantly change the rules of the game and in process take risks in innovation. That was Apple under Steve Jobs.

What's risky about iPhone 4S or new iPad? Sure, Apple developed these products while Jobs was CEO, but he also was ailing and Cook ran day-to-day operations. Cook has yet to demonstrate David Thinking, not that he's had much time. Still, there's time enough.

My favorite example of Jobs' disruptive approach is iPod nano, and I watched to see if there might be something similar with third-generation iPad. Apple introduced the diminutive music player in September 2005 to replace the iPod mini, which was the standard copied by competitors. Just as their larger devices arrived for the holidays, Apple transformed the category with the tiny nano.

Something else: Apple killed off iPod mini at the height of popularity. No one does that! But Apple did. iPod sales dramatically rose with launch of the mini in early 2004 and simply skyrocketed after the nano. iPad's high-resolution display adopts similar philosophy but is nothing near as radical. In more ways, it preserves the status quo rather than defies it. Cook must do better.

For Apple to remain Apple, disruption and risk should be defining characteristics. If not, then there is no Apple without Steve Jobs. The company has become something else.

Would you pay Google $399 for unlocked, HSPA+ Galaxy Nexus?

Posted: April 25th, 2012, 1:36pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Google has surreptitiously answered whether AT&T or T-Mobile would carry Galaxy Nexus, which is available from Sprint and Verizon here in the United States: No. Otherwise, why would Google sell the smartphone direct, which it started doing yesterday. It's a helluva price, too -- $399, unlocked, with no contractual commitment.

This is the HSPA+ model released internationally in November 2011. That means no LTE and only 16GB storage, rather than 32GB -- and it's not expandable. The phone sold for $729 or more from Amazon and handset resellers just a few months ago. Amazon lists the 16GB model for $438 today. But, hey, $399 is better. But is it low enough for you? You can get 64GB iPhone 4S from AT&T for same price -- granted locked, with 2-year contractual commitment. Both handsets are HSPA+, though, and AppleCare+, which offers cheap replacement for broken phones, is an extra $99. So I ask: Would you -- or will you -- buy Galaxy Nexus direct from Google?

"First available in the US, Galaxy Nexus costs $399 and arrives at your door unlocked, without a carrier commitment or contract", Android chief Andy Rubin says. "You can use it on the GSM network of your choice, including T-Mobile and AT&T. It also comes pre-installed with the Google Wallet app which lets you easily make purchases and redeem offers with a tap of your phone. Best of all, we'll give you a $10 credit to get you started with your new mobile wallet".

Galaxy Nexus is available from Google Play's new "devices" section. I purchased two Nexus One smartphones direct from Google in 2010. Process was simple and delivery fast. I expect similar customer service here.

Google's timing is strange, though. Samsung plans to debut Galaxy S II's successor during a London event next week. Galaxy Nexus may soon lose its crown as hottest Android handset, although "pure Google" -- meaning newest Android and no sneaky skins -- remains an important differentiator.

Google had the right idea when selling Nexus One direct starting in January 2010. Many bloggers, journalists and pundits got it wrong, presuming Google wanted to circumvent carriers. As I said then, Google rightly wanted to establish a reference design for Android smartphones and provide developers and enthusiasts with the most current OS version. Galaxy Nexus is similar, but more.

This time, Google is trying to get around carriers as well. Some partners have corrupted pure Google -- Verizon among them -- by disabling or muting some Galaxy Nexus/Ice Cream Sandwich features while holding back updates. Then there is the distribution problem, with AT&T and T-Mobile being glaring examples.

Neither carrier offered predecessor Nexus S, either. Best Buy sold the phones for Google, unlocked with or without carrier commitment -- but $529 no contract. By that measure, the considerably better Galaxy Nexus is a bargain at $399. Still, it's pricey compared to what Americans are used to paying with contractual commitment.

So what do you get? Galaxy Nexus sports 4.65-inch multitouch display with 1280 x 720 resolution (100,000:1 contrast ratio); 1.2GHz dual-core processor; 1GB RAM; 16GB storage; GSM/EDGE/GPRS (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), 3G (850, 1700, 1900, 2100 MHz), HSPA+ 21; 5MP rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; Near-Field Communication (NFC); Bluetooth; WiFi; Android 4. Measurements: 135.5 x 67.94 x 8.94 mm, 135 grams. The battery is 1750 mAh, which is less than the 1850 mAh available with Sprint and Verizon models.

I reviewed the Verizon Galaxy Nexus in December. I highly recommend the carrier's model, which gets big boost from LTE. I presume the HSPA+ model experience is comparable, but would want to test one, considering how much better I find cellular and data service from Verizon than AT&T.

So back to where we started: Would you buy unlocked, HSPA+ Galaxy Nexus from Google for $399. Comments await your response.

Apple is better off without Steve Jobs

Posted: April 25th, 2012, 10:03am MDT by Joe Wilcox

For all practical purposes, Tim Cook has run Apple since cofounder, and then CEO, Steve Jobs' January 2009 medical leave. Sure Jobs returned six months later and continued his micromanaging ways, but Cook, as COO, continued responsibility for day-to-day operations. He already had distinguished himself as a logistics genius, at Compaq and for a decade at Apple, before assuming Jobs' daily role -- and becoming CEO in August 2011. Cook's influence on the current state of Apple cannot be understated.

As I write Apple shares are up, following yesterday's stunning fiscal 2012 second quarter earnings results; net income rose a stunning 94 percent year over year. The stock closed down 2 percent yesterday, but shot up more than 7 percent in after-hours trading. Apple closed at $560.28 yesterday and opened at $615.99 today. But the measure of Cook's success, and why he is the better man to run Apple, is much more than rising share price. It's really about performance.

Dollars and Sense

During fiscal first quarter 2012 (synchronous with calendar Q4 2011) Apple generated more revenue ($46.33 billion) than all fiscal 2009 ($42.9 billion). During the first half of fiscal 2012, Apple generated more revenue ($85.83 billion) than all fiscal 2010 ($65.23 billion). If Apple meets or surpasses targets for fiscal third quarter, revenue for the first nine months will top all of fiscal 2011 ($108.25 billion).

Looked at differently, Apple's net income for the first fiscal half of 2012 ($24.12 billion) exceeds that of fiscal 2009 and 2010 combined ($22.25 billion) and is surprisingly close to all of fiscal 2011 ($25.9 billion). This all happened effectively on Cook's watch and is measure of his influence and performance long before officially becoming Apple CEO last summer.

Finally, under Cook, Apple delivers performance that meets Jobs' hype and the reality distortion field that long kept interest in the company, its products and stock. Effectively, Apple has traded reality distortion for reality -- and unequivocally Cook deserves more credit than Jobs. It's one thing to design pretty products and something altogether different to sell them. There Cook's manufacturing and distribution genius has proved greater than Apple cofounder's.

These numbers speak for themselves, as do milestones like: May 2010, Apple market capitalization tops Microsoft, to become world's most valuable tech company; August 2011, Apple's market capitalization passed Exxon to become world's most valuable company.

The Devices' Story

Then there are the hard device numbers. Jobs may have had the vision with iPhone, which launched in June 2007, but Cook executed on it, particularly in 2010 and 2011, with launches of iPad and iPad 2 and iPhone 4 and 4S.

At the end of calendar 2011, Apple had 315 million cumulative iOS device sales. The 55 million iPads sold to then accounted for 17 percent of the total and iPhone, with 175 million sold, 56 percent.

But 2011 was the break-out year for iOS devices -- 156 million, according to Asymco's calculations. So Apple sold 49.5 percent of all iOS devices in a single year, which indicates considerable accelerated momentum.

According to company financial filings, for calendar 2011, Apple sold 92.95 million iPhones and 40.45 million iPads -- generating $61 billion and $24.95 billion revenue, respectively. For all calendar 2011, all Apple generated $127.84 billion revenue. The two products accounted for 67 percent of the company's sales for the year (again referring to calendar and not Apple's fiscal year).

Three months later, end of first calendar quarter 2012 (and Apple's fiscal second) and cumulative iOS device sales are 365 million, as stated during yesterday's earnings call. Apple sold 50 million iOS devices in the quarter, generating $29.8 billion revenue, or 76 percent of the total.

Measuring the Men

I proposed this story to my BetaNews colleagues more than a month ago and planned on writing it since mid-February. But I kept holding back and decided to wait until Apple announced fiscal Q2 earnings. That was wise, considering how strongly the first two quarters compare to everything else and demonstrate the wisdom of decisions Cook made years ago, which Jobs obviously supported. Recent results derive from plans in motion long before Cook took the chief executive's chair.

There's something else, which must be stated but unfortunately will draw fire from the Apple faithful: Jobs' ego hindered Cook's genius. For years before Job's 2009 medical leave, the company made asinine distribution decisions that courted to his need for attention. Apple kept products secret, so that showman Jobs could bask before the attention of "one more thing" unveilings.

Practically, such approach is manufacturing and distribution lunacy. Rather than have products in channel to sell, Apple had to hold back -- sometimes even production -- leading to delayed distribution and shortages. The strategy also cut into margins, as Apple had to assume heavier costs ramping up production and rapidly shipping to customers.

Something's different now: I preordered iPhone 4 in 2010 and it shipped FedEx from China. This year, my family preordered the new iPad and it shipped from California, which suggests, as rumored, that Apple prepped the channel -- something that would have been harder under Jobs' leadership.

Perhaps Apple gross margins reflects some of the sanity returning to manufacturing distribution. In fiscal second quarter, they rose 6 points year over year to 47.4 percent.

I've been writing about Apple product shortages for more than a decade. What differentiates now and then is reality distortion vs. reality. In the early 2000s, Apple suffered from supply-side problems. More recently, shortages are all about overwhelming demand.

Cook understands this newer supply problem is all about distribution logistics, that's why he repeatedly turned to the topic during yesterday's earnings call. For example, going on at length about China:

We have expanded point of sales. On a year-over-year basis Mac is up 70 percent, but still only 1,800 [outlets] for all of greater China. Obviously there is a lot more opportunity there. iPhone we're up over 11,000, which is up 138 percent. But 11,000 is a much smaller than the number we have in the US. Obviously China in the next few years will be a bigger opportunity. iPad is only in 2,500 points of sale. Yes, we've expanded, expanded a lot. However, there is a lot of headroom here in our view.

During the quarter, Asia-Pacific region passed Europe to become second largest in revenue. If the trend continues China may exceed all of Europe in a couple quarters. During fiscal Q2, China generated $7.9 billion compared to $8.8 billion for Europe. Distribution is the key, something Cook understands. He visited China this month. Would Jobs have?

Cook has done for Apple, what Jobs couldn't. Make reality distortion a reality. Make Apple the most successful technology company on the planet.

Vision is one thing. Execution is another.

Apple had an 'incredible quarter in China'

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 5:13pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today after the closing bell, Apple announced fiscal 2012 second quarter results, with earnings up a staggering 94 percent year over year. But one region -- and within it a single country -- stood out for performance and closed on the United States as Apple's most important market as measured by sales.

Apple revenue to Asia-Pacific rose a staggering 114 percent to $10.15 billion. That data excludes Japan, where sales soared 91 percent. By comparison, Americas revenue topped $13.2 billion, up 41 percent year over year. During the quarter, Asia-Pacific pushed past Europe to be Apple's second most important region, as measured by revenue. In that region, China rises above all other countries.

"It was an incredible quarter in China", says Apple CEO Tim Cook, speaking during today's earnings conference call. "Revenue was a record at $7.9 billion in greater China, which is up over three times year over year and brings the first half revenue for greater China to $12.4 billion. That compares to a full year of last year of $13.3 billion".

Stated differently, China accounted for 78 percent of Asia-Pacific region revenues fiscal second quarter.

"Part of this was the pent-up demand for iPhone 4S", he explains. "As you know we launched in mainland China in January. China was not able to get into the Q1 period, so all of that is in Q2".

Demand was so great for iPhone 4S, Apple postponed the launch to protect store employees and customers. Crowds nearly rioted.

"We also have very strong demand for iPad 2", Cook says. "We have not shipped in China yet the new iPad, although we are shipping in Hong Kong".

Apple's iPad and iPhone sales success has other benefits. "It's a combination of these things and the halo that both of these products has produced for the Mac is also incredible", Cook explains. "Mac was up over 60 percent year over year, and that compares to a market rate of growth of about 6 percent".

What China lacks, particularly compared to North America, is distribution. "We have expanded point of sales", Cook says. "On a year-over-year basis Mac is up 70 percent, but still only 1,800 [outlets] for all of greater China. Obviously there is a lot more opportunity there. iPhone we're up over 11,000, which is up 138 percent. But 11,000 is a much smaller than the number we have in the US. Obviously China in the next few years will be a bigger opportunity. iPad is only in 2,500 points of sale. Yes, we've expanded, expanded a lot. However, there is a lot of headroom here in our view".

China's broader importance to Apple cannot be understated, particularly in a country where many Internet users will first use smartphone, or even tablet, as first connected device -- rather than a PC. It's a market all cloud-connected device makers covet.

"It is mindbggling that we could do this well", Cook exclaims.

Photo Credit: Elizabeth Phung

Apple Q2 2012 by the numbers: $39.2B revenue, net profit up 94%

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 2:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Apple investors expressed their nervousness this week, following earnings reports from AT&T and Verizon. Carrier iPhones sales sagged from calendar fourth quarter -- and why should they not, considering the holidays and iPhone 4S launch. So the question for Apple today: How many iPhones sold during fiscal second quarter, and iPads, for that matter.

Apple shipped 5.2 million Macs, 11.8 million iPads and 35.1 million iPhones during the quarter. Analyst consensus was around 4 million, 11 million and 33.5 million, respectively. Number of iOS devices sold to date: 365 million.

For fiscal Q2, Apple reported $39.2 billion revenue and net profits of $11.06 billion, or $12.30 a share. A year earlier, the company reported revenue of $24.67 billion and $5.99 billion net quarterly profit, or $6.40 per share. Net profit rose by 94 percent.

Three months ago, Apple forecast $32.5 billion in revenue for fiscal 2012 second quarter, with earnings per share of $8.50. Analyst average estimates were higher than Apple guidance: $36.81 billion revenue and $10.06 earnings per share.

Gross margins rose a stunning 6 points year over year to 47.4 percent. International sales accounted for 64 percent of revenues.

Looking ahead to fiscal third quarter, Apple projects $34 billion revenue and $8.68 earnings per share.

Apple ended the quarter with $110.2 billion in cash, up from 97.6 billion three months earlier.

After closing down 2 percent today, Apple shares jumped more than 7 percent in after-hours trading.

Q2 2012 Revenue by Product

Desktops: $1.56 billion, up 8 percent from $1.44 billion a year earlier.
Portables: $3.5 billion, down 7 percent from $3.7 billion a year earlier.
iPod: $1.2 billion, down 25 percent from $1.6 billion a year earlier.
Music: $2.51 billion, up 32 percent from $1.6 billion a year earlier.
iPhone: $22.7 billion, up 85 percent from $12.3 billion a year earlier.
iPad: $6.6 billion, up 132 percent from $2.84 billion a year earlier.
Peripherals: $643 million, up 11 percent from $580 million a year earlier.
Software & Services: $832 million, up 12 percent from $743 million a year earlier.

iPhone. Apple shipped 35.1 million iPhones worldwide during fiscal second quarter, up from 18.65 million iPhones a year earlier. That's an 88 percent increase, year over year. Wall Street analyst average estimate was about 33.5 million units. Apple counts shipments into the channel, typically making them several million units higher than numbers released by Gartner, which measures actual sales.

During the quarter, iPhone 4S was available in 100 countries from 230 carriers. Apple ended the quarter with 8.6 million units in the channel, up 2.4 million sequently for 4 to 6 weeks of inventory.

Recent analyst data bodes well for iPhone. Earlier this month, Nielsen reported a huge surge in the number of new purchasers choosing iPhones compared to Android. For the three months ending in February, 48 percent of Americans who recently bought a smartphone, chose Android -- 43 percent iPhone, according to Nielsen. A year earlier, 27 percent of new acquirers chose Android versus 10 percent for iPhone.

comScore reports share for overall market, not new purchasers. During the three months ending in February, Android share was 50.1 percent among smartphone subscribers 13 and older -- that's up 3.2 points. iOS: 30.2 percent, up 5 points year over year and 1.5 points three months earlier. Those numbers are fairly consistent with Nielsen's: 48 percent for Android and 32 percent for iOS.

But Verizon caused some market panic following news it activated 3.2 million iPhones during first calendar quarter, a 1-millon sequential decrease. I don't see a problem in that but something else: Quarter on quarter, iPhone dropped from 58 percent to about half of Verizon smartphone sales, based on activations. Android is gaining, no doubt propelled by 4G LTE.

Q2 2012 Unit Shipments by Product

Desktops: 1.2 million units, up 19 percent from 1 million units a year earlier.
Portables: 2.82 million units, up 2 percent from 2.75 million units a year earlier.
iPod: 7.7 million units, down 15 percent from 9.02 million units a year earlier.
iPhone: 35.1 million units, up 88 percent from 18.65 million units a year earlier.
iPad: 11.8 million units, up 151 percent from 4.7 million units a year earlier.

iPad. Apple shipped 11.8 million iPads globally during the quarter -- that's up from 4.7 million -- a 151 percent -- a year earlier.

Apple ended the quarter with 2 million iPads in the channel, that's down 300,000 units sequentially, for 4 to 6 weeks in inventory. About a month ago, my daughter said that San Diego School District would buy iPads for 2012-13. Today, during Apple's earnings conference call, Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer says that the school district bought 10,000 iPads during fiscal Q2 and will get another 15,000 this quarter.

"The new iPad is on fire", Oppenheimer says, adding that Apple is selling as fast as it can make them. Supplies are constrained globally. New iPad is available in 40 countries.

Analysts repeatedly asked about the impact of $399 iPad 2 on overall sales. Apple CEO Tim Cook says that lower pricing definitely appeals to educational buyers and in some geographic markets. However, Apple isn't yet certain about the final sales mix between iPad 2 and new iPad.

iPad continues to dominate the tablet market, and it's an increasingly important category. In a report issued yesterday, Forrester Research analyst Frank Gillett proclaims: "Tablets will rule the future personal computing landscape". He predicts the global install base of tablets will be 760 million by 2016, with 375 million sold just in that year -- one third of them to businesses.

He predicts that "tablets will become our primary computing device".

Q2 2012 Revenue by Geography

Americas: $13.2 billion, up 41 percent from $9.32 billion a year earlier.
Europe: $8.81 billion, up 46 percent from $6.03 billion a year earlier.
Japan: $2.65 billion, up 91 percent from $1.38 billion a year earlier.
Asia Pacific: $10.15 billion, up 114 percent from $4.74 billion a year earlier.
Retail: $4.4 billion, up 38 percent from $3.2 billion a year earlier.

Computers. Mac shipments rose significantly during fiscal second quarter. Apple sold -- what company executives really mean by shipped -- 4 million Macs during the quarter, up from 3.54 million units during fiscal Q2 2011; growth was 7 percent year over year. Wall Street consensus was about 4.5 million units worldwide.

Apple PC growth easily beats the market at large. Two weeks ago, Gartner and IDC reported dismal global shipments. IDC put year-over-year growth at 2.3 percent, but only 1.9 percent by Gartner's estimates. The hard drive shortage had nominal impact compared to fourth calendar quarter.

The Mac is big windfall benefactor of the PC shipment/sales crisis, because:

Apple's brand is sizzling hot right now.
Most people use Windows, which is old to them if upgrading, while the Mac is fresh.
iPad cannibalizes Windows PC sales, as businesses and consumers buy the tablet as upgrade companion or even replacement.
Apple is more insulated from the hard drive shortage, in part because of how it sources components compared to most other computer makers.

"The consumer segment continued to be a drag on market growth, as PC demand was low", Mikako Kitagawa, Gartner principal analyst, says. "Questions remain on whether low-end systems can attract consumers, as their attention has moved to other devices". Reiterating previous observations, Gartner again highlighted smartphones and tablets as leaders among those "other devices".

But those consumer sales problems are specific to the larger industry, and not Apple. In the United States, Apple ranks third. IDC puts market share at 10 percent and Gartner at 10.6 percent.

Q2 2012 Unit Shipments by Geography

Americas: 1.21 million units, flat from 1.21 million units a year earlier.
Europe: 1.05 million units, up 5 percent from 995,000 units a year earlier.
Japan: 158,000 units, up 2 percent from 155,000 units a year earlier.
Asia Pacific: 771,000 units, up 29 percent from 596,000 units a year earlier.
Retail: 826,000 units, up 4 percent from 797,000 units a year earlier.

iPod. Apple shipped 7.7 million iPods during fiscal first quarter, down from 9.02 million a year earlier -- a 15 percent decline. iPod touch accounted for more than half of units sold. Apple ended the quarter with 4 to 6 weeks of inventory.

iTunes revenue: $1.9 billion, up 35 percent year over year.

Retail. Revenue was $4.4 billion up 38 percent year over year. Apple retail stores sold 826,000 Macs during the quarter. Apple opened two new stores for 363 worldwide. With average 361 stores open for the quarter, they generated $12.2 million each.

Photo Credit: Francesco Dazzi/Shutterstock

Windows Server 2012 release candidate coming in June

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 12:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

This just in from Microsoft: Windows 8 release candidate won't be the only one coming your way in less than six weeks. Expect Windows Server 2012, too. "The Windows 8 Release Preview will be publicly available in the first week of June 2012", Microsoft's Jeffrey Snover says. "We plan to deliver a release candidate of Windows Server 2012 in the same timeframe".

Windows & Windows Live President Steven Sinofsky revealed the June RC for the desktop operating system earlier today in Tokyo. Concurrent Windows Server 2012 release candidate isn't surprising given the operating systems share common code and development has tracked closely all along.

Last week, Microsoft formally named Windows Server 2012, which is a cornerstone of the company's public and private -- really, hybrid -- cloud strategy. Both products are tracking for October launch, although urgency is less with Windows Server 2012. Microsoft's PC partners are counting on Windows 8 to boost holiday device sales. Business sales aren't seasonal.

Photo Credit: gualtiero boffi/Shutterstock

You can assemble IKEA's Uppleva HDTV [video]

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 11:37am MDT by Joe Wilcox

My wife and I just about collapsed laughing while watching Conan last night. Episode's highlight: Two videos -- one for IKEA's Uppleva television. Team Coco isn't waiting for the official release and offers set-up instructions now.

The other segment, featuring a video, may not be SFW. Conan O`Brien accepts viewer responses, via YouTube, about mistakes he makes during the show. Last night, he went to great lengths to get around one. Keep liquids away from your computer before watching this one.

Macs may not get PC viruses, but they sure can spread them

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 10:10am MDT by Joe Wilcox

What do sexually transmitted diseases and Mac viruses share in common? Surprisingly lots, according to security software developer Sophos. People can spread both without exhibiting symptoms, and the infection rates for "Macs carrying malware and level of Chlamydia infection amongst young people" are about the same.

Say what? That's the question asked in BetaNews group chat this morning about the seemingly strange correlation. But it makes sense to me. My colleague Tim Conneally gets it, too. He observed (after doing a little research): "One in 4 people with Chlamydia have no symptoms. They're saying it's spreading but not affecting the host". That's exactly Sophos' point. The firm found a shocking number of Macs infected with PC viruses, in a 100,000 sampling. The Macs are immune but can infect Windows PCs.

Not long ago, Apple tweaked its OS X security page by removing something: "Mac OS X doesn't get PC viruses". That's absolutely true. Most viruses are designed for Windows and, therefore, don't infect Macs. But as the Sophos study shows, Macs sure can carry Windows viruses. Sophos finds that one in five Macs carry Windows malware, which can be spread by email and other means. One in 36 -- that's 2.7 percent -- are infected with Mac malware.

"Amazingly, some of the malware discovered by Sophos on the 100,000 Mac computers sampled dates back to 2007, and would have been easily detected if the users had run an anti-virus sooner", Graham Cluley, Sophos senior technology consultant, observes.

Like Windows, "malware can spread onto Macs via USB drives, email attachments, website download, or even a silent drive-by installation where the user doesn't realize their Mac's security has been subverted", Cluley explains. "Some Apple fans might feel relieved that they are seven times more likely to have Windows malware on their Macs than Mac OS X-specific threats, but they shouldn't be".

The recent Flashback Trojan, which infected 700,000 Macs and may still persistent on 500,000, is good example. That's not some asymptomatic Windows malware but something catchable by OS X.

"Sadly, cybercriminals view Macs as a soft target, because their owners are less likely to be running anti-virus software", Cluley warns. According to complimentary BetaNews polls, 74 percent of respondents do not have anti-malware installed on their primary Macs, while 92 percent of Windows users do.

"Bad guys may also believe that Mac users are likely to have a higher level of disposable income than the typical Windows user" Cluley speculates. "So, they might believe the potential for return is much higher". I've often wondered about that and am surprised attacks against Macs aren't greater because of it.

Linking Mac and Chlamydia infection-rates is brilliant. For one, it's a startling, memorable analogy. For another, the analogy links together pervasive behavior about taking unnecessary risks against viruses -- being unprotected. Finally, there is the youth angle, since the same demographic often seen using Macs also has high rates of STD infection.

Cluley makes the important point: "Just like malware on your computer, Chlamydia commonly shows no obvious symptoms. But left undetected Chlamydia can cause serious problems, such as infertility". He notes that some countries have created national screening programs to test people under 25, annually, for Chlamydia.

Maybe there should something like this for Macs. Once a year, Apple, working with security software developers, offers a free check up to scan and rid Macs of malware -- with special emphasis on clearing out the crap spread to Windows users.

Photo Credit: Vasilchenko Nikita/Shutterstock

Suddenly I'm uneasy about Windows 8's release date

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 8:39am MDT by Joe Wilcox

While I was sleeping -- and perhaps you, too -- Microsoft announced that one more public Windows 8 test build will come before the code is gold. Right now, Windows 8 Release Preview will be available the first week of June. What? Microsoft no longer calls these things release candidates? Timing is tight, unless Windows & Windows Live president Steven Sinofsky and his team exude absolute confidence they can finalize code in time for autumn launch.

It's a narrow path from early June release candidate to August release to manufacturing to October launch, unless there are no major changes from the Consumer Preview released in February or last-minute show-stopping bugs. You can read this as sign that Windows 8 is rock-solid ready and that Sinofsky and team are absolutely certain about the operating system's readiness or that they need to stretch out the time as long as possible. The Consumer Preview came at the last possible milestone for Microsoft to ship this year, and the next one follows similar tight track.

Measuring Windows 7 Milestones

As I wrote nearly three months ago you can expect Windows 8 in October, or not at all this year. To get there, RTM must come no later than end of August.

By measure of Windows 7, its successor trails considerably behind development track for October, which is the last month to launch so that new PCs fill the channel before holiday sales begin in earnest. Microsoft released Windows 7 Beta 1 on Jan. 9, 2009. By measure of that milestone in 2012, Windows 8 Consumer Preview came about seven weeks later. Typically, Microsoft would have offered a second Windows 7 beta but went right to release candidate, on April 30, 2009. Windows 8 needs similar accelerated track to be ready for the holidays. Instead, we have late-April announcement about June release candidate.

Windows 7 RTM: July 22, 2009, about six weeks from release candidate. Early June is even longer between public preview and RC for Windows 8. Windows 7 launched on Oct. 22, 2009 -- or three months after RTM. By that measure, Windows 8 gold code should come in late July to make October release.

OEMs need time to test new Windows versions, put together software images and ship PCs into the channel. Even in this era of real-time manufacturing, retail remains the primary sales channel. PC manufacturers still need a good six weeks from final Windows code's release to manufacturing to actual launch -- a little longer to get PCs in stores. Ideally, then, Windows 8 must RTM by end of August to make October launch, which is best timeframe assuring the channel is stocked for Black Friday.

Problem: Windows 8 brings dramatic changes compared to its predecessor, particularly because of the aforementioned user interface changes -- touch-oriented Metro and legacy desktop, which nixes the Start Button and Menu and adds the Office Ribbon throughout. Customers, developers and hardware partners will have to adapt to these changes. The more time the better, and they may not have it.

Last Chance to RTM

The good news: Windows 8's development will only trail its predecessor's by about 5 weeks if Microsoft meets the early June milestone. That's a refreshing sign for October release, but bodes ill for customers hoping for major changes, particularly around the Metro UI. Reaction among BetaNews readers is largely negative, for example. It's now unlikely that changes will come, with such a late release candidate. If you don't like Metro, stick with Windows 7 or get used to it.

I believe that Microsoft can ship Windows 8 in time for the holidays. But the less time the ecosystem has to prepare the less likely truly exciting hardware designs and Metro-supporting applications will be ready for the holidays.

Still, there's sense to what I hope is going on at Microsoft. In the writing business, there are deadlines. A story is ready when the deadline comes, regardless of what more the editor or writer might want to change. That's good analogy for software development. The Windows ecosystem needs the operating system ready for holiday PCs. Windows 8 is ready enough when the deadline to ship comes -- and that's whatever Microsoft and partners decide when its to be, not predecessor operating systems.

Something else: Microsoft's announcement timing is brilliant, and I hope by design. Apple announces first calendar quarter earnings today. Today's Windows 8 announcement should silence some of the ridiculous pre-Apple earnings blathering that floods the InterWebs. To Steven Sinofsky, I offer thanks for dulling the Apple noise -- even for just a few hours.

Samsung Galaxy S III promo dares iPhone users to be different [video]

Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 2:17pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Samsung's new promo for next week's big mobile event is a real snoozer. It's nothing like those cheesy videos mocking iPhone users for being wannabe hipsters, who have such no lives they'll wait hours on end to buy a phone that looks exactly like the one owned now. Instead of chutzpah, galaxies pass before your eyes. Get it? New Galaxy device launch. Wake me, I fell asleep.

But wait for it. There's a pretty good punchline, if you can bear through the video's first 48 seconds. Be sure that if an iPhone user, Samsung means the dig for you.

Thank you, JK Rowling

Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 12:12pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Sometime ago, I pledged to wait on reading the Harry Potter series until it came out as ebooks. I was ready and willing for October's planned debut on Google Books, but that was cancelled last minute. What happened instead mindboggles. In late March, author JK Rowling opened the Pottermore Shop to sell the ebooks directly -- in formats for most any device and with no onerous digital rights management. Let me emphasize that last bit: no DRM.

I've meant to opine since buying the Harry Potter ebooks as a set -- and affordably priced at that -- when Pottermore Shop opened 25 days ago. The universal distribution approach, fair pricing and DRM-freeness set apart the most successful fiction series in history from most every other popular literature available today in digital formats. Rowling's ebooks mark a watershed moment in digital publishing that could eventually lead to the end of onerous DRM. Remember, music started that way, but mostly is DRM-free today.

Timing is Magical

Rowling's timing couldn't be better, too. Two weeks ago, the US Justice Department accused Apple and five publishers -- Hachette SA, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster -- of colluding to fix ebook pricing. Three immediately settled, while MacMillan and Penguin, along with Apple, refused. I observed something then overlooked by many analyses of the lawsuit -- price fixing's effects are much bigger than what people pay for ebooks.

Publishers also demand onerous digital rights mechanisms that defy fair use-laws permitting people to share print books. Ebook sharing is limited at best and rights often are confined to a single user account. That's a secondary form of price fixing, since it compels even members of the same household to buy more than one copy of a title when using separate accounts on different devices. Buyers can read Kindle books on any device running Amazon's software, but rights restrictions limit or prevent sharing the titles with, say, family members on their separate accounts.

In a competitive market, particularly a growth one, competition should loosen rights. That's what happened with digital music, where DRM ruled early on but today is all but gone. Consumers benefit from the ability to share music within a household. Ebook publishers generally grant no such rights.

By breaking the price-fixing cartel, the US government has opened competition that likely will lead to the end of onerous ebook rights protection. There, retailers like Amazon -- and also Pottermore Store -- lead the charge, much as they did for digital music. Do you remember Apple cofounder Steve Jobs' call to end digital music DRM? Apple is a music retailer, which helped put pressure on music publishers. Jobs posted a public letter in February 2007, and Apple started offering the first DRM-free tracks two months later.

Your Rights to Read

DRM-free music typically contains a digital watermark, often in the metadata to identify the purchaser. Pottermore Store also watermarks ebooks, which won't deter piracy but should discourage it. Ebook rights also are similar to DRM-free music, including certain sharing prohibitions:

You may download one (1) copy of each book you purchase for storage and use on your reading/listening system, which could be your computer, your tablet, your MP3 player, your mobile phone, your eBook reader or any other compatible electronic device, or any compatible reading/listening service linked with the Pottermore Shop ('System'). You may also download up to seven (7) further copies of the book for storage and use in the same ways but this is subject to the continued availability of the book via the Pottermore Shop...

You may not and may not permit others to do any of the following things in relation to any book or extract: sell, distribute, loan, share, give or lend the book or extract to any other person including to your friends (except in the limited circumstances explained at 12.1 above).

Pottermore Shop offers some interesting buying options. Books are available in EPUB format, but there also is integration with digital store formats. I purchased my books connected to Amazon's Kindle Store, a choice made after purchasing. Pottermore Shop ebooks also support Barnes & Noble, Google Play and Sony Reader stores. Missing, and I surely wonder why: Apple's iBookstore.

Because of the generous download rights, I'll sometime soon download EPUB versions as backups for use on personal future devices. I may not use Kindle software forever. EPUB should last awhile.

All ebooks should be consumable on any device, anywhere without proprietary restrictions or rights protections. These favor publishers (and some distributors) selling ebooks, but not buyers or the cause of reading. Pottermore Shop does right, what the publishing cartel did wrong.

Fair Pricing

That gets down to pricing, too. Pottermore Shop sells the first three Harry Potter ebooks for $7.99 each and the other four for $9.99 a piece.

If that pricing rings familiar but distant memory, it should. Amazon favored $9.99 for popular titles before the publishing cartel, in cooperation with Apple, forced a change in the sales model -- from wholesale to agency. Under the wholesale model, market leader Amazon and other ebook distributors set prices. Amazon chose to sell some at a loss to reach that $9.99 price. Under the agency model, publishers set prices and give distributors a 30-percent take of the sale. Publishers forced the agency model on reluctant Amazon. The change effectively raised popular title prices by $5 or more.

But Pottermore does even better. The entire Harry Potter collection is available for $57.54, which works out to $8.22 each, saving $6.39 overall. That's how I bought my ebooks.

I don't have enough free-reading time, but managed to knock off Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in about 10 days. I was disappointed Rowling choose to keep the Americanized title over Philosopher's Stone, but, granted, that's nitpicking.

The Potter books are big and bulky to carry around everywhere. I could never have finished the first, if not for ebook format. I read Sorcerer's Stone on my smartphone whenever there was free time, such as meals or waiting somewhere for somebody. You know, plunking down in the man chair while my wife and daughter shopped.

Photo Credit: Daniel Ogren

Apple's Flashback Trojan tool fixes nothing

Posted: April 21st, 2012, 11:21am MDT by Joe Wilcox

As if there isn't problem enough, with Apple giving Mac users a false sense of security. Now security software vendors do it, too. Earlier in the week, Symantec reported that the number of Flashback-infected Macs had fallen to 140,000 -- that's from as many as 700,000 by Kaspersky Lab's reckoning. But yesterday, Dr. Web put the number at 500,000, leading Symantec to acknowledge low reporting of actual infections.

The revelation -- and it most certainly is -- comes more than a week after Apple released a security update designed to remove the Flashback Trojan, which also is called Flashfake. Half-a-million compromised Macs, tied together as a botnet, is the tipping point for Apple computers. Apple and its security software partners must rally quick, to kill this beast before it bursts the fragile dike protecting the Mac user community from the tsunamis that occasionally wash across the Windows world. This the turning point, where OS X joins Windows as a platform aggressively targeted by cybercriminals.

Mr. Gates' Neighborhood

People have talked about this tipping point for years, but it never came -- creating yet another false sense of security (damn there are so many). This is the time, should the Flashback botnet flourish -- or even just persist. As I expressed last week, before Apple released the security fix: "Botnets this size are self-propogating. Cyberciminals can use a large botnet to attack and infect other computers. Can this one be taken down?" No is the worst possible answer to the question.

For years, I've heard pundits of every kind claim that cybercriminals largely attack Windows over Macs because of the large number of users. One day, should Apple PC market share increase, they argued, Macs would become targets. That thinking is a load of horse poop.

The problem started first by design. Microsoft developed Windows before the popular, public Internet and designed early networking and other features for the corporate network. The simple concept: Make sharing as easy as possible. Years ago, I referred to Windows and supporting productivity apps like Office as Mr. Gates' Neighborhood, playing off the public television kids program Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood. It was a safe place, where people had no locks on their doors or windows and even connected their homes (think of that as Microsoft cross-integrating features). But then the big city -- the Internet -- grew up around the safe neighborhood. Suddenly, those lockless doors and windows and interconnected homes were a liability. Anywhere criminals could get in, they freely moved everywhere.

A decade ago, Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates made security the company's number one priority. Microsoft changed the way it develops software, took an aggressive and proactive approach to security fixes and put in locks, so to speak. But securing the Windows ecosystem was a slow process -- and still is. End users didn't change their behavior right away.

Meanwhile, cybercriminals assailed Windows with great success, creating vast botnets of infected PCs to advance their activities. This is hugely important to understand. Windows isn't the larger target because there are more PCs running the operating system. Cybercriminals succeeded creating botnets early on that are persistent, and they will continue to be unless one thing changes rapidly in the Wintel market: XP.

Botnet Backbones

Windows is quite a secure operating system today. But the majority of the install base uses Windows XP, which shipped long before Gates made security Microsoft's top priority. Granted, Service Pack 2's release in 2004, did much to improve Windows XP's security architecture. But escalated user privileges, among other features, make XP considerably more vulnerable to malware attacks than Windows Vista or 7. It's explosive when mixed with careless, or simply stupid, user behavior.

Windows botnets are the backbones of cybercriminal activity. They spread spam and phishing email, mask cybercriminal's IP identities and steal personal information on massive scales. Botnets are the ground forces in a global attack against Internet users. Their persistence is devastating.

In March 2011, Microsoft and law enforcement took down the Rustock botnet, which had operated since 2006. Global spam volumes fell by 40 percent following the takedown. Even then, with the head and tail cut off the beast, Rustock's body persisted, with the botnet still about half its size, based on infected IPs, three months later.

As the market slowly moves off XP, Windows botnets are threatened. How much depends on many factors, such as user behavior and development of new attack vectors. Cybercriminals need to look somewhere else, and OS X is easy pickings (same can be said of Android and iOS) since most users don't install anti-malware and a false sense of security leads many to take unnecessary risks.

The Flashback botnet is a huge concern. If not reduced or eliminated quickly, it will spread more Mac malware and lead other cybercriminals to increase their attacks against the OS X platform. If you look at the rise of cyber attacks against Windows there is more correlation to botnets' reach than number of Wintel PC users (that's hard data I'll put together some other time -- it is Saturday!).

This is the turning point, if Flashback is unchecked. Not because Mac market share has increased or OS X is any more vulnerable to exploitation than Windows 7. It's the successful creation of a viable Mac botnet and promise of others.

Photo Credits: maraga/Shutterstock

Windows Phone holds back Nokia?

Posted: April 20th, 2012, 1:24pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

That's the sentiment expressed by a commenter to an exciting promotional video Nokia uploaded to YouTube today. The Finnish handset maker shot the promo using the new Nokia 808 PureView, which sports 41-megapixel camera. The comment: "This is true Nokia innovation. Windows Phone is just holding them back". My question: Do you agree with either or both sentiments?

I'm a big Nokia fan, who relished the benefits of great camera capabilities long before iPhone even had a crappy one. I've owned E71, N79, two different N95s, N96, N97 and N900. Nokia's N Series set the standard for mobile phone photography that most rivals have yet to catch up -- and that includes the N8 and N9, which capabilities should shame every iPhone 4/4S photographer. I clamor for Nokia 808 PureView but won't buy one. Symbian holds me back, or perhaps I should say Windows Phone. Compelling as the smartphone may be, Symbian is a dead end. Windows Phone is Nokia's primary mobile OS now.

Not in This Universe

Perhaps in an alternate universe, Nokia stuck with Symbian and set out to reinvigorate the brand with 808 Purview and smartphones like it. As truly innovative design, the handset outclasses every Windows Phone Nokia sells, including flagship Lumia 900.

808 PureView key features: 4-inch AMOLED screen (Gorilla Glass); 16GB storage, expandable to 48GB with microSD card; 41MP camera with Xenon flash and f/2.4 Carl Zeiss lens; HSPA+ (up to 14Mbps), WCDMA 850/900/1700/1900/2100, GSM/EDGE 850/900/1800/1900; WiFi N; Bluetooth 3; GPS; Near Field Communications; FM transmitter; 1400 mAh battery; and Symbian Belle Feature Pack 1.

Lumia 900 key features: 4.3-inch AMOLED display (Gorilla Glass); 16GB storage: 8-megapixel rear-facing camera with Carl Zeiss lens and dual-LED flash; 1MP front-facing camera; 720p video capture from rear camera and VGA from front camera; GSM 850/900/1800/1900 radio; WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100 radio; 4G LTE; Bluetooth 2.1+EDR; Stereo Bluetooth; WiFi; 1830 mAh battery; and Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango" Commercial Release 2.

PureView is the brand Nokia should spend tens of millions to promote, rather than Lumia 900. But Symbian is going nowhere fast, so PureView instead puts a fitting end to Nokia's smart Symbian cameraphone heritage. Of course, PureView isn't dead. The technology, and hopefully the brand, is destined for Windows Phone one day.

808 Purview joins N9 as a truly compelling smartphone few people will buy. Why should they? There are no compelling future applications or services given Symbian's death sentence. Both phones should have anchored Nokia's brand revival. Instead, resources dedicated to the Windows Phone transition hold back the kind of marketing Nokia is renown for -- well, that is outside the United States.

Proud Legacy

Americans are cheated that way. Lumia 900 commercials are poor introduction to Nokia marketing, which is unusual for high-tech companies by emphasizing benefits over features and doing so with taste and humor. Nokia also launched many, successful viral marketing campaigns before social was in vogue -- grass-roots contests, too.

The video above is one among many shot with a Nokia smartphone. The company has long promoted its phone by shooting videos with them. A favorite marketing campaign, which looks dated in the YouTube HD era: Jealous Computers, promoting N95 in 2007. Amazingly, the marketing website is still live. Quick! Get there before Nokia CEO Stephen Elop orders it dismantled!

Nokia's N95 campaign was post-PC before anyone really talked about the concept. The handset maker positioned N95 as a computer in your pocket. In the videos, shot with the cameraphone, jealous computers attack N95 owners.

Yesterday, following Nokia's dismal first quarter earnings results -- smart device sales declined 52 percent year over year -- colleague Ed Oswald and I took opposite sides. I wrote: "Nokia does the Windows Phone death dance". Ed opined: "Nokia's short-term pain is the result of long term problems".

Windows Phone is a pleasing operating system that looks and feels different from anything else available today. Now if only Nokia hardware could do for Microsoft's OS what it did for Symbian. Soon.

As many as 100,000 WordPress blogs infected 700,000 Macs with malware

Posted: April 20th, 2012, 9:35am MDT by Joe Wilcox

If computer security is your thing -- it really should be everyone's -- and you own a Mac, Kaspersky's analysis of Flashfake malware, also called Flashback, is a must-read. Gasp, this is only part one. There's more to come from the security software developer.

Flashfake's success -- Kaspersky raises the number of infected Macs to 700,000 from previous 600,000 estimates -- is bigger than the obvious conclusion Apple computers aren't safe havens from cybercriminals. Late last week, Apple released a Flashfake removal tool that contrary to earlier reports failed to substantially reduce the botnet. But as many as 100,000 infected WordPress blogs, the majority in the United States, lay in wait for unpatched Macs or even a Flashfake variant that unleashes another outbreak. Like last year's MacDefender outbreak, cybercriminals used tactics tried and proven against Windows users.

Drive-by Downloads

Before March, Flashfake bothered few Mac users because the attack vector was largely social engineering. All that changed thanks in part to current Apple security policies. Flashback exploits a Java vulnerability that Apple could have patched sooner but didn't.

Last week I praised Apple for disabling the Java plug-in with the most recent update. Now I'm not so sure, since in context of Alexander Gostev's analysis Apple really covers its ass more than protects Mac users. That's because "Apple never uses patches from Oracle and creates its own patches to close Java vulnerabilities", he explains. Oracle patched the vulnerability in February, while Apple got round to it in April. "This practice of releasing patches with delays of about two months is traditional for Apple".

Apple's Lion security page claims: "OS X has you covered...With virtually no effort on your part, OS X offers a multilayered system of defenses against viruses and other malicious applications, or malware". OS X hasn't got you covered, if Apple doesn't take readily available Java patches, waiting to produce its own instead. The adage Apple's way or the highway will get you run down.

Gostev, who heads Kaspersky's Global Research and Analysis Team, explains what happened next:

In order to spread Flashfake in March 2012, its authors made use of a cybercriminal partner program that appears to be of Russian origin. The partner program was based on script redirects from huge numbers of legitimate websites all over the world. Around the end of February/early March 2012, tens of thousands of sites powered by WordPress were compromised. How this happened is unclear. The main theories are that bloggers were using vulnerable versions of WordPress or they had installed the ToolsPack plugin. Websense put the number of affected sites at 30,000, while other companies say the figure could be as high as 100,000. Approximately 85 percent of the compromised blogs are located in the US.

Gostev continues:

Code was injected into the main pages when the blogs were hacked...As a result, when any of the compromised sites were visited, a partner program TDS was contacted. Depending on the operating system and browser version, the browser then performed a hidden redirect to sites in the rr.nu domain zone that had the appropriate set of exploits installed on them to carry out an infection.

He goes on to describe in detail the process of infection, which I encourage reading over your late-morning coffee and bagel (breakfast sandwich or cinnamon roll). But the main point is this: Drive-by download spread malicious code -- something users of older Windows versions see but is much, much less common on Vista or 7. Mac Defender, which largely spread by SEO poisoning, used similar infection tactic.

People Problems

There has been much buzz this week about there being more Mac malware or increasing vulnerabilities in OS X. That's BS. OS X and Windows 7 are both fairly hardened operating systems. Flashback's success spotlights people problems instead:

1. Apple's response is inadequate. The company doesn't patch vulnerabilities fast enough, as both Flashback and Mac Defender demonstrate. Meanwhile Apple doesn't disclose enough information to end users. To both outbreaks, Apple either failed to acknowledge a security problem existed or waited too long doing so.

2. OS X marketing creates a false sense of security among Mac users. Apple propagates the myth Macs are safe from malware with statements like "OS X has you covered" or "OS X doesn't get PC viruses". Better security is one reason many people switch to the Mac, where they're lulled into believing they're safe. Meanwhile long-time Mac users already are believers.

3. Most Mac users don't use anti-malware. That's the finding of BetaNews polls conducted in May 2011 and earlier this month. Seventy-four precent of respondents say they do not have anti-malware software installed on their primary Mac. Ninety-two percent of Windows users do. If Apple isn't adequately protecting Mac users, they need to look after themselves. They don't.

4. Half of new Mac users come from Windows. From where is the Mac install base growing? Windows users. Apple executives consistently say that half of Mac buyers are Windows users. As both malware outbreaks demonstrate, the same social engineering techniques common to Windows PCs are used. Windows users bring bad habits to the Mac, which Flashback and Mac Defender show can be exploited as easily on Apple computers as Windows PCs. Those habits are deadly for users lulled into a sense of safety and not using anti-malware.

Editors Note: After posting, Dr. Web released startling new data that shows Flashback still infects more than 500,000 Macs. That following release of Apple's tool for removing the Trojan.

Photo Credit: Julien Tromeur/Shutterstock

Microsoft Q3 2012 by the numbers: $17B revenue, 60 cents EPS

Posted: April 19th, 2012, 2:03pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Late this afternoon, after the closing bell, Microsoft revealed results for one of its most uncertain quarters in years. That's because Gartner and IDC report tepid PC shipments and Microsoft prepares to launch a horde of new products later this year, including new versions of Office, Windows and Windows Server, among others. Sometimes sales sag in the quarter or two before new product releases -- and for 2012 there are many core ones coming.

"With the upcoming release of new Windows 8 PCs and tablets, the next version of Office, and a wide array of products and services for the enterprise and consumers, we will be delivering exceptional value to all our customers in the year ahead", Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer says.

Perhaps businesses share Ballmer's enthusiasm and aren't backing off purchases, particularly those looking to lock in Software Assurance upgrades. For fiscal Q3, ended March 31, Microsoft revenue was $17.41 billion, up 6 percent year over year. Operating income: $6.37 billion, a 12 percent increase. Net income was $5.11 billion, or 60 cents a share -- that's down from $5.23 billion and 61 cents a share a year earlier. However, in the year-ago quarter, Microsoft received a settlement from the IRS that boosted EPS by 5 cents. Removing this one-time event, EPS rose by 7 percent.

Average analyst consensus was $17.18 billion revenue and 58 cents earnings per share, for the quarter. Revenue estimates ranged from $16.61 billion to $17.46 billion, with estimated year-over-year growth of 4.6 percent. By both measures, Microsoft beat the Street.

Q3 2012 Revenue by Division

Windows & Windows Live: $4.62 billion, up 4 percent from $4.45 billion a year earlier.
Server & Tools: $4.6 billion, up 14 percent from $4.1 billion a year earlier.
Business: $5.81 billion, up 9 percent from $5.33 billion a year earlier.
Online Services Business: $707 million, up 6 percent from $667 million a year earlier.
Entertainment & Devices: $1.6 billion, down 16 percent from $1.94 billion a year earlier.

Q3 2012 Income by Division

Windows & Windows Live: $2.95 billion, up 6 percent from $2.8 billion a year earlier.
Server & Tools: $1.74 billion, up 29 percent from $1.35 billion a year earlier.
Business: $3.77 billion, up 14 percent from $3.31 billion a year earlier.
Online Services Business: Loss of $479 million, up 38 percent from $776 million loss a year earlier.
Entertainment & Devices: $229 million loss compared to 210 million profit a year earlier.

Whither Windows

Laggard PC shipments weighed on Microsoft, which isn't surprising given the continued distraction smartphones and tablets cause consumers -- and that includes those bringing personal devices to work. Still, Windows and Windows Live division revenue grew 4 percent year over year and income by 6 percent (after falling 6 percent and 11 percent, respectively, in fiscal Q2).

IDC puts first calendar quarter year-over-year PC shipment growth at 2.3 percent, but only 1.9 percent by Gartner's estimates.

"The consumer segment continued to be a drag on market growth, as PC demand was low", Mikako Kitagawa, Gartner principal analyst, says. The analyst firm again highlights smartphones and tablets as leaders among those "other devices".

"Slow growth in the US shows that despite interesting and new form factors like all-in-one (AIO) desktop PCs and Ultrabook-class notebook PCs, the market remains conservative and focused on replacements", Loren Loverde, IDC vice president, says. Replacements don't just refer to necessary PC upgrades but tablets being used to supplement existing PCs. The devices replace behavior rather than the older computer.

Still, both analysts expressed optimism for the holidays. "We expect PC shipments to pick up significantly by the fourth quarter and beyond as HDD supply and pricing are normalized, Windows 8 is launched, and replacements pick up", Loverde says. But "the US PC market is likely to remain constrained at least until the launch of Windows 8, which is expected in the fourth quarter of 2012".

The future looks interesting, as Microsoft prepares its increasingly aggressive response to iPad. Yesterday, the company disclosed Windows 8 Enterprise feature and licensing benefits -- and nearly all relate to mobility or mobile devices. They also tip how much emphasis Microsoft will place on Windows RT, which runs on ARM processors and is queued for tablets.

Two Software Assurance benefits stand out: Extended Virtual Desktop rights for Windows RT devices and extended rights for companion devices.

"So that means that WinRT devices, when used by someone with a PC covered by SA, are automatically given the same virtualization rights as the PC itself, notably the right to access a remote instance of Windows running in a VM (a VDI scenario)", Paul DeGroot, president of Pica Communications, tells me today.

"If you have something other than a WinRT device you have to pay more", he continues. "As with the WinRT device, you need SA on the PC; but after that you still need to purchase a Companion Device License for Windows SA. However, this license will cover up to four devices, like your iPhone, iPad, and home PC or Mac.

DeGroot emphasizes: "Overall, I'd rate this as an improvement over the old SA Roaming Rights, which were useless to most people, but this is a case where MS is clearly giving WinRT an advantage over the competition".

Division Highlights

Microsoft reports revenue and earnings results for five divisons: Windows & Windows Live, Server & Tools, Business, Online Services and Entertainment & Devices.

Windows & Windows Live. Strong demand among businesses helped the division to overcome the effects of weaker than-expected PC demand. Revenue rose by 4 percent year over year, and operating income by 6 percent.

Microsoft estimates that global PC sales to businesses grew 8 percent, but were flat among consumers. However, when removing continued, steep netbook sales declines, consumer PCs actually rose 6 percent. Together, Microsoft estimates that PC sales grew by 2 percent and 4 percent, which is stronger than either Gartner or IDC estimates.

More granularly, like other recent quarters, OEMs accounted for 75 percent of Windows sales. Despite the increase in sales to businesses, the mix was only 33 percent to them but 41 percent to consumers. OEM revenue grew by 4 percent.

Looking ahead to fiscal fourth quarter, Microsoft is cautious about negative market dynamics, but expects business PC sales to continue growing.

The company estimates that Windows 7 is deployed on 40 percent of enterprise desktops.

Server & Tools. Revenue rose 14 percent year over year and operating income by 29 percent, delivering a simply stunning quarter. The division is insulated against economic maladies, because about 50 percent of revenues come from contractual volume-licensing agreements.

"Product revenue increased $396 million or 12%, driven primarily by growth in SQL Server, Windows Server, and System Center, reflecting continued adoption of Windows platform applications.", according to the company's 10-Q filing.

Looking ahead to fiscal Q4, Microsoft expects volume-license sales to grow in the high teens.

Business. The division was the quarter's big overall performer (again); revenue rose 9 percent and income by 14 percent year over year.

Annuity licensing continued to lift sales, an ongoing trend. "MBD revenue increased primarily reflecting sales of the 2010 Microsoft Office system. Business revenue increased $469 million or 11 percent, primarily reflecting growth in multi-year volume licensing revenue, licensing of the 2010 Microsoft Office system to transactional business customers, and an 11 percent increase in Microsoft Dynamics revenue. Consumer revenue increased $16 million or 2 percent due mainly to increased sales of the 2010 Microsoft Office system", according to the company.

More numbers: Multi-year license revenue grew by 13 percent, Dynamics CRM by 30 percent and Lync by 35 percent.

Like Server & Tools, Business division is largely insulated against sluggish PC sales. Sixty percent of revenue comes from annuity licensing to businesses.

Looking ahead to fiscal fourth quarter, Microsoft expects double-digit volume-license growth.

Online Services Business. Online services revenue rose by 6 percent, while the operating loss decreased by 38 percent. Search and display ads drove up online advertising revenue by 9 percent -- $51 million to $639 million. "OSD operating loss decreased due to higher revenue and lower cost of revenue and sales and marketing expenses.", according to the 10-Q.

Looking ahead to fiscal Q4, Microsoft expects continued improvements.

Entertainment & Devices. Revenue fell by 16 percent. Microsoft shipped 1.4 million Xboxes during the quarter -- a 1.3 million-unit decline from a year earlier. Xbox revenue fell 33 percent, or $584 million.

There were -- get this -- 100 billion minutes of Skype calls -- up 40 percent year over year.

Looking ahead to fiscal Q4, Microsoft expects double-digit revenue growth.

Photo Credit: Microsoft

Nokia does the Windows Phone death dance

Posted: April 19th, 2012, 10:09am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Few high-tech companies have imploded like Nokia and at the strangest time. Typically, dominant companies get killed during transitions from where they rule to where they don't. Nokia is oddest exception, imploding during a major computing era shift that favors its core competency. Transition from the PC to the mobile device eras is underway -- to a market where Nokia was, until recently, share leader by huge margins. How low the mighty has fallen, and former Microsoft division president turned Nokia CEO Stephen Elop wields the missile codes that launched self-inflicted nuclear strikes.

Today's Nokia earnings report is a disaster. It's radioactive fallout from Elop's decision to turn over the Finnish company's crown jewels to Microsoft. Elop sold Nokia's soul to his former masters, which I described at the time as a "silent takeover" of the company. Nokia needed new leadership, not new technology -- Elop's fundamental platform and cloud services switch -- to combat escalating Android and iOS competition. Before his tenure, Nokia did the right things, just in the wrong ways. Since taking the chief executive's seat in Autumn 2010, Elop has done the wrong things in all the right ways to destroy a once proud mobile device innovator.

Elop's Nuclear Nightmare

Companies are successful for many reasons. Leadership is among the most important. Good leaders inspire their underlings. They instill confidence among the loyal troops and raise their morale. Instead Elop disgraced all Nokia employees by showing absolutely no faith in them or the hugely successful mobile business their work produced. When justifying the Windows Phone switch, he called Symbian a "burning platform".

In a long memo, Elop wrote: "I have learned that we are standing on a burning platform...We poured gasoline on our own burning platform...Nokia, our platform is burning". In business, perception is everything. Yet Elop contributed to the perception that the global leader in handsets and mobile operating systems was a failure. He fed the fire of hype burning behind Android and iPhone. If anyone lit Nokia's platform afire, it was Elop and his negative memo that spread more FUD -- fear, uncertainty and doubt -- about Nokia's future than any competitor ever could. Elop isn't the harbinger of positive change but negative perceptions.

Then he chucked away the most successful mobile operating system on the planet -- with install base that dwarfed Android and iOS. The only thing burning about Symbian and planned successor Meego was the fire Elop set. He burned down the house -- no, he nuked the city -- in order to build anew.

The extent of devastation is nowhere more apparent than Q1, the first full quarter of results after Nokia shipped the first handsets running Windows Phone. Smartphone sales boom everywhere else, globally rising 58 percent in 2011 to 472 million units, accounting for 31 percent of all handset sales, according to Gartner. There is huge market transition underway that rivals capitalize on. Look at Apple's 35.5 million iPhones sold in fourth quarter, by Gartner's reckoning.

Lumia 'Sales Have Been Mixed'

Today, Nokia revealed that Q1 sales plummeted by 29 percent, leading to a $1.76 billion loss. Sales fell 26 percent quarter-on-quarter, too. Device and services net sales plummet by a stunning 40 percent year over year and 29 percent sequentially. Other year-over year declines: smart devices, 52 percent; mobile phones, 32 percent.

Nokia's Windows Phone transition is a major part of the problem, lessening demand for Symbian smartphones. First quarter global sales aren't available from analysts yet, but, according to Gartner, Symbian smartphone share fell to 11.7 percent from 32.3 percent in Q4 2011. The company that invented the smartphone, dropped from first to third place, behind Android and iOS, respectively.

Today, Elop says the hard thing -- and he deserves credit for it: "Actual sales results have been mixed", referring to Lumia Windows Phones. That's a polite way of saying they suck. During fourth quarter, Microsoft mobile OS share fell from 3.4 percent to 1.9 percent, according to Gartner. First quarter numbers aren't available, but as the IDC chart above shows it's a trend.

In February 2011 I warned: "Nokia will lose customers and market share. It's the inevitable consequence of such a massive operating system switch. Timing is terrible". That's not a rocket science conclusion. Android and iOS device sales soared and higher still later in 2011. Again mixing metaphors, it's like Elop called his race car to the pits during the Indianapolis 500 to change engines.

Now he's desperate. "We have a clear sense of urgency to move our strategy forward even faster". Elop says -- and he should. But where was that urgency in early 2011, when he turned over platform development responsibility to Microsoft?

Burning Down the Brand

Nokia had much to build on before Elop nuked it. For starters the brand. Wireless analyst Tomi explains: "More people use a Nokia phone than drink a Coca Cola, than wear Levis's jeans, than tell time on a Timex watch, than wear Nike running shoes, than smoke Marlboro cigarettes, or write with a Bic pen". While Nokia's brand may not seem much to Americans, it's huge everywhere else, particularly Asia, Europe and Africa.

"What was life like before Stephen Elop started to destroy the brand most widely spread on the planet?" Ahonen asks. Much better is the answer. While Nokia bled share before, the Windows Phone transition and Elop's performance opened an artery.

Unquestionably, Nokia had problems before Elop joined the company. Smartphones like N97 couldn't compete with iPhone, cloud services proved to be clunky and developers fled for Android Market (now Google Play) and Apple's App Store. But these were fixable problems with leadership and even a few cloud and software acquisitions. Instead, Elop nuked this city in lieu of urban renewal.

Nokia 808 PureView, announced in late February is sure sign of what the company could have done with Symbian. The truly innovative smartphone sports a 41-megapixel camera but not Windows Phone. So much good that was Nokia is now lost.

I'm a big Nokia phone fan -- have been for years. I would be ecstatic to be proved wrong, to a year hence write a mea culpa story. But looking at how much worse off Nokia is today than 14 months ago, when Elop cut the Microsoft deal, the big Windows Phone turnaround is more Harry Potter magic than Albert Einstein Relativity.

Editor's Note: Ed Oswald and Joe Wilcox wrote opposing positions about Nokia's Windows Phone strategy, independently today (we didn't want one directly responding to the other but to circumstances). Please read Ed's "Nokia's short-term pain is the result of long term problems".

Photo Credit: andrea crisante/Shutterstock

Is Microsoft's carrot enough for businesses to take the Windows 8 Enterprise stick?

Posted: April 18th, 2012, 7:21pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Microsoft pours out the Windows 8 news this week, ahead of fiscal 2012 third quarter earnings results. Yesterday, the company revealed the new SKUs and Windows Server 2012 naming. Today comes more information on the most distinct edition -- Windows 8 Enterprise. I debated all day what to write about the software, feeling that there's more marketing speak than substantive information in the blog post announcement. The devil is in the details as they say, and never more than Windows Enterprise and so-called Software Assurance benefits coming with it.

That's because Enterprise is a slippery slope for large businesses to climb. Most enterprises acquire Windows on new PCs -- OEMs account for 75 percent of sales -- but from there Microsoft licensing rules get sticky. Businesses can reimage PCs based on whatever license rights they have. Those wanting to deploy Windows Enterprise must take on something else: Software Assurance is required and adds considerable upfront cost: 29 percent of the full price for two or three years, paid annually. The real benefits -- that carrot -- are all about licensing, for those businesses willing to be beat by the stick (Software Assurance).

Assessing Software Assurance

Eleven months ago, Pica Communications president Paul DeGroot wrote an 8-part Microsoft licensing series for BetaNews. Microsoft has tweaked licensing over the past year, largely to support the cloud and Windows 8 Enterprise Software Assurance reflects some of the tweaking. Largely, what DeGroot laid out in May 2011 still holds true. That 29 percent works out to 13 percent savings over a three-year annuity contract. He explains:

At 29 percent a year on desktop products like Windows and Office, if you hold out for four years or more, the non-SA customer will pay 'only' 100 percent for the upgrade license, while the SA customer will pay 116 percent. In effect, the Software Assurance customer is paying a 16 percent premium to get a 13 percent discount. In fact, since larger business customers pay for Software Assurance three years at a time, they pay 87 percent for the first three years, and if they renew SA without getting an upgrade, another 87 percent for the next three years. That adds up to 174 percent, or a 74 percent premium to get a 13 percent discount.

Most enterprises upgrade less frequently than three or even four years, based on multiple analyst studies and an easily observable situation: More than 10 years after its release -- with Vista and 7 in between, XP is still the most widely deployed Windows. As an upgrade plan, for the majority of large businesses buying Windows, Software Assurance is no benefit at all from cost-savings perspective.

However, one benefit is commonly used -- and it's one Microsoft likes to keep secret: Many large businesses use annuity contracts to exercise downgrade rights, so they can maintain compatability across the organization. So they buy new PCs with, say, Windows 7 and reimage with XP.

But there are other benefits that Microsoft touts, and few have done much to increase Enterprise Edition adoption. When Windows 7 launched nearly three years ago, OEMs accounted for 80 percent of sales. Since, with Microsoft all but forcing enterprises to take Software Assurance, there has been 5 percent shift. I have argued since Vista's release more than 5 five years ago that the Software Assurance requirement discourages enterprises from deploying newer Windows versions.

Microsoft won't change, because it wants for Windows what it has with Office: The majority of sales are tied to lucrative annuity contracts, not uncertain PC sales.

Enterprise Edition Benefits

Microsoft's Software Assurance stick is hard. What about the carrot? In today's blog post, Erwin Visser breaks down the benefits by features and licensing terms -- but they're really all about licensing. Microsoft makes a choice to license certain features in one Windows 8 edition or another. There is no technical reason, as there might be for hardware, for any distinction. About features, he explains:

Windows To Go is a fully manageable corporate Windows 8 desktop on a bootable external USB stick. This will allow IT organizations to support the “Bring Your Own PC” trend and businesses can give contingent staff access to the corporate environment without compromising security.

DirectAccess allows remote users to seamlessly access resources inside a corporate network without having to launch a separate VPN and helps IT administrators keep remote users’ PCs in compliance by applying the latest policies, software updates, is easier to deploy, and it can be implemented with the existing IPv4 infrastructure.

BranchCache allows users’ PCs to cache files, websites, and other content from central servers, so content is not repeatedly downloaded across the wide area network (WAN). When used with Windows Server 2012, Windows 8 brings several improvements to BranchCache to streamline the deployment process, optimize bandwidth over WAN connections and ensure better security and scalabilty.

AppLocker can help mitigate issues by restricting the files and apps that users or groups are allowed to run.

VDI enhancements: Enhancements in Microsoft RemoteFX and Windows Server 2012, provide users with a rich desktop experience with the ability to play 3D graphics, use USB peripherals and use touch-enabled devices across any type of network (LAN or WAN) for VDI scenarios.

New Windows 8 App Deployment: Domain joined PCs and tablets running Windows 8 Enterprise will automatically be enabled to side-load internal, Windows 8 Metro style apps.

Regarding benefits directly related to Software Assurance:

Windows To Go Use Rights: Windows To Go will allow companies to support Bring Your Own PC scenarios and will give employees who need to work from home more secure access to their full corporate environment. With Windows To Go use rights under Software Assurance, an employee will be able to use Windows To Go on any company PC licensed with Windows SA as well as from their home PC. Additionally, through a new companion device license for SA, employees will be able to use WTG on their personal devices at work.

Windows RT Virtual Desktop Access (VDA) Rights: When used as a companion of a Windows Software Assurance licensed PC, Windows RT will automatically receive extended VDA rights. These rights will provide access to a full VDI image running in the datacenter which will make Windows RT a great complementary tablet option for business customers.

Companion Device License: For customers who want to provide full flexibility for how employees access their corporate desktop across devices, we are introducing a new Companion Device License for Windows SA customers. For users of Windows Software Assurance licensed PCs this optional add-on will provide rights to access a corporate desktop either through VDI or Windows To Go on up to four personally owned devices.

In looking over both lists, I make an immediate observation: The major benefits are all about enabling businesses to better handle different device types. Stated differently: Windows 8 Enterprise is Microsoft's solution to businesses' consumerization of IT problem -- if you can really call it a problem.

Analysts Weigh In

When Microsoft introduced Software Assurance in May 2001, it positioned the annuity license plan for upgrades. But over time, businesses consistently used SA to exercise the aforementioned downgrade rights, while many others chose to pay full price since they wouldn't upgrade any sooner than four years. Microsoft responded by adding so-called benefits, such as home use rights, to tempt more enterprises to Software Assurance. The real question about Windows 8 Enterprise: Are the select features and new SA benefits enough for the bulk of businesses?

"The transition is going to be pretty slow for enterprise", Roger Kay, Endpoint Technologies president told me today. "It always is, and it seems like the pace of OS turnover is slowing as the incremental increase in value of each transition declines (oddly, because the last one was so good)".

In looking at new features, "there is some new value here", Kay says, "but is it enough to stimulate a large-scale transition? The Win7 transition is still under way. So, I'd say first tentative experiments in 2012 and 2013, more adoption in 2014, and flood tide in 2015". Oh? If Microsoft keeps to releasing a new Windows every three years, the tide would like, Windows 8 this year, flood the new version.

DeGroot is a bit more optimistic, but not exactly glowing. He told me today:

Windows RT VDA rights and the Companion device licenses could be very important. While I still think Microsoft's VDI licensing stinks, and this doesn't change it a lot, these new rights are vastly superior to the current SA Roaming Right for Windows, which are ridiculously restrictive. The SA Roaming Right only gives you the right to use third-party devices over other people's networks.

My short description of this is that it gives you the right to access corporate resources only over insecure networks from untrusted devices. These two benefits, in contrast get it right: SA on Win 8 will give customers the added flexibility that they should have been getting all along when they bought SA.

Earlier today, Microsoft refreshed Intune. Licensing changes related to Windows 8 Enterprise are promising.

"The accompanying Windows Intune blot/release says you'll be able to manage up to four addtional devices, and it will cover iPads, Android, etc, at the same $11 a month price", DeGroot explains. "I have always thought Intune was seriously overpriced, but this really can deliver value, and it's much better for mobile devices than using conventional management tools".

That circles back to the actual features and extent of their appeal.

"They've got some new stuff here: AppLocker, probably the VDI stuff (although it would be nice to get a closer look), the sideloading of Metro apps", Kay says. "I imagine Windows To Go and DirectAccess, taken together, make a pretty nice offering".

DeGroot sees Microsoft making an important concession to all businesses that actually diminishes Windows 8 Enterprise's appeal. "The two most important enterprise pieces, BitLocker and the MUI, are in Win 8 Pro and don't require SA anymore. I'm happy to see those changes, but they also reduce the value of SA somewhat", he says.

"The other stuff, like App Locker, DirectAccess, BranchCache, are features that some folks appreciate, but they're not going to drive many people to Enterprise", he adds. "Microsoft is always evolving RDP, and I'll give them credit for an excellent job there, so I'm not sure what additional VDI enhancements SA provides".

Consider all this an introduction to posing the question to you and your IT organization: Is Microsoft promising enough for you to seriously consider adopting Windows 8 Enterprise, particularly if you don't have Software Assurance coverage today?

Photo Credit: mikeledray/Shutterstock

I applaud Windows 8 versions because I remember pure XP

Posted: April 18th, 2012, 11:58am MDT by Joe Wilcox

I certainly hadn't planned on responding to a story written in 2003 today. But, hey, the Internet's memory is better than an elephant's -- and I've been called to task for "forgetting". Most certainly I did not forget. Circumstances changed.

Yesterday, while waiting for my 90 year-old father-in-law at the optometrist, I got out my smartphone and started scanning Tumblr posts. One led to a Time magazine story about the "Hug Me Coke Machine", which I Tumblred hours late. While at Time's site, I spied something else: "Windows 8 Versions: The News Is Mostly Good" by Harry McCracken. He referred back to my old CNET story "Windows faces new competition: Itself", about fragmenting versions, and contrasted it against my more recent musings for BetaNews. Thanks for remembering, Harry.

XP Fragmented

Microsoft launched Windows XP with two versions: Home and Professional, but quickly added more: Embedded, Media Center, Tablet PC and 64-bit, among them. End users could easily buy 32-bit or 64-bit Home and Pro editions but not Embedded, Media Center or Tablet (and much later Starter), which shipped on new hardware -- like Windows RT will, presumably, later this year. I observed then that Microsoft confused customers by fragmenting Windows and attempted to artificially create competition in a monopoly market.

People want choice, and there was little of it and for many; the existing Windows installed on corporate and consumer PCs was good enough. Microsoft wanted to create competition that might spur upgrades. The strategy failed -- more on the significance later.

The XP fragmentation story posted in April 2003, within weeks of my leaving CNET and joining Jupiter Research as analyst responsible for the Microsoft practice. Two-and-half years later, I met Microsoft product managers to discuss Windows Vista. The company planned to greatly expand the number of Windows editions but, in the end, not as many as discussed during that meeting.

Whither Windows 8

Now fast forward to this week's announcement, where Microsoft modestly trimmed Windows 8 editions. For the majority of non-Chinese speaking users there are two: Windows 8 and Pro. This is the software that will ship on new PCs or you can buy to upgrade Windows 7 systems. These are largely comparable to Windows XP Home and Pro. Microsoft also will keep the Enterprise Edition introduced with Windows Vista that is available only through volume-licensing and release a Chinese-language Windows 8 version. Like Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, the new Windows RT, for devices running on ARM processors, will be available only on new hardware.

That brings me to McCracken's story. He writes:

People somtimes pine for the Windows XP era and talk about XP coming in just two well-defined editions: Home and Professional. (Here’s Joe Wilcox recently doing that -- even though he wrote that 2003 article about the excessive number of XP versions.) They seem to be forgetting that XP is where the concept of endless specialized versions of Windows began. You had your Tablet PC Edition, your Media Center Edition, your Starter Edition, forgotten variants such as Windows XP for subscription computers.

I agree that "XP is where the concept of endless specialized versions of Windows began". But Windows XP also started with only two versions, in October 2001, and that's my point in the stories McCracken references and the newest: "Three Windows 8 versions is just right". I don't drum on about the endless XP versions because they're no more. The hardware-only versions are way out of vogue, if you can find them for sale anywhere at all. The editions that matter -- the ones installed on hundreds of millions PCs are Home and Pro, sprinkled with a little Starter for good measure.

Remember This

I didn't forget; what happened to Windows XP editions between 2003 and 2007 isn't relevant to the current discussion or what's available in the market. But getting back to basics -- two versions for x86 processors that end users can buy and install -- is. Meaning: What Microsoft released in October 2001. As I've repeatedly expressed, one Windows would be even better -- going even more back to basics. Windows 95 was one version for businesses and consumers. That's the ideal product scenario: Windows 8 for x86 and Windows RT for ARM, and nothing more.

Windows XP Media Center and Media Center editions were market failures. They sold poorly. Microsoft tried to recoup them and artificially create choice by expanding the number of editions with Windows Vista. Ultimate replaced Tablet PC and Media Center. Today Microsoft sells six Windows 7 editions, three at retail (Home, Professional and Ultimate), which is tacit admission the number is too many. Basic and Starter come on new computers and Enterprise is volume-license only.

The big difference is something I predicted in February 2006, which sets apart the versioning strategy adopted with Windows Vista from that extended from two Windows XP editions: "The version strategy may also allow Microsoft to do something not done in more than a decade: Raise desktop operating system prices, a tact that can be difficult to take in a market where one product dominates and where monopoly and a contentious antitrust case cast long shadows". That's exactly what happened by introducing Ultimate and strong-arm licensing tactics for Enterprise (Microsoft demands enterprises use this edition, which also requires paying extra for Software Assurance).

I didn't forget. I made reference to what was Windows XP at launch and what it is today as widely-deployed software: Home and Pro. Then there is what Microsoft did with new editions later on: Effectively raise prices in a non-competitive market. Everyone would be wise to remember that and wonder, with increased competition from non-PC devices and Macs running other operating systems, what Microsoft will charge end users, OEMs and volume-license subscribers for Windows 8.

Microsoft, Nokia, don't cheat Lumia owners of Windows Phone 8

Posted: April 18th, 2012, 9:01am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Children often suffer when parents make bad decisions. For the marriage of Microsoft and Nokia, there is trouble looming for the kids -- that's you, buyers of Lumia smartphones. The next version of Windows Phone codename Apollo may not be supported. That's the rumor shooting across the web today. Here's one bit of gossip every current Windows Phone owner should hope is wrong.

I've got no inside intelligence here, hearing nothing either way about Lumia upgrades. But I can see scenarios where Apollo might be a problem, particularly for older CPUs or GPUs. For example, all current Windows Phones are single-core. Surely double-core handsets are coming, but will the software support single-core CPUs? It's the first question to ask, with rumors a flying and Microsoft not denying.

Microsoft has long made backward compatibility a top design priority, and that's something I can only hope won't change for Windows Phone. So far, Microsoft has done right by end users, quickly dispatching Windows Phone software upgrades and supporting most existing hardware. Looking ahead, anything less would be a marketing disaster for flagship handsets.

AT&T started selling Lumia 900 here in the United States on April 8, in three colors. White model hits stores April 22. The smartphone is Nokia's flagship, for which Microsoft and its partners are spending beacoup bucks to market. Then what, a few months into subscribers' two-year contractual commitment, they discover their sizzling hot Windows Phone is obsolete? Say it ain't so, Microsoft and Nokia.

But if it's true, they can't say anything. It's a rock and a hard place. What Microsoft, Nokia or Windows Phone enthusiasts will buy now knowing they'll be cheated later? Silence is confirmation, if it persists. Speak up Nokia and Microsoft. Tell us you'll do the right thing by customers -- in the way we expect you to.

CNET's Lance Whitney asks my question: "No Windows Phone 8 upgrade for you?" The Verge has conflicting reports: "Sources: current Windows Phone devices will not get 'Apollo' upgrade" and "All Windows Phones to get upgrade to 'next major version,' according to Microsoft developer evangelist" both by Dieter Bohn. The "no upgrade" story is more recent and the one setting off lots of InterWeb chatter this morning.

The trouble I see is Lumia. Backward compatibility can only go so far. It's not reasonable to expect Microsoft to support the oldest Windows Phones. Lumia is different, however. The first handsets hit market late last year, and Lumia 900 is freshly baked. Lumia is the first offspring of the Microsoft-Nokia marriage. There are high expectations here, which Apollo could lay low.

Microsoft, Nokia, do the right thing. Don't cheat Lumia owners of Windows Phone 8.

Meet Windows Server 2012

Posted: April 17th, 2012, 10:55am MDT by Joe Wilcox

It's codename Windows 8 Server no more. Keeping with previous year nomenclature, Microsoft today officially announced Windows Server 2012, during its Management Summit in Las Vegas. Corporate vice president Brad Anderson also confirmed the software would ship later this year, another indicator Windows 8 is on track for autumn launch.

Microsoft tends to be very specific with products that have a year in the name. Windows Server 2008 got its name in Mid-May 2007. The company has some rules about nomenclature, and that one foreshadowed late-year release at best (the software launched in February 2008). The deliberate 2012 nomenclature signals Microsoft's confidence that the new Windows Server will ship this year and likely sooner than later.

The official naming comes less than a day after Microsoft unveiled official desktop editions: Windows 8 and Windows 8 Pro for x86. The Redmond, Wash.-based company will continue offering a volume-license-only Enterprise edition and, separately, Chinese-language Windows 8. Another edition, Windows RT, will be available for ARM processors.

Windows Server 2012's big marketing push is the cloud and the software as foundation for businesses creating private clouds or third-parties -- Microsoft among them -- public cloud infrastructure. After years of toe-in-the-water experimentation, IT organizations are accelerating cloud adoption.

"There is a feeling of optimism in IT and excitement about the benefits of cloud computing", Anderson asserts. He adds:

What I hear now is you are still worried about the challenges, but you see how cloud computing can help you and your IT departments deliver more business value to your companies than ever before. You see that you can enable this change and help your business realize cloud computing benefits – greater agility, increased focus on innovation and significant cost savings.

"Many organizations have now passed the definitional stage of cloud computing and are testing cloud architectures inside and outside the enterprise and over time, the cloud will simply become one of the ways that we 'do' computing, and workloads will move around in hybrid internal/external IT environments", Chris Howard, Gartner managing vice president, says.

"As a result, the traditional role of the enterprise IT professional is changing and becoming multifaceted", he adds. "A hybrid IT model requires internal and external IT professionals to support the business capabilities of the enterprise".

Many organizations are choosing public cloud services for non-critical applications, but building private clouds where critical applications or data demand accountable security and privacy mechanisms. There Windows Server 2012 -- what Microsoft calls a "cloud-optimized OS" -- will be a crucial product for many businesses.

Microsoft's timing for Windows 8, Windows Server 2012 and System Server 2012, which is available today, bucks against uncertain economic times. But Gartner's recent CEO survey shows chief executives' determination to keep investing in technology this year.

"The intention to invest in technology is comparatively healthy" Jorge Lopez, Gartner vice president, says. "The newer trends, such as mobile and cloud, are rising to the foreground of CEO’s attention. However, CRM remains CEOs’ favorite IT capability because marketing is a never-ending competitive quest for customer retention".

Will your business invest in Windows Server 2012 this year?

Photo Credit: fbmadeira/Shutterstock

Dead rapper performs at California music fest

Posted: April 17th, 2012, 9:26am MDT by Joe Wilcox

My daughter watched him sing last night on YouTube, so it must be true.

The Coachella Valley Music and Arts Annual Festival is underway here in California. Weekend 1 just finished, with another three days of performances coming April 20-22. Third night's bang-up headliner: Rapper Tupac Shakur. He died in 1996.

MTV's Gil Kaufman explains how Tupac returned from the grave via hologram. You can thank Dr. Dre and AV Concepts, which is based here in San Diego.

"This show was by far one of the most exciting yet challenging projects we have ever worked on", AV Concepts president Nick Smith says. "A highly choreographed, live, outdoor holographic production of this magnitude with hundreds of thousands of people watching gave us the added incentive, and pressure, to deliver".

2Pac performed with Dr. Dre and Snoop Dog, reportedly before a crowd of 100,000.

Seriously, this is every music label executive's dream come true. Rock Star X dies young and posthumously sells beaucoup albums. Then he starts performing live gigs, resurrected by hologram, generating massive ticket sales, too.

"To the best of my knowledge, this was the first time anyone decided it would be a good idea to resurrect a long-dead music icon for the sole purpose of a performance", James Montgomery observes for MTV. "I'm willing to bet it won't be the last. Whether or not that's a good thing is largely up to you. Part séance, part neo-necromancy, Holo-pac also almost certainly heralds the coming of a brave new era of revenue-grabbing, legacy-tarnishing spectacle".

Do we perhaps love our musicians a little too much to let them go? Surely music labels love the money they generate. Hollywood Reporter's Jordan Zakarin says 2Pac's hologram may go on tour.

Then there are aging rockers. Who wants to see a bunch of balding, middle-aged fat guys singing yesteryear's hits. Put the old frakers behind a curtain, instead. They play and sing while holograms of their younger selves romp the stage and scream at moshers.

Say, Bud, you better check the fine print on that recording contract and see exactly who controls rights to your image when you die. Technology that amazes today could be mainstream tomorrow.

Three Windows 8 editions is just right

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 7:24pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Common sense has returned to Windows product marketing. After rumors of nine Windows 8 editions sent me into near cardiac arrest last month, Microsoft instead has gone back to basics. The new operating system will come in just two editions for x86 processors -- Windows 8 and 8 Pro. If you're running Windows XP today, as most people still are, these two will be familiar to you, right down to the major differences between them, being similar to Home and Professional Editions. The third, Windows RT, is for devices running ARM processors, and, as Microsoft previously disclosed, will only be available on new hardware. You can install Windows 8 or Pro on your PC, but RT comes preloaded.

Hot damn! There's seriously fresh thinking going on over at the Windows & Windows Live division. Someone pinch me and pray tell I'm not dreaming. The only thing better than this would be lower pricing, which, admittedly, I'm not hopeful for. But one can dream within the dream!

Windows isn't Toothpaste

Today's announcement also signals, with certainty short of alien invasion or Mayan-end-of-the-world predictions come true, that Windows 8 will ship this year. I'm still looking for October launch, and September is still reachable depending on when gold code is ready. Microsoft also tips that Windows 8 marketing will be Mad Men worthy. The stars are lining up for something truly exceptional, and given lackluster PC sales Microsoft partners need it.

I've long criticized Microsoft for the multi-edition approach, back to when product managers revealed the plan to me during meetings in late 2005. My suggestion then: One version and no more than two. Operating systems aren't toothpaste. Microsoft sought to create choice where none existed, because of the Windows monopoly.

Today, consumers have lots of choices. Mac market share is over 10 percent in the United States, according to Gartner and IDC, and tablets running Android or iOS compete against Windows Tablet PCs. Gartner and IDC report negligible market share for Windows tablets. By comparison, Pew Internet says that two out of every 10 American adults already own a tablet -- and, yes, based on other market share data most likely iPad. Given increasing competition for device dollars, the last thing Microsoft should do is make buying Windows any more complicated. Two versions for x86 plus one for ARM is enough -- it's just right.

KISS of Death

KISS -- keep it simple, stupid -- is the kiss of death when not followed in marketing matters. Simplicity sells, complexity smells, and this is truer in marketing than almost anything else. I've long argued that one reason Windows XP hung around so long is the overwhelming marketing complexity -- and price increases with it -- Microsoft introduced with Windows Vista and continued with successor 7.

Microsoft chose the features differentiating one of the many editions from the next, rather than letting competition and consumer choice dictate them. Not surprisingly, buyers -- and OEMs selling PCs -- chose differently and consistently two editions: Home Premium and Enterprise, the latter of which is purchased through Microsoft volume-licensing programs.

The market consolidated around two editions. Finally Microsoft meets that choice, by going back to basics: Home and Pro. I would still prefer to see one edition, which is what Apple does with OS X on the desktop. But I'm too giddy about the positives here to really complain.

Something else: Businesses and consumers have enough change to deal with because of Metro. The new user interface will jar many users and scar others, because, regrettably, many people don't like change. The last thing Microsoft should want to do is add complexity onto complexity, by pumping out mucho Windows 8 editions along with a radical user-interface re-design.

One strong ARM

Core features will largely overlap between Windows 8 and Pro. Microsoft's Brandon LeBlanc explains the important differences:

Windows 8 Pro is designed to help tech enthusiasts and business/technical professionals obtain a broader set of Windows 8 technologies. It includes all the features in Windows 8 plus features for encryption, virtualization, PC management and domain connectivity. Windows Media Center will be available as an economical 'media pack' add-on to Windows 8 Pro. If you are an enthusiast or you want to use your PC in a business environment, you will want Windows 8 Pro.

Windows RT will be a "single edition" for ARM processors, he explains further. It's clear the nomenclature plays off WinRT and emphasizes its importance. That won't mean much to consumers perhaps, but it will to developers and some IT departments. Windows RT is a Metro-only environment. Microsoft doesn't provide a legacy desktop, like with Windows 8 and Pro.

"Windows RT will include touch-optimized desktop versions of the new Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote", LeBlanc explains. "For new apps, the focus for Windows RT is development on the new Windows runtime, or WinRT, which we unveiled in September and forms the foundation of a new generation of cloud-enabled, touch-enabled, web-connected apps of all kinds". As I explained in February, Windows on ARM is the future of the operating system.

One version makes sense. On ARM, Microsoft faces lots of competition, looking at Android and iOS lead on media tablets and smartphones. KISS is the only sensible marketing approach.

Windows Secret Edition

I originally titled this post "Three Windows 8 editions is just right, Enterprise is too many", but condensed it to cut Microsoft some slack. There's a hidden gotcha -- the third x86 edition not emphasized in today's announcement. Enterprise edition isn't going away.

I only see it as a problem if Microsoft keeps requirements applied to Windows Vista and 7. Microsoft demands larger businesses to take Enterprise, which requires they also pay up for Software Assurance, too. I've long argued this licensing requirement discourages businesses from getting off Windows XP.

If Microsoft applies same terms to Windows 8, then Windows Pro is nothing but reduced-feature Vista or 7 Ultimate Edition. Perhaps Pro and Enterprise will be the same functionally, but one only available through volume-licensing. If they're feature equivalent, why have three x86 editions at all? Two is enough. Three's a crowd.

So what do you think? Is this approach sensible or simple enough? I'm impressed now, but the devil is in the details, as they say. Pricing and any more surprises are details that will matter much.

Editor's Note: Home Premium name corrected.

What is the most popular household gadget?

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 2:08pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Surely it's no surprise that nearly nine out of 10 American adults owns a cell phone. But would you believe that 19 percent own an ebook reader or tablet? Or that one in five dosen't use the Internet? These are among the fascinating findings from a fresh Pew Internet report "Digital Differences".

The findings are a blueprint for understanding Americans' digital lifestyles and what gadgets -- and supporting products and services -- fit in where. Major tech companies create distinct digital lifestyles people buy into, which is particularly true for Apple, Dell, Google, Microsoft, Samsung and Sony among others. Apple, Google and Microsoft are in pitched lifestyle product competition, and should look to studies like this one to understand the stunning nuances connected, so-called post-PC devices bring to consumer behavior.

Pew's Aaron Smith and Kathryn Zickuhr write:

Currently, 88 percent of American adults age 18 and older have a cell phone, 57 percent have a laptop, 19 percent own an ebook reader, and 19 percent have a tablet computer; about six in ten adults (63 percent) go online wirelessly with one of those devices. Gadget ownership is generally correlated with age, education, and household income, although some devices, notably ebook readers and tablets, are as popular or even more popular with adults ages 30-49 than those under 30.

Then there is Internet usage, for which demographics show wide gulfs. For example, 85 percent of college educated American adults have broadband at home compared to 22 percent of those who didn't complete high school. More broadly, six in 10 American adults have broadband at home -- that's up from 11 percent a decade ago.

But Pew's data presents an interesting trend the report's authors don't really address. Broadband adoption is down from 2010, when it was 66 percent. Based on this report and others from Pew, I can guess. Some Americans are replacing home broadband with connected-device wireless, whether built-in cellular 3G/4G, public hotspots or (more likely) both.

The change and reasons for it are hugely important as what I call the cloud-connected device (many analysts use the aforementioned post-PC and others PC-plus) era advances. Here Smith and Zickuhr identify changes in digital lifestyle:

As our research has documented the rise of mobile Internet use, we have also noticed a 'mobile difference': Once someone has a wireless device, she becomes much more active in how she uses the internet -- not just with wireless connectivity, but also with wired devices. The same holds true for the impact of wireless connections and people’s interest in using the internet to connect with others. These mobile users go online not just to find information but to share what they find and even create new content much more than they did before.

Connected-device owners use the Internet more and they are more engaged than traditional PC users, particularly cloud services (cue trumpets for Facebook and Google). Pew identified the early trend three years ago in report "The Mobile Difference".

AT&T gouges me for Internet usage -- 30 bucks a piece for three cellular data plans and another $65 for 24Mbps wired Internet. We get faster throughput on the LTE phones, and I'd gladly dump broadband and only use LTE and the local Internet cafe if there was unlimited family data plan for our smartphones. That's how my behavior would change.

For everyone else, Pew's report adds much to Gartner's recent prediction: cloud will replace the PC as the "center of users' digital lives" by 2014. Today's digital lifestyle is more about the cloud, sync, multiple devices and mobile Internet connections. But you knew that already, right? Because you're living the cloud connected-device life style already -- yes?

Photo Credit: Digital Storm/Shutterstock

Don't cry for me, iPhone

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 11:52am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Mark April 16th on your calendars as a day to remember -- and not because your taxes are due tomorrow, Americans. The weeks ahead promise cool ways to spend your refunds (assuming the tax man giveth back to you). Some of the best smartphones will arrive this week, with a blockbuster announcement coming in 17 days -- from Nokia and Samsung and another Samsung but with a big dash of Google sprinkled in. And Apple? Aaaaaahnt! Sound the game show buzzer. LTE iPhone is nowhere to be seen.

Coming April 22nd are not one, but two tasty 4G treats. As previously announced, Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone comes to AT&T all decked out in white -- yours for 100 bucks. Meanwhile, announced today, for an extra C Note, Sprint subscribers can get Galaxy Nexus along with fat $50 credit to put in their Google Wallet; the only real Google phone comes to the only national carrier with unlimited data. Looking ahead, Samsung today dispatched invites for a splashy May 3rd launch event -- it's the next Galaxy phone, baby. Don't cry for me, iPhone!

My question: Will some of you iPhone idolators turn coat and join the Android Army? Surely you all can't be satisfied with last year's last year's model (that's no typo), since iPhone 4S is little more than 4 with slightly spunkier processor and late-isn't-the-same-as-great 8-megapixel camera. There's still no LTE, which is increasingly standard on Android and even Windows Phone. When Apple follows Microsoft's tail to market, you've got to ask who's the real innovator here?

Pure Google

Sprint is taking preorders now for Galaxy Nexus, which arrives as early as April 20. So, if you've been wanting Ice Cream Sandwich, don't wait until Sunday when you can get a "pure Google" phone sooner.

I'm a sucker for good marketing. Sprint should give a raise to whomever wrote this: "Unleash the genius of your Galaxy Nexus with a Pure Google, bloatware-free experience at Sprint -- the only national carrier with truly unlimited data. Get unlimited data, text and calling to any mobile while on the Sprint network, with no throttling, no metering and no overages".

Galaxy Nexus specs: 4.65-inch multitouch display with 1280 x 720 resolution (100,000:1 contrast ratio); 1.2GHz dual-core processor; 1GB RAM; 32GB storage; 3G/4G LTE; 5MP rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; LED flash; zero shutter-lag; 1080p video recording; accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; proximity sensor; digital compass; Near-Field Communication (NFC); Bluetooth; WiFi. Measurements: 135.5 x 67.94 x 8.94 mm, 135 grams.

The phone is pretty much the same as Verizon's but with a few service differences:

Sprint is just building out its LTE network, so 4G is more in name only than with Verizon.
Sprint will support Google Wallet -- hence that fat credit -- in ways Verizon won't.
Google Voice is a big feature, which Sprint already offers with the Nexus S 4G.

White is Purity

Nokia launched the Lumia 900 on April 8th in three colors: cyan, magenta and black. But white is pure and on April 22nd in more ways than one. Lumia 900 stumbled at launch, after some early buyers had trouble keeping Internet connections. The company magnanimously responded by offering owners $100 credit or replacement phone. A software fix is available, for those taking the credit. New phones already are updated, including the white model. Hence my other reference to purity.

Last week, Jeff Flahaven explained why he traded iPhone 4 for Lumia 900. He's got LTE now, for starters, and a modern user interface in Windows Phone.

Lumia 900 specs: 1.4GHz Qualcomm APQ8055 processor; 4.3-inch AMOLED display (yes, it's Corning Gorilla Glass), with 800 x 480 resolution; 512MB RAM; 16GB storage: 8-megapixel rear-facing camera with Carl Zeiss lens and dual-LED flash; 1MP front-facing camera; 720p video capture from rear camera and VGA from front camera; GSM 850/900/1800/1900 radio; WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100 radio; 4G LTE; Bluetooth 2.1+EDR; Stereo Bluetooth; WiFi; accelerometer; ambient and proximity sensors; gyroscope; 2 microphones; 1830 mAh battery; Internet Explorer 9 mobile; and Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango" Commercial Release 2.

In a Galaxy Far, Far Away

Then there is the hotly anticipated successor to Galaxy S II, presumably III but we'll see. Samsung will hold a May 3rd event in London. The only sure thing about the smartphone: The scads of rumors circulating until Samsung's official announcement. But if this isn't a honking behemoth with high-resolution display, quad-core processor and 12-megapixel or greater camera, Samsung enthusiasts among the Android Army may collapse in despair.

As Apple and Samsung fight for smartphone market share leadership, the new Galaxy will set pace for iPhone to follow.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

As Metro debate smolders, will it burst into flames and consume Windows 8?

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 9:30am MDT by Joe Wilcox

On Friday, colleague Ed Oswald opined "Metro apps on Windows 7 is a bad, bad idea". I agree. Ed responded to Adrian Kingsley-Hughes' ridiculous commentary: "Bring Metro apps to Windows 7 to encourage developer growth". He usually writes good stuff, but this one is a stinker. Metro doesn't belong on Microsoft's current OS, and BetaNews commenters raise legitimate questions about how much it belongs on Windows 8.

Metro is a hotly-debated topic here, and on other sites where Windows enthusiasts gather. There's general consensus that Metro works for touch, albeit with too much scrolling to the left once there are many apps, but controversy about its functionality with mouse and keyboard and position as primary user interface is fierce. Some readers here also question whether or not touch should be the future Microsoft bets on. Windows 8's success depends on Metro -- businesses, consumers and developers embracing it. If they don't, the OS could be the biggest flop since Windows ME or Vista. Take your pick which!

Microsoft has brazenly bet on dramatic user-interface changes before and won. Windows 95 introduced the Start Button/Menu, and people lined up enthusiastically on launch day to buy the OS. Office 2007's Ribbon is better example, being more recent and offering no way back. The new UI wasn't reversible; Microsoft provided no mechanism to switch back to the old one. Yet Office 2007 and particularly successor 2010 were huge sales successes. Windows 8 will adopt the Ribbon motif for the secondary, legacy desktop motif. Change doesn't mean failure and these examples demonstrate huge successes.

On the other hand, what has the tile-like interface done for Microsoft's mobile OS. Windows Phone 7 bleeds market share rather than recovers it. Metro is much more appropriate for a smartphone -- some readers would debate touch's value there -- but hasn't done enough to woo even small numbers of users from Androids or iPhone. Is Metro really right for Windows 8? The answer starts with touch and its appropriateness as primary means of interacting with Windows.

Touch Me

Last week, analyst Mike Feibus opined for BetaNews: "Touchscreens are our friends". He uses newspaper redesigns -- surely dramatic moving from print to web -- as example of the challenge ahead. "It is Microsoft’s cross to bear as workloads increasingly transition from the client to the cloud. When you think about it that way, Metro is vital for Microsoft’s success. It’s a gateway between the old and the new. Between the PC and the tablet". Feibus is confident Metro and Windows 8 is a workable relationship.

Reader Robert Kegel responds:

I agree touchscreens are our friends but only with tablets and maybe laptops if you're using your laptop on your lap (like I am now). Once you have to take your arm off your table, or arm rest, or you have to lean forward to touch your monitor it stops being your friend and starts becoming a pain in the neck. Multitouch pads I can see being useful with Windows 8. I can also see (if MS will develop it within Windows 8) using your Windows 8 tablet as your touch pad with your tablet/touch pad mirroring our desktop OS...Windows 8 for me is a friend, I don't find it difficult to use with a mouse and keyboard (more difficult with a single touch track pad though).

"Do you have a touchscreen on your laptop?" mshulman asks. "As someone who does, I can say it almost never gets used. It's just not convenient to reach across my keyboard to the screen when my hands are already closer to my mouse".

"I'm not opposed to touch, or to a touch-based interface on desktop and laptop computers", Dave Mackey comments. "I do think the Metro approach is seriously underwhelming, in large part b/c it fails to consider that touch-based devices are largely used for less intensive applications, and I think Metro treats the power user (which is a large number of users) like second-class citizens".

That second-class citizen theme is one that pours through BetaNews comments and those I've read many other places. Power users tend to be the elite -- enthusiasts whose endorsement is hugely important to every Microsoft OS launch. Their negative reaction to Windows Vista greatly contributed to doomed sales. If touch is the future, and Metro is the way there, Microsoft must have enthusiasts' support. Will they give it?

Great Debate

Frequent BetaNews contributor Chris Boss partially answers that question in comments to Ed's story:

There is a big divide between two general types of PC users. One could be refered to as consumers (content readers) and then the other as business or power users (content creators). The consumer base is what Microsoft is likely targeting with Windows 8, especially mobile devices (aka. tablets). Touch is the future for such devices. People want absolute ease of use, small footprint and mobility to read, display their favorite content (aka. movies, ebooks, etc.)

The content creators though, will never be fully satisified with touch (only). There is no comparison between a real keyboard and a touch screen keyboard display. The human finger with touch will never replace the mouse. The mouse, despite its age, is still one of the best UI inputs around. Those (even Microsoft) who suggest the mouse is antiquated, just don't get it. The mouse is an amazing device which will continue to have a long life span.

"Everyone that says touch is the future is probably writing the same comments with a mouse and keyboard", Buenos comments. "Recently I asked my friend why he does not want to drop his blackberry, the keyboard. Granted, he can write faster than anyone I saw with a touch phone".

He asks: "Do you think touch is the future? Think again. For a phone yes, you can use it with one hand and tops 2 fingers. For tablets? Maybe yes, because tablets are newbie users, or casual users, the minute this same tablet users want to work, get of the couch or the bed they want to hook their tablets to a keyboard and mouse".

Reader jbrush: "Metro for the desktop is a bad, bad, bad idea. Tablet -- good. Desktop -- bad".

Winning Enthusiasts

Without question, the fiercest debate about Metro and Windows 8 is mouse and keyboard -- that the appropriateness ends with touch. But that's not the real issue. The more I read, the Metro debate comes back to this: Power users don't like it. So, I ask again: Will enthusiasts give their support to Metro? If not, can Windows 8 succeed without them?

My answer is no. Microsoft needs to generate much more enthusiasm among power users, even if they come kicking and screaming to Windows 8. Their support is crucial among developer and IT communities and also as huge influencers among regular consumers.

This absolutely is a crisis situation for Windows and Windows Live president Steven Sinofsky and his development teams. The time to strongly engage enthusiasts is now, before Windows 8 releases to manufacturing. Sure Microsoft can make changes to placate critics, but that can't ever be enough. Metro simply is too different.

Meet enthusiasts, hold contests where they can win Windows 8 slates. Subsidize early Metro apps (meaning pay developers if needed and damn the negative press for it). If Microsoft can't win enthusiasts, Windows 8 can't win the market. So far, these key influencers don't regard Metro as all that good for the legacy market, which is the Windows market right now.

"Windows 8 will end up like Windows ME, on the scrap heap", reader Peeed Off warns. "MS have missed the boat on this one, Metro on a PC/Laptop is as useful as a Chocolate Teapot".

Photo Credit: BESTWEB/Shutterstock

As if Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone didn't have enough problems...

Posted: April 15th, 2012, 6:55pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Nokia has enough Lumia 900 marketing problems, without twitter making more. The photo with this post is pretty self-explanatory and shows how nasty promoted tweets can be.

The smartphone went on sale from AT&T April 8 for $99.99 -- that's quite a good price. Then almost immediately users started complaining about Internet connectivity problems, and Nokia quickly responded by making a magnanimous offer: $100 back to the people who already bought the phone and were willing to install a software update. Anyone else: Phone replacement. Meanwhile, Lumia 900 is free to new buyers until April 22. Okay, so why is there a promoted tweet in my feed on April 15: "That's right! Starting April 8, the Nokia #Lumia900 can be yours for $99.99 exclusively at @ATT"?

Sure, it's a March 26 tweet, but there's no place for such an offer when the phone is free nearly three weeks later. Many people won't look at the date stamp. Small plus: Customers expecting to pay 100 bucks but finding the phone costs nothing once at AT&T. They should be happy campers. For others familiar with the temporary free offer, there could be confusion and reprehension.

I don't know how these promoted tweets work, so it's all a mystery to me. Would someone more knowledgable than me like to explain this?

Got the Flashback Trojan? OS X update removes it

Posted: April 13th, 2012, 12:48pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I'd clap my hands and slap Apple on the back, but yesterday's Flashback fix took too long -- and lots of negative publicity with it -- coming. There shouldn't have to be an uproar, or massive Mac botnet, for Apple to get an urgent security fix out there. Technically, a fix released last week. This one goes further and does what many Mac users will need most: Malware removal.

Criticism aside, there is reason for praise. The update disables Java applets from running. If the user flips on the switch but no applets run for awhile, the capability is disabled again. Smart. Apple already takes a heavy hand to Adobe Flash in Safari. Disable all plug-ins by default, I say. Let people use them only if needed, and when not used for awhile bugger them.

Flashback is the second big Mac Trojan outbreak in a year and lays waste to the ridiculous contention that OS X doesn't get malware or is somehow more secure than Windows. The real problem is something else: The false sense of security Apple marketing creates about Mac security.

"Our main takeaway from [Flashback] should be that many Mac users have been lured into a false sense of security, and will be, or may already be, in for a rude awakening", security consultant Adrian Sanabria explains.

Apple used to claim "Mac OS X doesn't get PC viruses", which is a bit misleading. Many viruses are operating system-specific. But OS X can get Mac viruses and is vulnerable to worms that can affect any operating system. Now Apple claims "OS X has you covered...With virtually no effort on your part, OS X offers a multilayered system of defenses against viruses and other malicious applications, or malware".

The Trojan infected as many as 600,000 Macs. "The numbers I've heard report 2-3 percent of all Macs are infected, or were infected at the peak", Sanabria reports.

Apple took six weeks to patch the vulnerability, doing so a second time because of problems with the first. Meanwhile, millions of Macs were unprotected, largely because of that false sense of security.

This week, I conducted two polls that alarmingly aren't that different from identical ones taken 11 months ago. Seventy-four percent of respondents do not have anti-malware installed on their primary Mac. By comparison, 91 percent do on their primary Windows PC. Apple apologists would argue that the disparity isn't surprising, since Windows is more prone to viruses than OS X. But that kind of thinking is the problem. Denial.

Yesterday, security consultant Christopher Budd answered a question that shouldn't need asking: "Do I really need anti-malware?" D`oh. Do you lock up your home, or car? Do you leave your paycheck cash on a Starbucks table while you go to John? Or do you keep it in your wallet or purse? Or in a bank? You protect your valuables in many ways. Why wouldn't you install security software, particularly when there are so many free options?

Apple distributes the fix/removal tool via Software Update. Run it from your Mac. What can you expect. Apple explains:

This Java security update removes the most common variants of the Flashback malware.

This update also configures the Java web plug-in to disable the automatic execution of Java applets. Users may re-enable automatic execution of Java applets using the Java Preferences application. If the Java web plug-in detects that no applets have been run for an extended period of time it will again disable Java applets.

Java for OS X Lion 2012-003 delivers Java SE 6 version 1.6.0_31 and supersedes all previous versions of Java for OS X Lion.

This update is recommended for all Mac users with Java installed.

For more information: OS X 10.6; OS X 10.7.

Photo Credit: Jirsak/Shutterstock

Google is evil

Posted: April 13th, 2012, 10:00am MDT by Joe Wilcox

In the Biblical story, the serpent tempted Eve by offering something she desired -- to be like God. It's appropriate metaphor for every shyster that followed. Evildoers follow a consistent pattern of offering something tempting that masks something else. It's the art of misdirection that assures them power or profit -- often both. If there is a definition of evil, it's taking advantage of others for personal gain. The more people, the more evil. Greater the trickery, eviler still.

That sums up my assessment of Google's non-voting split revealed yesterday concurrently with first-quarter earnings. Stock-split seemingly gives investors twice as many shares as they have now. But half will be non-voting ones, diluting shareholders' say in Google's doings. Essentially, the company seeks to have it both ways -- be private while having the benefits of public investment. The most disruptive company of the 21st century is at it again. The implications are seemingly astounding.

Devil's Deal

As I opined in December 2010: "If there is a devil, a Great Satan of modern technology companies, Google is it". Yesterday's stunning proposal is more confirmation.

From the Founders' Letter signed by Larry Page and Sergey Brin:

Today we announced plans to create a new class of non-voting capital stock, which will be listed on NASDAQ. These shares will be distributed via a stock dividend to all existing stockholders: the owner of each existing share will receive one new share of the non-voting stock, giving investors twice the number of shares they had before. It’s effectively a two-for-one stock split -- something many of our investors have long asked us for. These non-voting shares will be available for corporate uses, like equity-based employee compensation, that might otherwise dilute our governance structure.

We recognize that some people, particularly those who opposed this structure at the start, won’t support this change -- and we understand that other companies have been very successful with more traditional governance models. But after careful consideration with our board of directors, we have decided that maintaining this founder-led approach is in the best interests of Google, our shareholders and our users. Having the flexibility to use stock without diluting our structure will help ensure we are set up for success for decades to come.

Google offers shareholders a two-for-one split, something tempting that many desire, while taking away their participation as owners. "Without diluting our structure" really means the authority of Google's two cofounders and its board of directors making decisions independent of and without interference from shareholders, who by their investment are company owners, too. The two-for-one non-voting stock split is a devil's deal.

Google will now have three classes of stock, which structure favors minority shareholders. Brin, Page and Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt are the largest last time I checked, controlling about two-thirds of voting shares. The new change will entrench them and other investors holding or acquiring large blocks of shares. From the perspective of control, and founders' ability to make long-term investments and strategic decisions independent of the whiles of quarterly earnings, there's some sense to the approach. But as a precedent for other public companies, Google's plan is pure evil.

In a Reuters' blog post today, Felix Salmon puts dual-class -- well, in Google's case triple-class -- stock in important historical perspective:

Dual-class voting shares were illegal for most of the 20th Century, but came back in 1986. James Sterngold’s NYT story on their reintroduction is well worth a read, featuring as it does comments against the new rules from both Felix Rohatyn ("The one-share, one-vote rule is pretty fundamental to the market") and T Boone Pickens ("Let’s face it, managements want this because they want to entrench themselves. They went to Congress to get protection and they didn’t get it. So they went to the exchange to get protection, and they got it.")

Google isn't giving investors say in the plan, not that the three minority shareholders need it since they control the majority of voting stock. Again, this is about the cofounders trying to have the benefits of being private and public. "These non-voting shares will be available for corporate uses, like equity-based employee compensation, that might otherwise dilute our governance structure" -- meaning "dilute our control". Like the shyster making distracting promises, the founders cajole: "It’s important to bear in mind that this proposal will only have an effect on governance over the very long term".

Do No Good

Evil is a word often associated with Google, in part because of its "Ten things we know to be true" -- principles by which the company operates. No. 6 states: "You can make money without doing evil". Perhaps you can, but Google hasn't. Its highly disruptive business model is at the core about using others for corporate gain.

What I call "Google free" robs value from nearly everything it touches, largely because of the search keyword and advertising business model. Someone else pays to produce content or other valuable intellectual property, around which Google wraps search keywords, ads and services. The information giant doesn't produce content, but its entire business model is about cannibalizing others' valuable intellectual property. Google's search dominance -- anywhere from 65 percent to 90 percent share, depending on the geography and analyst crunching the numbers -- means that content creators must pay homage to free.

Content's base value to the producer is at least the cost of production, but content creators are compelled to give away their stuff for less and often for free. If not, the content becomes invisible to the Internet -- or at least to the majority of people who use Google search and other services.

Google's core business is parasitic.

Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates laid out a different business, one where people get paid for production, in 1976 "An Open Letter to Software Hobbyists." Gates wrote:

Most of you steal your software...One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free?

Gates' question "Who can afford to do professional work for nothing?" is strangely prescient of today's expanding Google free -- supported by advertising -- business model. The question also defines one of the principles behind Microsoft's worldview -- that people (or the businesses they work for) who create something have a fundamental right to profit from it.

All companies have a worldview that defines their behavior. Google's is openness, which I explored at length in December 2009 post "Google's 'Open' definition: Simply brilliant business, but is it evil?" Contrary to public perception, Google free isn't some altruistic openness but a business model, which its search monopoly anchors.

When I look at Google's non-voting stock-split proposal, I see behavior consistent with overall business tactics. Google offers something seemingly compelling to gain much more. Like Google devalues content that news and many other organizations pay to produce, this plan devalues public stock, stripping away its most important attribute: The right of owners to vote.

Photo Credit: David Evison/Shutterstock

$7 million worth of phones will be lost today [infographic]

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 4:09pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Not a day passes by without a couple infographics dropped in my inbox and somehow I just don't get around to posting them. My bad, since they can be fun and informative. Granted the producers hope for a little promotion along the way, but hey.

This one comes from BackgroundCheck.org, which blogs stuff like "8 Crazy Nannies Who Should’ve Been Background Checked" and "7 Things You Should Know Before Choosing a Babysitter" (Hey, whatever happened to 10 things?).

The infographic comes in cooperation with Lookout, which I confess makes a better-than "Find My iPhone" app for Android. Okay, have I plugged everyone? I'm only doing so feeling guilty for not posting some of their other infographics and because this is the first one. Besides I just had to get in the nanny and babysitter links (pay attention, parents).

I'm not going to repeat here much of anything from the infographic -- otherwise why post it? But I've got to wonder if there is any correlation between Manchester, England (where more phones are lost) and 9 pm and 2 am (when more handsets disappear).

PC shipments rally for big (cough, cough) 2% growth

Posted: April 11th, 2012, 6:23pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Well, if fourth quarter PC shipments were bad (and they were), Q1 was not so bad, according to preliminary data Gartner and IDC released today. Woohoo, break out the sparklers, IDC put year-over-year growth at 2.3 percent, but only 1.9 percent by Gartner's estimates. Somebody cue up "Nearer My God To Thee", because the Titanic tragedy's centennial anniversary feels timely. Is the PC market suddenly sinking?

IDC already called 2011 the worst year for PCs since 2001, when recession robbed manufacturers and retailers of Christmas and set off a chain of profit warnings, including Apple and Microsoft. There are no profit warnings this time around, just plenty of misery. Well, unless your business is selling so-called Post-PC devices, like smartphones and tablets.

Microsoft and Windows OEMs can no longer blame the hard drive shortage, which had a "limited impact on PC supply", Mikako Kitagawa, Gartner principal analyst, says. Limited means select segments, such as low-cost notebooks, which didn't sell well anyway.

"The consumer segment continued to be a drag on market growth, as PC demand was low", Kitagawa says. "Questions remain on whether low-end systems can attract consumers, as their attention has moved to other devices". Reiterating previous observations, Gartner again highlighted smartphones and tablets as leaders among those "other devices".

Still, both analysts expressed optimism for the holidays -- and, whoa, if they're wrong the Good Ship PC really could join Titanic at the bottom of the Atlantic. "We expect PC shipments to pick up significantly by the fourth quarter and beyond as HDD supply and pricing are normalized, Windows 8 is launched, and replacements pick up", Loverde says. But "the US PC market is likely to remain constrained at least until the launch of Windows 8, which is expected in the fourth quarter of 2012".

Kitagawa isn't as optimistic:

The first quarter of 2012 was a transitional period as the PC industry is awaiting two big releases: Intel's Ivy Bridge and Microsoft's Windows 8. Both are expected to be launched this year. Although these new releases are not expected to stimulate demand as much as the industry hopes, they will affect PC supply so that there will be artificial supply control before and after the product releases. There will be few products rolled out into the market until these major releases have taken place.

Looking at the hard numbers, global PC shipments reached 87.1 million units in first quarter, according to IDC and 89 million by Gartner's reckoning. IDC says US PC shipments grew 1 percent year over year to 16.57 million. Gartner: Shipments fell 3.5 percent to 15.5 million. There's big disparity in those numbers. Well, there are reasons why they're called preliminary.

US share leaders: HP, Dell and Apple. HP share was 28 percent, according to IDC and 29 percent according to Gartner. Dell: 21.7 percent and 22.3 percent, respectively. IDC put Apple market share at 10 percent and Gartner at 10.6 percent.

Google+ redesign generates wicked #whitespace meme [slideshow]

Posted: April 11th, 2012, 4:26pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Credit: Christian Martel

Credit: David Meetze

Credit: AJ Batac

Credit: Christopher Rizzo

Credit: Lewi Hussey

Credit: Michael McAdams

Credit: Gisel Ocañas

Credit: Vtipy

Credit: Cory Miller

Credit: Eric Rice

Credit: E Online

Credit: Prashanth Rao

Credit: Timothy Jordan

Credit: Serhane Med Amine

People have too much time to waste, and I'm not one of them. But occasionally I have fun and write about others goofing off. Waste away, baby, because today's Google+ redesign has generated strange reaction to a sudden amount of white space to the right of the friend feed. People are posting with hashtag #whitespace.

Google Plusers are finding all kinds of uses for that white space, which brings new meaning to making something out of nothing. It's fascinating watching the white space viral geekfest. I must live in an alternate universe, because it's just white to me. Or perhaps I lack any real sense of creative humor (don't comment on that!). Anyway, I've grabbed 15 photos from Google+ -- all credited, but none taken with any permission first (hey, they were shared publicly).

Jonathan Chalker wins my vote for best #whitespace meme contribution, with this fako news story:

Google Acquires WhiteSpace For $120M

In a surprise move perhaps intended to counter Facebook's acquisition of Instagram, Google has purchased a little known app company, WhiteSpace, which cleverly adds large, random pockets of white space to any interface.

When asked why WhiteSpace posed an interest, David Lawee, Head of Google's Business Development team responded:

"There are synergies here, the scale of which we don't yet fully understand. The color white, to Google, is like air. WhiteSpace is like air in outer space and everyone agrees it would be cool if there was more air in outer space. It is equally as cool to have more white in our space".

Lawee refused to speculate as to whether WhiteSpace would be added to their new Google Glasses interface.

What would you do with all that white space?

InstaHam app for smartphones, an idea worth $1 billion [video]

Posted: April 11th, 2012, 2:41pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Some really strange stuff (I want to use the other "s" word, but content filters) comes into the BetaNews Tips box. I'm paying more attention to what's in it this week, given my 7-day Google Reader fast. Weirdness knows no bounds, nor my perplexity to embrace and share it. I swear to debating for 10 minutes about sharing this video. It's strange. Topical. From a vlogger with 26,664 subscribers (now I'm one of them). And, sheepishly confess, made me laugh.

Hell, I even liked the text of the email before the video link and made it the headline. If Instagram is worth one billion bucks... You got me Khyan Mansley. Commenters don't be cruel.

Google+ makeover is much more than a pretty face

Posted: April 11th, 2012, 12:15pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Just as Facebook forces users to adopt a more cluttered, confusing appearance, Google+ simplifies and provides social networkers more control over the layout. Much as I've tried to use Facebook more, because that's where my family hangs out, Google+ is inescapable. It's a gravity well too strong to resist. For 170 million, the number of users Google revealed today, Plus perhaps is irresistible, too. That's a lot of people for a service less than a year old.

Google+ is more than a social network. It is the future of Google. Like it or not, the company has embarked on a strategy around social search, and Plus is a pillar. Competing against Facebook clearly is one of Google's goals. But there also is realistic appraisal that social is the web's future -- and why shouldn't it be with gregarious humans? Additionally, Google+ is the sun around which the company's other products will revolve -- even search -- defining a digital lifestyle empowering connections, communications and commerce.

The New Social

I strongly encourage anyone trying to understand this concept to closely read Vic Gundotra's blog post about Google+ changes. The vice president of engineering writes:

We're more excited than ever to build a seamless social experience, all across Google. A critical piece of this social layer is a design that grows alongside our aspirations. So today we’re introducing a more functional and flexible version of Google+. We think you’ll find it easier to use and nicer to look at, but most importantly, it accelerates our efforts to create a simpler, more beautiful Google.

This isn't marketing gobbledygook. Gundotra's theme is consistent with past statements and Google's actions building out Plus. Stand-outs: "grows alongside our aspirations" and "create a simpler, more beautiful Google". He doesn't write about creating a more beautiful Google+, but Google. The whole shebang. Page and company are reinventing Google. Make no mistake about their "aspirations".

Plus Your World

Services like +1, Search Plus Your World and, of course, Google+ are part of this transformation in progress. Two weeks ago in post "Google, there's no good 'without doing evil'", I reviewed the colossal amount of cross-product and service integration taking place over the last year. Search anchors the integration effort, but its role changes as social creeps into everything Google does, with G+ and Search Plus Your World as key pillars.

In that post, I asked readers: "Does all this newfangled integration -- Android, Chrome, Google+, +1, search and other services benefit you?" I'll answer yes before anyone else, particularly how search now lets me tap into social when looking for something or answers to questions.

I'm not alone. "I love the integration of Google products", John Thomas comments. "Things just keep getting better. I worry about Google's dominance, but that dominance has come through providing amazingly useful services for a great price -- free. I'm happy to share my browsing history with Google. It's very useful to me to find places I've been and it helps Google fund their amazing services".

"The integration benefits me a lot", Ismail Hammoud agrees.

Renovation Row

I started writing this post early morning, then had to shelve it to report the Justice Department's lawsuit against Apple and five publishers. When Gundotra announced Google+ changes, I didn't have them. Now I do, and they impress.

There isn't as much generous white space as before, but Google+ still is largely uncluttered. Facebook looks like a horder's house, by comparison. Google moved the top menu bar -- Navigation Ribbon -- to the left, which isn't my preferred location. But I can live with it. My eye tends to gravitate up, but when reading posts in the flow there's sense to having the menu bar with them. Nicety: The apps on the Navigation Ribbon can be dragged to the order you prefer. There are pop-up options behind some of the menu bar apps, too.

Gundotra highlights other changes:

Once you’ve upgraded to Google+, it’s easy to share with your circles from just about anywhere. We’re dreaming bigger, though. We're aiming for an experience that fuses utility with beauty—one that inspires you to connect with others, and cherish the conversations that unfold. Today’s update is an important step in this direction, including:

Full bleed photos and videos that'll make you really proud to post

A stream of conversation 'cards' that make it easier to scan and join discussions

An activity drawer that highlights the community around your content

Better Place to Be?

From my perspective, the most startling and important changes are two: Trending topics and revamped Hangouts page. There are now trending topics visibly placed on your main G+ page and even more under the "Explore" button, where Google finally succumbs to clutter creep -- lots of it. Hangouts is busier still, but, whoa, what a place now to discover new folks to video chat with. Trash the TV, baby, and light up the webcam.

The two areas share common theme: Increasing interaction around interests or people that matter most to you.

Circling back to where I started, Google's reinvention is all about cross-product integration with search and social as core. Gundotra writes:

By focusing on you, the people you care about, and the stuff you’re into, we’re going to continue upgrading all the features you already know and love -- from Search and Maps to Gmail and YouTube. With today’s foundational changes we can move even faster -- toward a simpler, more beautiful Google.

Sorry, Vic, but I'm struggling with my nerd stereotypes. Can a geek hangout really be beautiful or are you just putting lipstick on a pig?

DOJ accuses Apple, five publishers of colluding to fix ebook prices

Posted: April 11th, 2012, 10:22am MDT by Joe Wilcox

In December 2010 I asked: "Is someone fixing ebook prices?" Google's digital bookstore opened for business, and I started comparing prices only to find them fairly consistent across all retailers. I expected to see huge variances, not pricing consistency, which shouldn't be in a competitive market but is systematic of one where businesses conspire to "fix" prices.

I wasn't alone wondering about this abnormal consistency. After weeks of rumors, today, the US Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Apple and five publishers. The antitrust enforcement agency accuses them of colluding to fix ebook prices, thus impeding competition and, more importantly, consumer choice.

The lawsuit names five publishers: Hachette SA, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster. However, Bloomberg reports that three of the publishers already have settled with the Justice Department. As previously reported by BetaNews, MacMillan and Penguin, along with Apple, refused.

Causing Consumers Harm

There are few areas of US antitrust law that is more clear or so aggressively enforced as price fixing. Unlike Europe, where trustbusters focus a bit more on protecting competitors, US priority is the consumer. The 1890 Sherman Act and the court precedents following it allow for aggressive competition -- some really rough play. But what's fair among competitors is a problem when they collude in ways that diminish competition at the expense of consumers.

US Antitrust law looks harshly on price fixing, because it causes harm to consumers. They don't receive the benefits, lower pricing among them, of companies vying for the same customers.

I wrote 16 months ago about ebooks:

Nearly uniform pricing is highly suspicious. Brick-and-mortar retailer book pricing does vary more, depending on initial discount, volume of inventory to sell (or unload if too many) and time on shelf, among many other factors. Remember: Ebooks don't grow old on the shelf. Retailers can't over-order or be compelled to offer overstock deals.

In looking at these four ebookstores, pricing is too similar. It stinks of publishers demanding prices be such and such to grant distribution. It wasn't that many months ago, that in a disagreement with publishers Amazon was forced to raise ebook prices and adopt an agency sales model. I have to wonder: Are major publishers fixing prices?

Conspiracy Theory

The Justice Department answers yes and says that Apple helped them. Before Apple opened iBookstore, Amazon sold many ebooks at a loss, to gain market share. Had Amazon been allowed to continue, consumer demand surely would have compelled publishers to lower prices. Amazon typically sold new ebooks for $9.99.

During negotiations for iBookstore, Apple pushed for an "Agency" revenue-sharing model. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company would take a 30-percent cut and sell books at prices dictated by publishers. Amazon got into a scuffle with several publishers, leading to threats of withholding books. The retailer ended up adopting the Agency model, thus raising prices to match Apple's. That's reverse of how competition works -- one company lowering prices to match another's.

Before today's criminal filing, a civil case was underway. There, in a legal filing, Apple strangely admitted to collusion: "Apple knew that if Amazon were allowed to continue to solidify its position in the ebook market, these network effects would make it nearly impossible for Apple to dislodge Amazon in the near term".

More: "It would make perfect sense as a rational and competitive business strategy for Apple not to enter as a retailer incurring losses, but instead as an agent on commission with a competitive offering – which is exactly what the agency agreements negotiated by Apple accomplished".

Based on the civil case, San Diego-based antitrust attorney William Markham tells my colleague Ed Oswald that the behavior of Apple and publishers "easily meets the standard for stating actionable antitrust claims". He adds:

By this conspiracy they have apparently raised and fixed the prices of ebooks so as to preserve Apple’s sales of iPads, improve its share of sales of ebooks, allow the old publishers a few more years to exact profits that their own honest services can no longer produce, and harm the fortunes and progress of the new Walmart of our era, Amazon.

Bad, But Worse

Collusion is much bigger than single-title pricing. Publishers also demand onerous digital rights mechanisms that defy fair use-laws permitting people to share print books. Ebook sharing is limited at best and rights often are confined to a single user account. That's a secondary form of price fixing, since it compels even members of the same household to buy more than one title when using separate accounts on different devices. I can read Kindle books on any device running Amazon's software, but rights restrictions limit or prevent sharing the titles with my wife and daughter on their separate accounts.

I've warned several times that Apple policies regarding publishers would likely lead to antitrust problems:

"iPad is a devil's deal for publishers", February 2011
"Apple App Store subscription plan gouges publishers, eats their young", February 2011
"Apple intimidation drives developer innovation", August 2011

But there is another policy that suddenly makes sense in context of today's lawsuit: Apple's iBooks Author EULA. The company unveiled the software in January with surprisingly restrictive terms. Simply stated: If you publish ebooks using iBooks Author, no other publisher but Apple can profit. Distribution anywhere else must be for free. Authors can only charge money at iBookstore.

The onerous terms didn't make much sense, since they might detract some people from using the software to create ebooks. Now they do, or so I conjecture. Apple must have known what was going on before anything leaked about the Justice Department ebook pricing investigation. Apple knew if the Justice Department filed a case, and anyone settled, it would lose control of favorable pricing terms, allowing Amazon to undercut prices. So in making a compelling publishing tool, Apple also placed restrictions favoring distribution through its ebookstore. The EULA was a pre-emptive strike.

I proposed this idea to Ed Oswald last week, since he leads our ebook price-fixing reporting. He answers that Apple is "threatening to shut the whole damn thing down if that happens".

My response in group chat: "But Apple won't because of education market. For many obvious reasons. Core market. Nab the youth young. Sell more Macs, since tools require OS X. Besides, people pay more for Macs. They'll pay more for ebooks, too. Customer loyalty to the brand, for starters and what publishers can add to the books beyond text".

Ebooks are serious business to Apple, because they can help sell more iPads and, via the authoring tool, more Macs. There's your reason for Apple colluding with publishers and fighting the Justice Department's case.

Photo Credit: JustASC/Shutterstock

Did you buy Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone?

Posted: April 10th, 2012, 11:58am MDT by Joe Wilcox

I just have to ask, because your first impressions will matter to other possible buyers. Colleague Tim Conneally reviewed Lumia 900, but good as that is we need more. I want your review, too. AT&T started selling the 4G LTE Windows Phone on April 8 -- Easter Sunday -- when the major malls here in San Diego were closed. Heck, even my local Target shuttered for the holiday. It's Tuesday, and that's time enough for your first impressions.

I got to thinking more about Lumia 900 last night when something quite unexpected happened. My wife asked: "That new phone is only $99?" Which one? "The Nokia". She had seen a TV commercial for the handset. My wife has never asked me about an advertised phone before. Never. Never. Never. If Mrs. Non-Geek Artist is intrigued, what about enthusiasts rushing out to buy Lumia 900? Is it a bruiser or a loser?

"Readers help other readers" is one of my mottos, and your Lumia 900 review can do just that. You can comment to this post or, better, submit a review to joe at betanews dot com; I'll need a bio and photo, too, as your name will appear in the byline.

Strong Buying Intentions

I know somebody bought Lumia 900. Two weeks ago, I posted a poll asking who would. The sample size is excellent -- 3,025 as I write. A whopping 70.45 percent of respondents say they will buy the Windows Phone within 3 months (including preorders). Only 16.96 percent won't buy at all.

Granted, respondents aren't qualified (meaning I don't know who they are) and are presumably Windows Phone enthusiasts (based on what I know about BetaNews readership). But I've been doing these buying polls for about 18 months and this is by far the most overwhelmingly positive response to any smartphone. The questions: How wide is this enthusiasm? Will it turn into real sales?

Commenter IT advisor doesn't believe the numbers: "How bizarre. Microsoft Windows Phone gets a market share of 75 percent among BetaNews readers. In the general population, it gets only 1.9 percent. Are these the same people who bought Zunes and Kins? Yes, they are! Hey, you can wave around your Microsoft Kin phone at parties these days and everyone will laugh!"

"Say what you will, and I am sure you will, but the Zune was actually a really nice device", PC_Tool responds. (Once you got over their utter lack of marketing and whatever childish 'color phobias you might have)." I agree, as expressed in my September 2009 Zune HD review. But he concedes, "not that I'll be getting a Windows Phone -- in the foreseeable, ever".

Shutter Speed

I'm a long-time Nokia fan, and only abandoned the manufacturer after it abandoned me (and perhaps you, too). Nokia had great hardware -- hell, it invented the smartphone around the time Windows 95 launched. But software and services stumbled after iPhone released in June 2007 and fell far behind Apple after App Store opened in July 2008 -- and later Google. I don't believe that Windows Phone can recapture Nokia's glory days, but I can hope!

Last week, in group chat, Tim expressed amazement at just how good is Lumia 900's camera. I explained that Nokia cameras have been great for years. Don't believe me? Gander at my Nokia N97 Flickr set or these tagged photos and compare to Tim's Lumia 900 slideshow.

Circling back where we started. Please submit your Lumia 900 mini-review in comments below or email the big shebang to joe at betanews dot com. Your first impressions take can help others decide whether to take the plunge -- and, remember, the white model comes out April 22nd -- or choose another.

Tumblr for Android smokes iOS version

Posted: April 9th, 2012, 5:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

The official Tumblr app was a late-comer to Android, and, sigh, hasn't kept pace in the years since. That's all changed. Today's update simply puts the iOS version to shame. Surely this lead can't last.

Tumblr for Android has a spiffy new user interface, which look and feel -- including post-type icons -- is more like the social network. The revamped UI is the real deal; well close to it. The app is speedier, and that includes photo browsing as well as loading blogs and posting to them. By comparison, Tumblr for iOS looks ugly and lacking. Access to Tumblr Radar from the Android app rocks. Still there are omissions that favor Tumblr for iOS, such as audio uploads. I'm surprised this feature isn't available on the Android app (Wasn't it once?).

"Its very rare for me to say that an app is sexy", jozefd14 comments on the Google Play product page. "This is truly an awesome update. Hopefully iPhone/iPod Touch update will look like this. Its very nice to the eyes". The Android user has HTC myTouch 4G.

Brett, who uses Droid Bionic: "A really good update for the app. Things are better, and I can actually open the photos on ny dashboard to get a better look. I just wish I could go through all of my 'liked' posts, because it seems I'm limited to a certain amount. I see the three periods at the end, so does it mean I have to stop there?"

Lee, who uses HTC Thunderbolt, offers more mixed reaction: "Love the new UI. Really well done. This app was just terrible before, definitely usable now! Problem: logs me out a lot and says its unable to reach the network. Really annoying!"

I must admit to rarely using Tumblr for Android, having likewise found previous versions deficient. But the update is promising.

Earlier today, I explained that for this week I'm putting away the RSS reader and using social media to ferret out the news. Thanks to software developer Aaron Burrell, whose post alerted me to Tumblr for Android -- something that likely wouldn't have popped up in Google Reader.

Can you live a week without Google Reader?

Posted: April 9th, 2012, 3:01pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

That's the question I will answer this week, for myself, as I kiss off RSS subscriptions, press releases and the like in favor of social media and honest to goodness live interaction. The moratorium includes Google News, which I rarely look at anyway (although some of my colleagues are obsessed with it). Press releases, blog posts, etc. that I see on social networks (including blog comments), or someone refers me to, are fair game.

The objectives are simple: To see if RSS feeds are antiquated and to increase my social engagement, which too often is limited to coworkers and the stories I manage. Hey, I work at home, where the grind makes dust of real interaction unless it is pursued. Aggressively.

Surely many of you already live this way now. Your main news and information comes from the sites and social networks you already frequent -- maybe all of it. Others work for companies that prohibit services like Facebook.

My social haunts for the coming week will include Facebook, Google+, Tumblr and Twitter -- all places I need to increase engagement. I also will do Reddit and Pinterest, where I have accounts but little activity.

There's a limit to how far anyone can spread his or her online social interactions. We'll see where mine stop. Different online communities appeal for many reasons, with community around common interest principal among them.

Who's More Social?

According to Pew Internet report "Social networking sites and our lives: How people’s trust, personal relationships, and civic and political involvement are connected to their use of social networking sites and other technologies", 59 percent of the 79 percent of online Americans use social network services like Facebook. That works out to about half of US adults.

Not surprisingly, engagement varies by age. Eighty-three percent of 18 to 29 year olds use social networking sites, compared to 70 percent of 30 to 49 year olds, 51 percent of 50 to 64 year olds and 33 percent for those 65 or older.

Pew used "Kony 2012" -- the recent viral video that surely you heard about or viewed -- as case study for social networks as news source. In March, a week after Invisible Children, a group based here in San Diego, released the video, Pew explained:

Those ages 18-29 were much more likely than older adults to have heard a lot about the “Kony 2012” video and to have learned about it through social media than traditional news sources. Indeed, a special analysis of posts in Twitter showed that it was by far the top story on the platform.

Forty-eight percent of Americans heard nothing about the video, while 40 percent of 18-29 years olds had "heard a lot". "A national phone survey in the days following the video’s release shows that 58 percent of young adults said they heard about the video", according to Pew. Thirty-six percent of this young group heard about the video on the Internet -- 27 percent from social networks. That compares to 10 percent from traditional media sources. Just 20 percent of 30-39 "heard a lot" about the video.

Circling back to Google Reader, I won't use it this week. Got to ask: From where do you get most of your news and information and with whom do you engage where? Do you use Google Reader or another RSS app?

It's increasingly difficult not use Google Reader somehow, given how many popular standalone RSS apps sync with the service. My fav, which I primarily use on smartphones and tablets is Feedly. But not this week.

I seek inspiration through interaction.

10 things you might not know about RMS Titantic

Posted: April 9th, 2012, 10:23am MDT by Joe Wilcox

April 14 is the 100th anniversary of Titanic's sinking. As the height of technological and engineering innovation of its day, the great ocean liner is more than fascinating for its sinking -- reminder that today's tech obsessions are nothing new.

In 1977, before the wreck had been discovered and when few people knew much about Titanic, I wrote a term paper on the ill-fated vessel in between college and high school. I participated in the federally-funded Upward Bound program for teenagers from low-income families wanting to go to college. I spent three summers at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine. The Titanic paper completed my three-year participation. Much about the disaster has changed since the wreck site was found, more than 2 miles beneath the Atlantic, in 1985, and my research. I confess. I am a Titanic buff.

For my 1977 paper, which I no longer have (sigh), I culled published testimony from US and UK inquiries, newspaper articles, a riveting 1912 Scientific American article and several books. Research is easier now, in the Internet era. In the spirit of the centurion week anniversary remembering Titanic, and those who tragically fell with her, I present 10 things you might not know about the great steam ship disaster.

1.There were three ships. William James Pirrie, president of shipbuilder Harland and Wolff, and Bruce Ismay, White Star Line chairman, conceived the Olympic Class ocean liners during a dinner party -- in 1907, if I rightly recall. Harland and Wolff would build three: Olympic, Titanic and Britannic -- in order of their going into service.

That's right, before Titanic's tragic maiden voyage, White Star Line launched Olympic about 10 months earlier. "Oly" sailed to New York on June 14, 1911.

Titanic was inches longer and lavished with grandeur compared to her sister. Olympic stayed in service until 1935, when she was scrapped. After being refitted as a hospital ship, Britannic sunk during World War I, in 1916.

Britannic construction completed after Titanic's tragic maiden voyage, leading to design changes later made to Olympic, too, such as extending watertight doors from E to B deck.

2. Olympic Class was too big. Titanic and her sister ships used three normal-size docks. Meanwhile their innovative triple-screw propellers created hazard for other ships. For example, as Titanic left the harbor on her maiden voyage, the New York pulled from its moorings and towards the giant liner. The ships came within inches of collision -- averted only by stopping Titanic, even with tugs pulling on New York.

Many seaman called the near collision, by the New York on the way to New York, a bad omen. It was.

3. Olympic's accident added to the unsinkable myth. In September 1911, the battle cruiser HMS Hawke rammed Olympic midship, sucked in by the triple-screw propellers. The accident opened two compartments to seawater -- damage that would have sunk most any other vessel. But Olympic's watertight doors contained the leakage, allowing her to return to port and to service, with repairs, less than two months later.

The accident helped foster Titanic's unsinkable myth and arrogance about human technological achievements.

4. Head-on collision with the iceberg likely would have saved Titanic, but killed many passengers. The ocean liner's design allowed for any two compartments to be flooded or all of the first four. Had Titanic hit head on rather than "port around" the iceberg, the damage likely wouldn't have flooded all four compartments. Olympic herself is example. She rammed and sank a German submarine in 1918.

Damage done by the glancing blow opened five compartments to seawater, allowing it to flow over the watertight bulkheads at E deck. A glancing blow killed Titanic.

5. Still waters made the iceberg difficult to see. The official inquiries conducted following Titanic's sinking faulted the crew and White Star Line for not having enough binoculars handy, particularly in the crow's nest where lookouts spotted for ice. The oversight proved crucial that night because the ocean was still, like a lake, and it was a moonless night. Waves would have created mist off the iceberg, making it easier to see -- as would reflected light from the moon had there been any. Lookouts spied the iceberg just a quarter mile away. Too close.

6. There was another ship close by. James Cameron's 1997 movie "Titanic" left out a hugely important detail -- rightly so considering it had nothing to do with the storytelling. But this omission creates misperception in popular Titanic lore. Somewhere between six and 10 miles away, the Californian had stopped for the night because of ice -- something Titanic should have done, frankly. But the ship did nothing to save Titanic, leading to reprimands for captain and crew during post-disaster inquiries.

These determined that the Californian's wireless operator closed down for the night within minutes, perhaps seconds of the collision. Titanic was unusual in having two wireless operators -- one was standard for the time. Unfriendly banter between Titanic and Californian wireless operators reportedly contributed to the signing off for the night.

In a strange twist, wireless operator for Carpathia, which steamed to Titanic passengers' rescue, returned to check the time over wireless before going to bed. Otherwise he also would have missed the distress call, sent first as CQD and later as SOS, which was new.

Later, Californian's crew observed Titanic on the horizon, not knowing the steamer's identity, and the rockets signaling trouble. Several times, crew members woke their captain, who dismissed the flares' significance. They would later wrongly view the sinking as the unknown ship disappearing over the horizon.

US and UK inquiries hotly debated whether or not the Californian could have saved Titanic passengers. Likely not, given how long the ship took to navigate past the field of ice during daylight. But, of course, captain and crew should have tried.

7. Official inquiries concluded Titanic sank whole. Survivor testimony conflicted about the ocean liner's plunge into the Atlantic. The UK inquiry ignored passengers who insisted Titanic broke apart before sinking, which we now know is what happened. Even after the sinking, and technological innovations' failure to save Titanic, arrogance and the unsinkable myth misguided those seeking answers to the disaster's cause and the ship's final minutes.

8. All the engineers were lost. In the romanticized view of Titanic's sinking -- and men of that era putting duty before life -- engineers bravely stayed at their posts, stoking coal so that Titanic had lights. The ship went dark just minutes before sinking, and all the engineers were lost. None survived.

Perhaps they were brave, but there was another factor. Contrary to presentation of Cameron's "Titanic", the ocean liner's keel did not rise 90 degrees high out of the water, but no more than 23 degrees, which by the way is more consistent with survivor testimony. This means the sinking was more sudden and unexpected, particularly the time between the fracture and stern's plunge into the Atlantic. Point: Titanic's final moments came quite suddenly and while the steam ship appeared seaworthy to those on top and below for still some time.

9. White Star wanted to send Titanic's ghost to ferry survivors. Following Carpathia's rescue of Titanic passengers, some dimwit wanted to send Olympic to take them to New York. Reasoning: Provide them with better accommodations. Fortunately, this didn't happen; for already traumatized passengers, Olympic would have been like a ghost ship -- Titanic returned.

10. It was "A Night to Remember". The definitive pre-wreck discovery work about Titanic, based on the original testimony, is Sir Walter Lord's book "A Night to Remember", from which a movie was made. If not for the 1976 Copyright Act, the book would have entered public domain this year. What irony!

Three-quarters of Mac owners don't use anti-malware software

Posted: April 6th, 2012, 11:40am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Early results from our "do you have anti-malware installed on your primary computer" polls are in, and there's some change from the ones conducted last May. More respondents on Mac and Windows use security software, but the split remains polarized: 75 percent of Mac users don't, while 90 percent of their Windows counterparts do. Welcome to the wonderful world of Apple denial. There are no pesticides to save this crop.

Responses are unusually low to both polls. I should know better asking anything over the Easter holiday weekend and start of Passover. I'm re-embedding the polls, hoping to jack up the numbers -- 315 for Mac and 358 for Windows, as I write. But the polarized results are consistent enough with the previous polls, when 86 percent of Windows PC users answered yes and 81 percent of Mac owners no. The difference between the polls is within reasonable margin of error, particularly considering respondents aren't qualified. Responses also could represent increased anti-malware usage in both camps.

I asked the poll following reports that the Flashback Trojan infects more than 600,000 Macs, binding them together as a botnet. Flashback first popped up last summer, so this isn't something new -- just the success as new variants appeared, Apple released updates (often too slowly) and Mac users failed to apply them.

Readers Respond

BetaNews reader Joel Medina uses OS X and Windows, and on the latter runs Microsoft Security Essentials. "But on my mac I rarely install an AV program -- not because I think I'm immune but because it's just so rare that Macs get them because the focus for years for hackers was to attack Windows. But now that Macs are starting to get into mainstream usage I'm considering an antivirus program for my Macs."

Andrew Johnson comments earlier today:

Getting nasties such as Mac Defender or System Tool 2012 or whatever on your computer has always been more about the user's browsing habits than about any supposed flaws, or lack thereof, in the browser and/or operating system. This is not to say that those flaws do not exist, but they would be harder to exploit if most users knew what and how to avoid infection.

Mac has had a pretty good track record up until recently, but I have always said, Apple versus Microsoft is an irritating debate, because it's all code, and if you can write code for it, you can write malicious code. I'm not using the "security through obscurity" argument here, I'm just saying it was always just a matter of time.

On a side note, I find it sad how many people think that their smartphones are unassailable fortresses even though the number of infected mobile devices is on the rise.

The real question to ask: Do you need antivirus software at all? Reader capncoad has an answer for that: "Anti-malware apps are simply a moron detector with no real security. Every time it dings and tell you that it blocked a virus, it's really saying 'moron'...If someone created an antivirus app that caused your PC to shock you every time you downloaded a 200kb executable thinking it was a free song then I think we'd be on to something".

That's the point isn't it? Behavior. Windows 7 and OS X 10.7 are pretty hardened. Often malware infections are about stupid online behavior. "How stupid can people be", maddy143ded writes. "Why download stuff from websites that promise you a song and instead give you a small executable?"

Is anti-malware software installed on your primary home Macintosh?

Is anti-malware software installed on your primary home Windows PC?

Do I Feel Lucky?

There are lots of reasons, like social media. Your friend whom you trust recommends a link and you click. Or you trust Google and search for band X, only to find SEO poisoning in place. Or you trust Apple marketing statements like "Mac OS X doesn't get PC viruses", creating a false sense of security. Or you're browsing from home, you feel safe and project that feeling to web browsing. Trust is the constant.

Last year I kicked Apple in the groin for making security claims like this: "Mac OS X doesn't get PC viruses", which fosters a false sense of security. Oftentimes, as Flashback and countless Windows malware show, successful attacks are more about social engineering than lax operating system security. Human behavior matters as much, sometimes more. Criminals can break in no matter how good the locks if people open the door for them.

But do they need to install a separate security system (e.g. anti-malware)? I would feel pretty safe using Windows 8 and OS X Snow Leopard without anti-malware software. But then, again, I'm cautious of what I click.

After making Snow Leopard seem like the toughest thing next to the Terminator, the updated OS X security page concedes and recommends:

The Mac is designed with built-in technologies that provide protection against malicious software and security threats right out of the box. However, since no system can be 100 percent immune from every threat, here are some other ways to help keep your information as safe as possible:

Download files only from known and trusted websites.

Use FileVault 2 to encrypt everything on your Mac.

Control access to your Mac by locking your screen after a period of inactivity.

Securely delete outdated sensitive files with the Secure Empty Trash command.

As Clint Eastwood playing Dirty Harry said, "You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

Photo Credits: maraga/Shutterstock

Do you use a smartphone or tablet and watch TV?

Posted: April 5th, 2012, 3:52pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I occasionally do. My wife does every day, multiple times, either using her Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket or Amazon Kindle. "In the US, 88 percent of tablet owners and 86 percent of smartphone owners said they used their device while watching TV at least once during a 30-day period", Nielsen says today. That's me. "For 45 percent of tablet tapping Americans, using their device while watching TV was a daily event". That's my better half. What about you?

I do tend to use my smartphone more often than a tablet while watching TV, that's to Shazam music -- something I frequently do everywhere. I was a deejay in an earlier life and compulsively search for good music. I'm not alone. Shazam audio QR codes appeared in Super Bowl ads for Best Buy, Pepsi and Toyota, among others. I see more QR codes in ads and TV shows every day. They're everywhere, and in some surprising places.

Nielsen's findings make sense of an increasing trend I see during prime-time programming: Interactive, companion smartphone and tablet apps. Second-screen they're often called, and emphasis often is social networking and sharing. "The Walking Dead" comes to mind. If I recall, viewers could track the number of people killed in real time, but the season's over and I didn't use the app. Last month, The Peel app extended its mobile apps second-screen in a pilot program with "American Idol". Suddenly, the live finalist broadcasts are interactive and social.

"It seems there are always a few controversial moments on American Idol, whether it is an overly harsh judge or the beloved contestant who is unexpectedly voted off", Peel CEO Greg Lindley says. "We are looking forward to being able to share our community's predictions and passion".

There is no shortage of second-screen apps. Among those for dedicated shows: "Bones"; "Celebrity Apprentice"; "New Girl"; MTVWatchWith, which covers the network's prime-time lineup; and NBC Live, which likewise is for prime-time programming; among many others.

Networks are getting more involved. For example, Fox has taken a small equity stake in ACTV8.me, which produces the "New Girl" app.

I'm surprised to see how far this second-screen thing goes. In late November eBay broke a feature from its iOS app as standalone for iPad: Watch with eBay. "You can browse and buy items related to the TV shows you’re watching", according to the auction site (This is where my jaw drops).

Definitely TV watching is increasingly social. Whether Facebook, Twitter, other social networks or broadly-dedicated second-screen apps like IntoNow, Miso or Zeebox (for UK audiences). How often do you see hashtags displayed during prime-time broadcasts, for example? I see them every day.

I wonder about these second-screen apps. "The most frequent tablet or smartphone activity across all countries while also watching TV was checking email, either during a commercial break or during the show", Nielsen says. I must confess, on the rare occasions I use a tablet while watching TV it's to manage email, which is faster by touch than mouse (well for me).

"Device owners also seem to engage with content related to the TV as well, either by looking up information related to the show or looking for deals and general information on products advertised on TV", according to Nielsen.

The closest I ever came to social watching: Dave Barry's live blogging commentaries of Fox series "24". Barry is a riot. But that was all before Facebook and Twitter added a different social element to TV watching -- or second-screen apps. But after writing this post, I might just start doing so.

Not that I need more reasons to sit in front of the boob tube. Do you?

Are you a Mac zombie?

Posted: April 5th, 2012, 9:47am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Sometimes when dealing with the so-called Mac faithful -- diehard users who relentlessly demean and attack anyone (reporters, particularly) who doesn't share their unquestioning enthusiasm -- I think of the "Walking Dead"; TV show or comic, it's your choice. Nothing stops their relentless, mindless walk. As if there weren't zombies enough, cybercriminals have unleashed another kind that is much worse.

Late last week, I started following progress of a new Trojan injected via rogue Java applet. Flashback is a variant of older malware and Apple issued a patch, so I chose not to write about it. Whoa, that was a mistake. Yesterday, Russian security firm Dr. Web claimed that more than 600,000 Macs are infected and part of a sophisticated botnet. Cybercriminals have amassed a sizable army of zombie Macs. Let me take a moment to welcome Mac users to zombieland -- a place many Windows users have lived for years.

No One is Safe

Trojans are nothing new, they're just not as common on Mac OS as Windows, but they're increasingly common enough for concern. For all the other Mac zombies -- let's call them the Walking Dead for differentiation -- who claim there is no Mac malware, 600,000-plus is nothing, nothing. Close your eyes and wish them away.

Two May 2011 BetaNews polls found that eight out of 10 Mac users don't have anti-malware installed, while as many Windows users do. I've started the polls anew, to see what's changed, if anything, in 11 months. Please respond to them. The Walking Dead aren't only to blame here as I explained last year: "Apple has created, by asserting things like 'Mac OS X doesn't get PC viruses,' a false sense of Mac security".

"Despite what Apple's marketing department would have you believe, Macs are not invulnerable to attacks and malware targeting OS X does exist", security consultant Adrian Sanabria explains. "Our main takeaway from [Flashback] should be that many Mac users have been lured into a false sense of security, and will be, or may already be, in for a rude awakening".

Think about something. From where is the Mac install base growing? Windows users. Apple executives consistently say that half of Mac buyers are Windows users. As Mac Defender showed last year, successful Mac malware uses the same social engineering techniques common to Windows PCs. Windows users bring bad habits to the Mac, which Mac Defender showed can be exploited as easily on Apple computers as Windows PCs.

Then there is the Walking Dead and other long-time Mac users who aren't accustomed to their computers being assaulted. They're naive and leave the windows open and doors unlocked, so to speak. They feel safe when they shouldn't and don't know what behavior creates risk. Yes, I'm generalizing, but the point is valid.

Risks increase with malware success. Botnets this size are self-propogating. Cyberciminals can use a large botnet to attack and infect other computers. Can this one be taken down? We shall see.

Is anti-malware software installed on your primary home Macintosh?

Is anti-malware software installed on your primary home Windows PC?

Flashback to Terror

Initially, Dr. Web reported 550,000 Macs in the botnet but later updated the number to more than 600,000, get this, with "274 bots from Cupertino" -- the city presumably referring to Apple, as it's common shorthand.

SEO poisoning spread the last big malware outbreak. Similarly, Flashback spreads through compromised websites. Dr. Web explains:

Systems get infected with BackDoor.Flashback.39 after a user is redirected to a bogus site from a compromised resource or via a traffic distribution system. JavaScript code is used to load a Java-applet containing an exploit. Doctor Web's virus analysts discovered a large number of web-sites containing the code.

More than half of the compromised computers are in the United States and more than three quarters in North America.

More specifically, how are Macs infected? Security vendor F-Secure explains:

Trojan-Downloader:OSX/Flashback.I is dropped by malicious Java applets that exploit the known CVE-2011-3544 vulnerability.

On execution, the malware will prompt the unsuspecting user for the administrator password. Whether or not the user inputs the administrator password, the malware will attempt to infect the system, though entering the password will affect how the infection is done.

If infection is successful, the malware will modify the contents of certain webpages displayed by web browsers; the specific webpages targeted and changes made are determined based on configuration information retrieved by the malware from a remote server.

F-Secure also offers detailed instructions to detect and remove Flashback.

Apple has patched the vulnerability but took six weeks doing so. Meanwhile, like Mac Defender, new Flashback variants spread. Will you be a Mac zombie, or are you one already? Now might be a good time to invest in a Mac anti-malware app.

Samsung Galaxy Nexus and Nokia Lumia 900 is a fair comparison

Posted: April 4th, 2012, 1:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Discussion Counterpoint. Colleague Tim Conneally and I got into a heated debate about smartphone comparisons this morning. He has the Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone for review (and I -- whaaaaa -- don't). I suggested Tim do a comparison with Google-branded Galaxy Nexus, which we both have. He refused. Tim was quite adamant about it, too. His out-and-out refusal clearly taps into strong feelings about how products are compared.

We bantered back and forth over group chat, with neither of our positions changing. "Buyers make these product comparisons all the time", I expressed late in our debate. "I can see we won't agree. If I had the Lumia 900, I would compare them". But I don't, and Tim won't. So I suggested: "Let's ask the readers...something like: 'Would you like the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and Nokia Lumia 900 compared?'"

I had planned on one story with both our perspectives, but Tim smartly wrote something longer -- hence we have a separate point and counterpoint. Please read his "Stop comparing unlike objects. RIGHT. NOW." Tim makes the case for why we shouldn't write a post/review comparing the two smartphones, while I advocate such comparison. Your feedback is vital to resolving our debate but also illuminating something else: How products are compared. There are lots of dumb comparisons out there, particularly tech products. Would this be one of them?

It's Our Job

Reporters aren't analysts or marketers. Our job isn't to divide the products we write about into tidy little demographic groups. So what if grandmas living on social security in Cleveland are more likely to get free iPhone 3GS, while their grandchildren soaking up sunny Malibu cough up $399 for 64GB iPhone 4S.

Market researchers live for this crap. We aren't Mad Men. We're the last visage of the Fourth Estate, before the Huffington Posts of the world extinguish our breed forever. We write for our readers, who love gadgets and compare many different products by measures that defy demographic modeling. Aggregators and marketers present varnished perspectives. We present the raw wood, with no blemishes covered (so that someone can better put one over the other to sell something).

Helicopters and Motorcycles

Tim contends that from the demographic perspective, the two smartphones aren't comparable -- that they appeal to different people. "Comparing them would be like comparing a
helicopter to a motorcycle because they both run on gasoline", he writes. Price is one reason ($299.99 for Galaxy Nexus and $99.99 for Lumia 900) and segmentation another (the Android handset appeals to bleeding-edge enthusiasts and the Windows Phone to the mass-market). That reasoning is a bunch of Android apologist horse poo-poo.

Galaxy Nexus and Lumia 900 is a fair comparison, because many BetaNews readers will do so in choosing one over the other. Google "Galaxy Nexus vs Lumia 900" or "Which is better Galaxy Nexus or Lumia 900?" There are comparisons out there already and for a reason. People want them, which is good enough for me.

Tim contends that in part because of price Galaxy Nexus "was not --and is still not-- a mass market device". Really? So what, Google, Samsung and Verizon partnered to sell the smartphone to 100 people? This is Google's flagship phone -- of course, the goal is to sell many of them.

By Any Other Name a Smartphone

Galaxy Nexus isn't a helicopter and Lumia 900 a motorcycle. They are LTE smartphones sold nearby one another in stores like Best Buy. They would be in a carrier's store if AT&T or Verizon sold both. Falling back to hollow out the market position thing, the segment that matters most here is smartphone -- people shopping for one and making decisions on lots of similar criteria: Battery life, brand, camera, carrier, data speed, ease of use, operating system and size, among many similar attributes.

Best Buy also sells many different televisions alongside one another. By the no-comparison reasoning, no budget shopper would ever consider the $1,200 big-screen TV over a $500 model. People make product decisions every day based on all kinds of different criteria. A friend of mine recently compared the Fuji X10 and X100 digital cameras. The X10 sells for around $600 and the X100 for $1,200. One is an advanced point-and-shoot camera, while the costlier model is more for amateurs and pros. Their target segments are different, yet there is much overlap in features and appearance. By Tim's reasoning, my friend would never have compared them.

My other reasons for comparing the phones have little to do with product segmentation or buyer demographics:

Pitting flagship phones -- Google's and Nokia's -- against one another
Platform vs platform -- Ice Cream Sandwich, Windows Phone 7.5 Commercial Release 2
Nokia vs Samsung -- the old smartphone market share leader takes on the rising upstart
Google vs Microsoft, which offer radically different philosophies on mobile digital lifestyles

Those are enough reasons for now. But are they reason enough? I say Galaxy Nexus and Lumia 900 is a fair comparison. Tim disagrees. What do you say?

Uh-oh, iPhone fanboys

Posted: April 4th, 2012, 10:43am MDT by Joe Wilcox

iPhone Idolators, please meet the Android Army. Now retreat! Android's share of the US smartphone market topped 50 percent in February, according to comScore. iOS gained share but trails considerably -- by like 20 points. You can have your iPhone, but many more Americans take Android. I'm waiting. What's your smarty-pants response to that, Apple apologists?

The findings butt against those from Nielsen -- a life raft of apology for those insisting iPhone will rule the world. Last week, Nielsen reported a huge surge in the number of new purchasers choosing iPhones compared to Android. For the three months ending in February, 48 percent of Americans who recently bought a smartphone, chose Android -- 43 percent iPhone, according to Nielsen. A year earlier, 27 percent of new acquirers chose Android versus 10 percent for iPhone.

Fifty percent is a big number and puts iPhone in potentially perennial second place -- unless Android suddenly loses share. There's nothing in comScore, Nielsen or any other analyst data that remotely suggests a reversal. Android's dramatic growth slowed following the release of iPhone 4S in October, but there's no reversal in growth or share gains.

Something else: Where Android and iOS gains come from. Microsoft and Research in Motion mobile operating systems lost share (again), 1.3 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively -- or nearly what Android and iOS gained. BlackBerry's downward trend seems unstoppable. Windows Phone is uncertain, given the arrival of hot, new LTE models, led by the Nokia Lumia 900. RIM can't give up share forever.

Where Apple apologists can find solace is the one-against-many argument -- iPhone alone shows tremendous gains against dozens of Androids. Among them, Samsung is smartphone leader, with 25.6 percent share, which is flat over three months. Second-ranked LG lost 1.1 points to 19.4 percent share, while Apple gained 2.3 points to 13.5 percent share. Apple gains pushed Motorola to fourth place, with 12.8 percent share.

But nothing gets past Android's 50 percent, which comes as the US smartphone market approaches its saturation point and growth gains slow down for the leaders. Over three months, the number of Americans owning a smartphone rose 14 percent -- to 104 million, or 44 percent of all handset owners. iPhone would need to make dramatic gains against Android for all of 2012 to close the distance. At the current smartphone adoption rate, saturation is perhaps coming within 18 months.

Considering that major carriers require two-year contractual agreements and more people will have recently purchased new smartphones then not, saturation is on track to lock in share for the major competitors sometime next year. If Windows Phone is to gain anything, new LTE models coming now must bring it while BlackBerry can still give up share. There's nothing in comScore, Nielsen or any other analyst data to suggest Androids or iPhone will relinquish anything.

Apple apologists can dance on BlackBerry's grave and laugh at (what they consider to be) Windows Phone dorks. But Android rules the world -- well, at least these United States.

How do you rate Larry Page's first year as Google CEO?

Posted: April 3rd, 2012, 10:01pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

On April 4, 2011, Larry Page returned as Google's chief executive after a decade's repast. In his first year back on the job, Google has dramatically changed. I planned to write a massive reflective story, but thought it'd be better if you did. A story with your assessment of Page and Google will be more interesting, and revealing, about the company and perceptions about it. I'll collect your comments here and put them together into a follow-up post. To get you started, I'll do a quickie review of Google over the last 12 months and call out a few highlights.

At the start of 2011, I called it the "year of Google", and it was. Much credit belongs to Page as he axed services not core to the Google lifestyle, acquired Motorola Mobility and refocused the company on rapid iteration. Just look how far Android and Chrome advanced over the last 12 months or how quickly Google+ went from conception to 100 million-plus users. If 2011 wasn't the year of Larry Page, 2012 will be. But will you like it, or what he has done to Google?

Below I've gathered some Google highlights to remind you what a year it has been. The list is by no means inclusive, but covers a wide range of events.

June 2011

Acer and Samsung Chromebooks go up for sale.
Google+ debutes as invite-only social network.
Google defends its monopoly position, in response to a Federal Trade Commission investigation. Many of the arguments remind of Microsoft in the late 1990s.

July 2011

Google releases first tools that allow users to extract their data from its services, in an affront to Facebook.
Google+ reaches 20 million users.
Google Labs closes.
Logitech loses $30 million on Google TV. Cuts price of Revue set-top box to $99 and takes massive charge.

August 2011

Google buys Motorola Mobility.
Justice Department finds Google knowingly permitted Canadian pharmacies to peddle cheap drugs through AdWords. The search giant is fined $500 million.

September 2011

Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt testifies before Congress. Legislators are concerned about the search giant's monopoly position.

October 2011

November 2011

Logitech abandons Google TV.
Google Music launches. Stream music anywhere, as long as you're willing to upload tracks first.

December 2011

Schmidt says Google will release branded tablet within six months.
Google "Currents" e-zine launches. It's slow and buggy.
Google Nexus arrives in the United States, finally, on Verizon.

January 2012

Google reduces Chrome page rank after video ads violate terms of service.
Google Plus Your World launches. The personalized, social search function raises antitrust concerns, in part because of Google's aggressive, cross-integration of features.
Electronic Privacy Information Center urges the FTC to investigate Google privacy violations.

February 2012

Chrome loses usage share after 11 straight months of gains, after Google reduces the browser's page rank.
Google+ tops 100 million users.
Chrome for Android 4.x enters beta.
Google bypasses Safari privacy settings, setting off more controversy about "doing evil".
Google adds collaboration to Docs for Android -- a feature that should have been there from the start.

March 2012

Google adopts controversial privacy policy. Information sharing across Google services puts some governments' regulatory agencies and end users in a row.
FTC asks Apple to provide information about Google services integration into iOS.
Google Go programming language reaches version 1.

One reason I chose not to write a retrospective today is this analysis from last week, which more or less is one looking at the increased cross-integration of products and services since Page returned as CEO.

So how would you rate Page's first year? At the least, please use a 1-to-5 scale, with the higher number being more satisfactorily. Better: Offer your quick assessment of Google and what it means to you -- or doesn't -- and, of course, Larry Page.

Google isn't trying to save Android tablets but kill Kindle Fire

Posted: April 3rd, 2012, 10:19am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Rumors about Google's forthcoming tablet are increasing, which astounds me -- as they portray this as something new. Hey, Google already formally stated it would produce an Android tablet. The rumormongers have got the reasons wrong, too. Google isn't gunning for Apple but Amazon.

The retail giant is by far the biggest competitive threat standing before Android today. Amazon has customized Android, released its own hardware, ditched Google's browser for its own Silk, established a viable app store alternative to Google Play and created a curated user experience that rivals Apple's. In just one quarter, Amazon's Kindle Fire jumped ahead of all other Android tablets, putting it second to iPad. Every Kindle Fire sold is one more brick in the wall blocking the success of the broader Android ecosystem.

I strongly disagree with CNET's Roger Cheng, who asserts: "The worst thing Google could do to its budding Android tablet business is get into it". A branded tablet is the best thing Google can do now for Android tablets.

Kindle Fire burns Android

Amazon announced $199 Kindle Fire in late September 2011 and started selling the media tablet in early November. According to IDC, the retailer shipped 4.7 million Kindle Fires during Q4, jumping to second place market share during the launch quarter. Amazon pushed Samsung down to third place. The Android tablet makers had 16.8 percent and 5.8 percent share, respectively, with Samsung growing from 5.5 percent in third quarter.

Something else: Kindle Fire is largely responsible for Android market share gains -- to 44.6 percent during fourth quarter, up from 32.3 percent three months earlier. During Q4 the two leading tablet operating systems were iOS and Amazon's Android, with combined share of 71.5 percent. Let me restate that: Not Android, but Amazon Android.

Google's tablet has got to get past Kindle Fire before ever touching iPad, which had 54.7 percent market share during fourth quarter, according to IDC.

Amazon's $199 is focus of Google tablet rumors, for good reason. Our polls show that most people don't want to spend more. But there is much more to Kindle Fire's success than price. There are other compelling $199 tablets, such as Lenovo's Ideapad A1, that trail far behind. Price is just table stakes. iPad competitors need more than lower-cost tablets to win.

Fractured Android

What Amazon does right, like Apple, that Google must do: Sell a lifestyle. Amazon prioritizes features and pricing that matter for living one digital lifestyle around its cloud-connected services, rather than offering the latest, hardware and software. Like Apple, Amazon offers a stack of content and services. Kindle Fire isn't about techie features but a digital lifestyle around Amazon products and services.

Unlike other Android tablet manufacturers, Amazon takes complete control over the entire stack. Kindle Fire features an Amazon-customized version of Android 2.x, its own Android app store, music and movie stores, ebook store, web browser and customized media consumption software and services. Sony is closest, followed by Samsung, among Android tablet manufacturers.

Amazon's continued success is good for driving up Android shipments against iPad, but it's bad broadly. Kindle Fire benefits Amazon and its customers willing to buy into the curated experience but at the expense of the larger Android ecosystem.

Amazon's objectives are contrary to Google's. For example, if I type the web address to Google's Android Market into the Silk browser on my wife's Kindle Fire, Amazon's Android app store opens instead. On other Android tablets, Google Play is default but there is option to sideload from other stores, like Amazon's.

Android already is fragmented. Kindle Fire, Amazon Android, the retailer's app store and curated services stand to fracture the platform and wrestle control from Google. CEO Larry Page, Android leader Andy Rubin and other Google execs aren't dummies. They can see exactly what's happening.

Google Play to Win

Google will bring a large arsenal to bear on Amazon:

1. The Google brand, which like Apple's and Amazon's is well-known and highly regarded. Branding and perception are everything in business.

2. Price, assuming Google goes for $199, as rumored. It's what I'd do.

3. Ice Cream Sandwich. Why wouldn't Google offer its newest Android version and in process finally jumpstart adoption. Google's partners are dragging their asses getting their devices to Android 4.0. As of April 2, ICS accounted for just 2.9 percent of all Android devices, which means cell phones, too.

4. Curated digital lifestyle apps. The Android ecosystem should prepare for the coming Google Android stack to rival Amazon's and to compete with other partners. About a month ago, the search and information giant renamed Android Market Google Play and last week prominently placed a link on the dark bar across services pages like Gmail and Plus.

The name change emphasizes Google over Android as dominant brand and foreshadows the curated approach to come. Like Amazon and Apple, Google offers ebooks, movies and music at its store. Then there is the broader digital lifestyle supported by services like search and maps.

5. Integration. Google is in process of cross-integrating all its products and services, many of which are tightly tied to Android and most prominently and deeply in Ice Cream Sandwich. Already, Google integration pays off big on smartphones. According to comScore's "2012 Mobile Future in Focus" report:

Google-owned apps led across both iPhones and Android devices in terms of total unique active users. For iPhone users, YouTube ranked as the top app by unique visitors, followed by Google Maps, Facebook, Yahoo! Weather and Pandora Radio. Analysis of the Android market found that Google Search led as the top app, followed by Gmail, Google Maps, Facebook and Google News & Weather.

What Google needs now is a successful tablet running ICS.

6. Reference Design. In January 2010, Google unveiled the Nexus One smartphone, which it sold direct to customers. Many bloggers and journalists wrongly wrote that Google charted new retail waters by selling direct, missing the point: Google wasn't going into retail sales but establishing a reference design for manufacturers and developers. From that perspective, Google executed brilliantly with N1 and continued with December release of the Samsung-made Nexus S and the Galaxy Nexus a year later.

A Google tablet as reference design is more important now than when I called for it in January 2011. Because of Amazon Android. Google can rally developers to a pure Android tablet running the newest OS version, while leading way for hardware partners to follow.

If Google fails, there will be two Androids competing against iOS tablets. What's that saying about a house divided?

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

What is new iPad's biggest benefit?

Posted: April 2nd, 2012, 2:20pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Simply stated: customer satisfaction. Lots of it. Oh, yeah, and the new display.

Apple started selling its newest tablet on March 8. Between the 22nd and 28th, ChangeWave surveyed new iPad buyers; 82 percent claim to be "very satisfied", which is up from February and 74 percent of iPad 2 owners. When combined with "somewhat" responses, 98 percent of new iPad owners are satisfied, compared to 97 percent for the previous model. The difference is the increase in "very" satisfied versus "somewhat".

Satisfaction is no small benefit. Consumer product nirvana is joy, for the user and the manufacturer/retailer. Happy customers are loyal ones. They tell their friends. Joy is paramount for products, like iPad, with aspirational attributes. It's not coincidence that new iPad commercials fit into the "if you buy this your life will be better" product marketing category.

What ChangeWave's findings lack is competitive reference. Okay, so new iPad owners are more satisfied. But how does this compare to other tablets? Amazon Kindle Fire? ASUS Eee Pad Tansformer Prime? Motorola XYBORAD? Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1?

See Me, Feel Me, Touch Me

More significantly, there is a killer feature that has new iPad owners clamoring with excitement. Can you guess? The high-resolution display. "By a landslide, the high-resolution "Retina" Display (75 percent) is what new iPad owners report they like best about the device", according to ChangeWave. Battery life ranked second (22 percent) and 4G LTE third (21 percent).

Frankly, new iPad's screen resolution bugs me. The better-than-HD display (2048 x 1536 resolution) diminishes the user experience of most every other device I use. New iPad's screen looks so good, everything else looks bad. I've wondered about giving the tablet a go as my primary PC for awhile because of the negative impact on everything else. Hey, I did Chromebook for two months last summer, why not new iPad? But I digress.

ChangeWave's study, of a paltry 200 owners, also reveals major dislikes. "Users cited the 'cost of the device' (26 percent) and the 'cost of the wireless data plan' (23 percent) as their two biggest gripes".

Cost isn't surprising. BetaNews polls show that most readers don't want to pay more than $199 for a tablet. Data plan demonstrates Apple's wisdom in working with carriers to make cellular optional, rather than required. If overwhelmingly satisfied new iPad owners don't like data pricing, what about those buying Androids and getting locked into multi-year contracts?

Fourteen months ago, I called onerous, mandatory data plans "the real reason Android tablets don't stand a chance against iPad". Now there is another: The display.

Heatwave

The question, of course, is how will Android competitors respond to new iPad? This year. Gartner expects quad-core processors and high-resolution displays to be mainstream during second half. Where will that put new iPad?

I'll answer "in the hot seat" to segue to another ChangeWave finding: New iPad isn't too hot. Consumer Reports made quite the to-do last month about the tablet being hotter than its predecessor. Today, in a rather sheepish turnabout, CR recommended new iPad, despite so-called "Heatgate".

If ChangeWave's survey is any indication, Consumer Reports blew a lot of hot air. Exactly zero percent of respondents find heat to be a "very big problem", while a mere 4 percent say "somewhat".

Wrapping up, I'll ask: If you bought new iPad, are you satisfied? Why? Please answer in comments -- and if responding on new iPad, then let us know.

Internet Explorer is a winner

Posted: April 2nd, 2012, 10:33am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Microsoft competes the old-fashion way with its web browser -- innovation and marketing -- and that's a fairly recent trend. There are reasons companies advertise their products. Promotion raises awareness and, ideally, product adoption. Finally, after years of steady decline, Internet Explorer has sustained growth, at least for five months -- that's a quantifiable trend. In fact, IE was the only major browser to increase usage share in March. Additionally, Microsoft finally sees payback from its risky strategy of not making IE9 Windows XP compatible.

Net Applications releases new data the first of every month, but I waited a day to make absolutely sure this statement was no April Fools prank: "With a gain of .99 percent last month and a net gain of 1.2 percent global usage share over the last five months, Internet Explorer has stabilized and even reversed its usage share declines of the last few years".

Internet Explorer usage share rose to 53.83 percent in March. Yes, that's a long way from the 57.15 percent a year earlier or 60.35 percent in November 2010. IE usage share was over 90 percent in December 2004, when Firefox launched. How the mighty has fallen. But perhaps there is a second chance for Microsoft's browser, like Rocky Balboa's comeback in the third movie of the series.

What irony! Internet Explorer's recent rise started in November 2011, when I reported it was hemorrhaging usage share, following a long, steep decline. What changed? Microsoft set out on a specific strategy and stuck with it, by:

1. Making changes only as often as necessary. Google and Mozilla are now on fast-track development cycles, essentially six-weeks, with multiple versions in simultaneous development. That's fine for revving new innovations but terrible for business adoption. Enterprises, particularly, look for stability not change. Sure IE9 offers some dramatic security and plug-in changes from its predecessor, but over a manageable time period. In April 2011 I asked: "Is web browser development moving too fast?" For many businesses, yes.

In August 2011, Google started killing off support for old browsers, yet not that old. Venkat Panchapakesan, Google vice president of engineering, explains in a blog post a few months earlier: "Each time a new version is released, we'll begin supporting the update and stop supporting the third-oldest version." This approach makes Chrome obsolete about every 12 weeks, which isn't enough time for most businesses to qualify a browser.

Microsoft wisely chooses to develop at a pace more in step with its core customer base of businesses. Developers see rapid iteration on the beta front, but Microsoft saves big changes for major releases.

2. More soundly adopting web stands. After years of pushing proprietary stuff, Microsoft is a leader adopting and advocating accepted and emerging web standards, like HTML5. The approach has many benefits, with positive perceptions among the most important.

3. Steadily promoting new benefits and upping the advertising ante. Microsoft promotes the hell out of Internet Explorer across the web and on TV. I'm a big fan of the recent "A More Beautiful Web" commercial, which is lively and contemporary. Microsoft is slowly, and successfully, rebuilding IE's brand image.

document.getElementById("na634689667010923400").src="http://www.netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?qprid=1"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qptimeframe=M"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpsp=148"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpnp=11"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpdt=1"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpct=4"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpcustomb=0"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpf=16"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpwidth=600"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpdisplay=1111"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"qpmr=10"+String.fromCharCode(38)+"site="+window.location.hostname

4. Leaving Windows XP behind. Google and Mozilla browsers support XP (although that ends soon for Firefox), which accounted for 85 percent of the Windows install base when IE9 released in 2009. I questioned the soundness of the strategy in several blog posts over the last 18 months. But the approach appears to be working for Microsoft, and surely somebodies inside the company fiercely debated the strategy as Chrome usage share dramatically rose during the same time period. As Windows 7 adoption increases, so does IE9 adoption.

Still, IE is in a pitched battle with Chrome. That's right, not Firefox! By browser version, IE9 is just barely ahead of Chrome for second place -- 15.17 percent usage share to 14.73 percent, respectively. IE8 leads with 25.4 percent usage share. Frankly, Chrome could lead if Google released new versions less frequently.

Back to the broad strokes, Firefox usage share fell to 20.55 percent in March from 20.92 percent the previous month. Chrome dropped to 18.57 percent from 18.90 percent. Safari: 5.07 percent from 5.24 percent. Opera: 1.62 percent from 1.71 percent.

These declines reverse gains for Firefox and Safari. What really changed in March for competitors? Microsoft started the new IE marketing campaign.

My question to you: Are Internet Explorer usage gains sustainable?

Anonymous hack reveals truth about Obama's birthplace

Posted: April 1st, 2012, 11:06am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today, hacktavist group Anonymous put to rest one of the most important debates about Barack Obama. Is he really a US citizen? Only native-born Americans are legally permitted to be president, and early during his 2008 election campaign Obama fought off accusations that he was born in another country and not the great state of Hawaii. The accusations turn out to be true. But his place of origin is farther out. Barack Obama was born on another planet.

Anonymous published the stunning revelatory material to Pastebin, marking its most courageous hack to date. For anyone questioning the group's motivations, the stolen material puts to rest any doubt about being a force of good. Hacktavists obtained emails and other documents from Obama's BlackBerry, along with foiled plans to invade the earth. The White House immediately issued a denial, calling the disclosure a prank.

Aliens Among Us

The revelation brings new meaning to terms like "resident alien". They're not from another country. The freshly released material also explains how Obama, with little political experience, mesmerized Americans during his presidential bid. People who four years ago called his campaign and its success "out of this world" were right in ways they never imagined. Anonymous revealed that alien agents instigated the financial collapse that preceded the November 2008 presidential vote, while using subliminal messages in campaign TV commercials -- even rival John McCain's -- to convince Americans to vote Obama.

Meanwhile, the US government's $700 billion-plus "TARP" bailout to crippled financial institutions paid off the rich elite cooperating with the aliens, while seeking to breakdown Americans' will to resist when the invasion came. Aliens also instigated similar bailouts across the globe, and even the current Euro crisis. The documents reveal that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernake, and predecessor Alan Greenspan, are aliens, too.

Occupy Wall Street organizer Terrance Travis Tonka immediately called for a protest against "the other 1 percent. I'm mortified, and soulfully sorry, to admit that we were wrong. Our woes weren't caused by the 1 percent of rich mother-effers but the other 1 percent -- the aliens among us. They want to break our will, our willingness to fight for ourselves. Yes, we are beaten down. But we won't give up. We call on all Americans, all peoples of the planet earth, to make April 1st a day of protest and start of a global campaign to uncover the identity of every alien invader".

Soon after Anonymous' stunning disclosure, former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin called for a recall of the 2008 election results, Obama's impeachment and Senator John McCain's instatement as president -- with her alongside him. But Anonymous revealed that Palin is an alien, too! Her seemingly irrational behavior four years ago was meant to undermine McCain's candidacy, while providing a back-up plan to the Oval House should Obama lose. Later, Palin and her non-alien collaborators founded the Tea Party Movement, which placed aliens in Congress for the purpose of destabilizing the US government. To date, given the deadlocked Congress, those plans succeeded.

Failed Invasion

However, while Palin and others laid the groundwork for invasion, top alien leaders worked against it. The "change" Obama campaigned for four years ago was more than leadership in Washington but capitol cities around the globe. Anonymous revealed that aliens planned to land their ships during Easter 2011, masquerading as the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Aliens hoped to create confusion enough to lay siege to major cities before governments could respond. The reasoning: Who would nuke Jesus?

The invasion failed because the first alien leaders enjoy their lives so much on earth, Anonymous revealed in several email exchanges between Obama and his brethren expressing their desire to keep the planet for themselves. The aliens sent misleading communiqué to their home world indicating that earth's inhabitants had already depleted its valuable resources and that a period of global cooling was underway. The aliens require higher concentrations of carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures -- sustained 40 degrees Celsius and above -- to thrive. There are reasons Obama is known to constantly complain about being cold in hot, humid Washington, DC.

Today's hack comes a day after Anonymous organized a coordinated attack against the Internet's 13 primary DNS servers. Group spokesperson #ductape revealed that its efforts to bring down the Internet were coordinated with a more brazen hack of Obama's BlackBerry.

The White House wasted no time responding to #ductape, issuing a followup statement claiming that the hactavist group's members are the real alien invaders. "What more proof do you need than bringing down the Internet and the recent surge of hackers seeking to destabilize global authority", according to the statement.

The Pastebin post is a wellspring of stunning revelations, some of which no science fiction writer could conceive. Example: For years, many analysts questioned the irrational leadership of Research in Motion's former co-CEOs Jim Balsillie and Mike Lazaridis -- almost like they were trying to destroy the company. They were! Anonymous revealed that they're aliens, too. By crippling RIM, and diminishing BlackBerry's popularity, aliens hoped to quietly implement their own security measures on Obama's smartphone and make the platform less appealing to hackers. Obviously, with today's disclosure, the plan failed.

Editor's Note, April 2, 2012: Yes, this is an April Fools.

Photo Credit: The White House

The Cloud, Big Data and connected devices lift Intel semiconductors sales

Posted: March 30th, 2012, 3:30pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

For all the talk about the post-PC era and rise of alternate chip architectures, Intel defies gravity's pull. The microprocessing giant's dominance grows stronger, not lesser, which is strange juxtaposition to analyst predictions about media tablets and smartphones running ARM processors ending the PC's decades-long supremacy.

This week, iSuppli reports that Intel's share of the semiconductor market reached its highest level in a decade, 15.6 percent, largely based on its core chip business. "Intel in 2011 saw its revenue jump by 20.6 percent", Dale Ford, head of iSuppli Electronics and Semiconductor Research, says. "This outpaced every other semiconductor supplier in the Top 20 with the exception of Qualcomm Inc. and ON Semiconductor, both of which also saw exceptionally high levels of growth based on a combination of organic expansion and key acquisitions".

Ford adds: "Until 2011, Samsung had been steadily closing the gap with Intel, with its share of global semiconductor market revenue rising from 3.9 percent in 2000 to 9.2 percent in 2010", Ford says. "Samsung’s revenue growth of 0.6 percent in 2011 left its overall market share unchanged at 9.2 percent in 2011". Texas and Toshiba ranked third and fourth.

Other measures show Intel's dominance in its traditionally core market -- x86 processors. During fourth quarter, the broader market for PC and server microprocessors generated $10.9 billion in sales, up 14.2 percent year over year, according to IDC. Intel's overall market share was 80.3 percent, but much higher for servers: 94.5 percent.

Looking ahead, Gartner predicts a surge in semiconductor spending during second half of 2012, reaching $316 billion for the year, a 4 percent increase. Product highlights:

Media tablet production will increase 78 percent year over year to $9.5 billion. Gartner expects quad-core processors and high-resolution displays to be mainstream this year.
PC unit production will increase by 4.7 percent, generating $57.8 billion in revenue.
Mobile phone production will increase by 6.7 percent, to $57.2 billion.

"2012 should be a reasonably strong year for the semiconductor industry if the macroeconomic outlook stays in check", Bryan Lewis, Gartner research vice president, says. "Growth projections assume the European debt issues stay contained, Iran/Israel tensions stay in check, and solid growth from China".

Planets Align

Intel benefits from a convergence of events -- the planets lining up, so the speak, much as they will for Mayan 2012 end-of-the-world predictions. These are particularly true for businesses. I've identified eight trends, many of which benefit Intel's recently announced Xeon processor E5-2600 product family. They are:

1. Economic recovery. While the post-2008 economic collapse initially forced cutbacks in IT spending, the recovery, however modest, unleashed pent up demand for enterprise infrastructure upgrades last year. But the Euro crisis has put the kibosh on some spending. Two months ago, Gartner lowered IT spending projections for 2012 -- to $3.8 trillion, with growth expected to be 3.7 percent year over year instead of 4.6 percent.

Other forecasters are more optimistic. Forrester predicts that IT spending will rise by 5.4 percent in 2012.

2. Changing role of IT. Ongoing economic crises have helped foster unexpected change, leading more businesses to look to CIOs and their staffs to generate revenue rather rather than just slash budgets.

"There has been a whole transformation that IT has played over the years", Ajay Chandramouly, Intel IT Cloud Computing and Datacenter Industry Engagement manager, says. "If you go back to 2008, perhaps earlier, IT was viewed as a cost center. It was all about doing more with less. Since then, with things like Big Data, cloud and consumerization, things have changed for IT. We now have a seat at the table, with business groups making product decisions that impact the top line".

3. Windows. When Microsoft launched Windows 7 in autumn 2009, XP accounted for 85 percent of the install base. Many businesses spent the following two years upgrading to the newest desktop operating system. During Microsoft's fiscal 2012 second quarter, Windows division revenue decline 6 percent and profit by 11 percent -- but that was mostly from a fall-off in consumer spending. Many businesses continued deploy Windows 7 on new PCs, which benefitted Intel microprocessor sales. Windows 8 is coming, along with a slew of supporting server software.

4. Consumerization of IT. Smartphones and tablets are now an undeniable reality among businesses. For example, Forrester finds that 27 percent companies support iPads today with another 31 percent planning to. Meanwhile, many businesses build out private, public or hybrid clouds to support these devices (see #7).

5. Virtualization. Businesses see many benefits for desktop and server virtualization. On the desktop, connecting to disparate devices drives demand. On the server consolidation is leading trend (see #6).

"As organizations begin to support connected smart devices such as iPads and smartphones, they also want to connect them to their enterprise data and applications", Forrester analyst Clarence Villanueva says. "Companies are turning to desktop virtualization as a solution to make that happen"

6. Server consolidation. Not since the three years preceding the so-called Y2K crisis has server consolidation been such a hot trend, and virtualization is driving catalyst allowing more businesses to maintain legacy operations while investing in newer tech.

Globally, server revenue rose 7.9 percent year over year in 2011 and units by 7 percent, according to Gartner. Forrester predicts server spending will reach $79 billion this year.

7. Cloud computing. The cloud has three primary faces: Public, private on-premise and hybrid between the two. The cloud is one of the major forces driving semiconductor spending today, whether devices or servers supporting them.

For example, many businesses continue to increasing spending on software as service, which will drive up revenues 17.9 percent year over year in 2012 -- to $14.5 billion, according to Gartner, which expects them to reach $22.1 billion by 2016.

One hot new server trend is infrastructure as a service, but right now "the main effects of IaaS have been to boost demand for server and storage hardware from telecommunications firms, outsourcers, Chinese regional governments, and hardware vendors themselves that want to compete with the early leaders like Amazon.com and Rackspace", Forrester analyst Andrew Bartels writes in a January report.

"Increasing familiarity with the SaaS model, continued oversight on IT budgets, the growth of platform as a service (PaaS) developer communities and interest in cloud computing are now driving adoption forward", Sharon Mertz, Gartner research director, says.

8. Big Data. You can't much of anywhere in IT without hearing this buzzword. But it's more than some analyst marketing gimmick, as more businesses see the value of information in global economy and the push to public and private clouds generate terabytes of data.

"The Big Data market is expanding rapidly as large IT companies and startups vie for customers and market share", Dan Vesset, IDC program vice president, says. "For technology buyers, opportunities exist to use Big Data technology to improve operational efficiency and to drive innovation".

IDC expects the market to reach $16.9 billion by 2015. Yesterday, the White House launched a $200 million Big Data initiative for the federal government.

"There are also Big Data opportunities for both large IT vendors and start ups", Vesset says. "Major IT vendors are offering both database solutions and configurations supporting Big Data by evolving their own products as well as by acquisition. At the same time, more than half a billion dollars in venture capital has been invested in new Big Data technology".

Big Iron

Intel had a great year for semiconductors, but the challenge ahead is change, and there is lots of it. Many of these eight trends demand more processing power on the server, which the company plans to meet with the recently announced Xeon processor E5-2600 product family.

Chandramouly describes the E5 as a "bandwidth machine". The chip features eight cores, but effectively more. "Each of these cores is multithreaded, so effectively you have up to 16 cores, or 16 threads".

Other benefits include:

Up to 768GB of system memory
Integrated PCI Express controller
Improved energy efficiency (up to 50 percent)
Increased performance (up to 80 percent over previous generation)

Intel also improved the caching technology such that "all the cores can access data simultaneously, so logically it's one cache but physically it's multiple slices", Chandramouly says. The E5 also bumps up to four-channel DDR3 memory, "which gives us a 30 percent bump in bandwidth".

Editor's note: Intel sponsored this story, which was independently conceived, reported and written. The company did provide an executive for us to interview. BetaNews' policy is full editorial control, which we maintained for this analysis.

Photo Credit: Sergey150770/Shutterstock

If 'Operation Blackout' succeeds, I might get a day off work

Posted: March 30th, 2012, 12:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

There are no snow days on the Internet. If you work from home and write online like I do, drudgery never ends. Or does it? This Saturday, Anonymous may change that.

"To protest SOPA, Wallstreet, our irresponsible leaders and the beloved bankers who are starving the world for their own selfish needs out of sheer sadistic fun, on March 31, Anonymous will shut the Internet down", so claims a February 19 Pastebin post.

I know it's still Friday and early to be reporting the Internet's demise. But I thought some of you might appreciate opportunity to plan for a one-day -- hell, if you're lucky two-day -- weekend.

But wait? Has Anonymous betrayed our leisure time? Tweets over the last 24 hours suggest the blackout so meticulously explained last month isn't happening after all.

Yesterday: "For the billionth time: #Anonymous will not shut down the Internet on 31 March. #OpGlobalBlackout is just another #OpFacebook failop. #yawn". And: "Think for a moment: Why would #Anonymous shut down our playground, the Internet? Really, how would that help ANY of us? #NextQuestion".

I dunno. I suppose no one would notice the Internet going black. No news organization would report such a feat, mentioning Anonymous and debating the attack ad nauseam. None of this would happen if Anonymous kept the plan.

Or is it all just a ploy -- a distraction before the strike against the Internet's primary DNS servers. I'm ready. I've waited six weeks for this day off work.

Anonymous had planned an attack against 13 root DNS servers:

By cutting these off the Internet, nobody will be able to perform a domain name look-up, thus, disabling the HTTP Internet, which is, after all, the most widely used function of the Web. Anybody entering "http://www.google.com" or ANY other url, will get an error page, thus, they will think the Internet is down, which is, close enough. Remember, this is a protest, we are not trying to 'kill' the Internet, we are only temporarily shutting it down where it hurts the most.

Of course, the Internet's distributed structure is quite resilient. The original ARPANET was designed to survive nuclear strikes. It would take one hell of a coordinated DDoS to cripple all the primary DNS servers.

Sadly, I may have to wait another month. Anonymous' big, new campaign supports Occupy May 1st -- a call for a global workers' strike; "a day without the 99 percent".

Anonymous: "On May Day, wherever you are, we are calling for: No Work. No School. No Housework. No Shopping. No Banking. Instead, take to the streets and protest with us!"

Well, such a protest, if possible, surely would cause more disruption that hitting the Internet. But, damn, I'll have to work. Someone has to report about the May 1st protests. That is unless Anonymous can bring down the Internet, too. Hey, that's a Tuesday. I never get those off, not even to vote.

Photo Credit: arindambanerjee/Shutterstock

You will buy Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone

Posted: March 30th, 2012, 10:23am MDT by Joe Wilcox

March 30 is finally here. Can you believe it took so long to arrive? Today, AT&T is taking preorders for the tasty Nokia Lumia 900. Yes, tasty. What? You think only Google's Ice Cream Sandwich is sweet? Not so. Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango" Commercial Release 2 is, too. It's yours on a swanky Nokia smartphone pimped with Carl Zeiss lens for the 8-megapixel camera and pumped with speedy LTE for data. For 99 bucks, AT&T practically gives away Lumia 900.

Many of you think so, too. Earlier in the week I asked: "Will you buy Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone for $99?" The overwhelming majority of respondents will -- nearly three out of four. The Finnish phone maker bet the company on Microsoft's mobile OS and brings this handset to a large, overlooked market. Nokia's US presence is mighty invisible outside T-Mobile. If Lumia 900 and its companions fail, so may Nokia.

Before giving the poll results, I owe you an apology. Typically, the greatest number of respondents come during the initial burst of reads. I made a last-minute change to the poll's appearance right before posting, then ran off to help my 90 year-old father-in-law with something. When I returned and checked the story, the poll wasn't there. After editing and re-saving, the poll appeared but missed the early burst of pageviews. Still, there are 1,296 responses as I write, which is more than I expected considering.

Among them, 29.94 percent will preorder, while 30.17 percent will do so within three months. That's more than 60 percent of you planning on buying Lumia 900 between today and early July. That's a simply stunning number.

What's interesting: How this poll compares to another, because I asked the same question before -- after Microsoft Store started taking preorders but before AT&T announced pricing. For that poll, 25.22 percent of respondents preordered or planned to, while 42.09 percent would do so within three months. That works out to 67.31 percent buying within three months, when including preorders, compared to 60.11 percent for the newer poll. Is that difference a problem?

No. The older poll's sample size is more than twice as large -- 3,041 as I write. The number of respondents choosing "Yes, within 3 months of release" for the first poll (1,280) is nearly as large as the total number for the second. Still, the number answering "No" is considerably higher for the second -- 26.16 percent compared to 18.18 percent. That's where the difference lies. The responses for "within 6 months" and "more than 6 months" are statistically the same. Assuming the polls are indicative of anything, fewer respondents plan on buying Lumia 900 now than nearly two months ago.

What You Say

Many reader comments show tremendous enthusiasm for Nokia's flagship Windows Phone, but lots of debate about the operating system's future and also the handset maker's.

Commenter weetigo "preordered the Lumia 900". Avatar Roku is "leaving Sprint, getting the blue cyan version of the Nokia Lumia 900".

Reader Joe (it's not me!): "Better industrial design than Apple, much more durable and also a better UI/UX; $99 means it will be free or near free on AmazonWireless soon. Fing awesome!"

Several of you see AT&T distribution as reason not to buy Lumia 900. "I think more people would have bought if AT&T were not involved", Matt Reid comments. "If the Nokia 900 can be sold for so little maybe they should have hit the prepaid market hard. I'd run to get this phone at anyone other than AT&T". Still, "I will be dumping my Epic 4G for the Lumia 900". Anthony Clark: "I would, but not on AT&T. Bring it over to Verizon and we can talk".

Gary Prusso won't buy on April 8. "I'm going for white, which will be offered on April 22nd".

"Considering the crap that phone manufacturers and service providers put on Android, and the crap that Apple puts their user through, I'll consider giving WP7 a fair shake", Daniel Ahn writes.

AT&T will take preorders for Nokia's flagship LTE handset on March 30, 2012; sales start April 8. Will you buy the Lumia 900 Windows Phone?

"Nokia is on its way down just as PalmOS and RIM and the dodo", ilev comments. "Lumia is a dog of a phone and will not succeed. Finnish resellers channels are steering customers away from Lumia".

AS147 answers: "Yes, Nokia is losing market share but that doesn't mean the game is over. Symbian is their major product and they are moving to something else so it will obviously lose market share for a while, give it time now that a new approach has been adopted".

Reader Car Audio-Outlet also answers ilev: "Wrong. Actually sales are increasing and Nokia already have over 80 percent of the Windows Phone market. The newer Nokia handsets will obviously only improve this. I have not seen a single review that doesn't highly rate the Lumia platform -- you are living in your own microcosm".

My colleague Tim Conneally will review Lumia 900 for BetaNews. I told him yesterday in group chat that, given my recent lambasting posts about Nokia's CEO, the only phone I could get would be with exploding battery and love note from Stephen Elop.

Since I don't expect to receive a review unit, and am not contractually eligible for $99 price, my request is reviews from you. Please contact me, joe at betanews dot com, to submit your Lumia 900 review. We love our readers and opportunity to promote them. Why write a long comment that might be lost on the InterWebs, when it could be a review instead?

I've embedded the Lumia buying poll above, so we can collect more responses, particularly on this first day of real preorders.

Photo Credit: Nokia

Don't cry for me, Steve Ballmer

Posted: March 29th, 2012, 2:46pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

But I'll shed a tear for you and remember the good times we had together.

That's because IDC asserts, despite exciting Windows 8's coming launch, that the PC era will be over by 2016. Gartner uses a different metric to arrive at 2014. But whatever the measure, the Windows era is over, too, as (gulp) Android becomes the most widely shipped operating system on the planet. I guess you were right to obsess about Google after all. Cripes! As long ago as 2003, wasn't it? Who could have imagined that it would really come to this? You weren't being paranoid at all.

There has been talk for some time now about the post-PC era, which I call the cloud-connected device era. The rascals at IDC have similar thinking, creating the "smart connected devices" segment, which includes PCs, media tablets and smartphones. IDC predicts that x86 Windows PC share will drop from 35.9 percent last year to 25.1 percent in 2016. That's behind Android, which share goes from 29.4 percent to 31.1 percent -- not much of a gain if you really think about it. But the point, of course, is Android's ascension over Windows.

You know, perhaps hope isn't lost, Steve. Maybe we can have our Windows somewhere else, because I don't see that IDC has reckoned Windows on ARM. The analysts refer to Windows on x86 and Android on ARM. But, hey, aren't you prepping a slanky Windows 8 version for ARM, too? I hear rumors about Windows Phone 8 sharing same kernel. Now that would be something to get excited about.

"We are in the multi-device age, and we believe the number of people who use multiple devices will only continue to increase", Bob O`Donnell, IDC vice president, says. "The trick, moving forward, will be to integrate all these devices into a unified whole through use of personal cloud-type applications and services. That's the real challenge of what we have often called the 'PC Plus' era".

I'm Ready to Fly

Now, Steve, I heard you talk during Consumer Electronics Show about bringing a unified user experience across devices. That's Metro and what it inherits from the Windows Phone UI. I'm really excited about the cloud stuff behind it. My Windows Live SkyDrive is primed and ready for seamless sync and storage.

You best hurry and connect together the cloud and Windows-powered devices (Xbox, too!). Gartner's rash prediction puts the cloud as "center of users' digital lives" by 2014, replacing the PC. Rather than be the hub, the personal computer will be among the devices connected to the new one.

"Emerging cloud services will become the glue that connects the web of devices that users choose to access during the different aspects of their daily life", Steve Kleynhans, Gartner research vice president, says.

I believe him, Steve, and surely you do, too. Why else are you investing so much in the cloud, and why is its role so paramount to Windows 8 and Phone 7.5?

Google Gripes

I got to tell you that Google cloud sync pulls users into that "evil", competing ecosystem. comScore points out how much in February report "2012 Mobile Future in Focus". Looking at the US smartphone market:

Google-owned apps led across both iPhones and Android devices in terms of total unique active users. For iPhone users, YouTube ranked as the top app by unique visitors, followed by Google Maps, Facebook, Yahoo! Weather and Pandora Radio. Analysis of the Android market found that Google Search led as the top app, followed by Gmail, Google Maps, Facebook and Google News & Weather.

Google product and services integration is especially tight on Android 4.0, as I've seen from using Galaxy Nexus. Say, why is it I don't have a Windows Phone to use? Must I play Smoked by Windows Phone and win to get one?

Of course, Google just gives it all away for free, and that's good news for you. Android's share may rise above Windows, but not its appeal to developers.

"Android's growth is tied directly to the propagation of lower-priced devices," Tom Mainelli, IDC research director, says. "So, while we expect dozens of hardware vendors to own some share in the Android market, many will find profitability difficult to sustain". Same goes for developers he adds, then Mainelli ruins it all by emphasizing "we expect a large percentage of application developers to continue to focus their efforts on iOS". Oh yeah? What about Windows?

Steve, you really need to set these analysts straight. They act as if Windows is dead and buried already. I haven't given up on Windows yet -- version 8 is great -- but it's hard to keep the faith some days.

iPhone is unstoppable

Posted: March 29th, 2012, 12:36pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Now there's a headline I never expected to write, particularly following "Android is unstoppable" nine months ago. But in the United States, at least, iPhone has nearly matched pace with Androids. Looks like the Apple apologists will get their day. After years of wrongly boasting iPhone's leadership over Androids, they might yet be right.

For the three months ending in February, 48 percent of Americans who recently bought a smartphone, chose Android -- 43 percent iPhone, according to Nielsen. Those numbers are up considerably for both, but iPhone surged to close the gap, following the release of the 4S in October. A year ago, 27 percent of new acquirers chose Android versus 10 percent for iPhone.

The Gain Drain

Android's overall market share is still considerably greater than iPhone's -- 48 percent to 32 percent, respectively. That's up from 38 percent for Android, 27 percent for iPhone nine months ago, by Nielsen's reckoning.

comScore reports similar share, but for end of January -- 48.6 percent for Androids and 29.5 percent iPhone, based on smartphone operating systems among US cellular subscribers.

Neilsen's findings join others. In February, Pew Internet asked American adults what kind of smartphone they own. Twenty percent responded "Android device", up from 15 percent in May 2011. iPhone: 19 percent, up from 10 percent during the same time period.

Pew puts the number of American adults with smartphones at 53 percent. Nielsen says 49.7 percent -- that's up from 36 percent in February 2011. Either way, smartphone sales soar, as the market rapidly consolidates around Androids and iPhone.

The China Syndrome

With the 4S launch, iPhone benefits from broader US distribution -- three of the four major carriers and regional ones, too. Additionally, Apple and its partners lowered the price to zero for the older iPhone 3GS and $99 for the 4, opening up the market to consumers who could't or wouldn't spend $199 or more.

iPhone's gains here may not be sustainable abroad. "Smartphone growth will be driven by Asia/Pacific countries, especially China, where mobile operators are subsidizing the purchase of 3G smartphones, thus increasing the total addressable market", Will Stofega, IDC program director, says. The analyst firm expect low-cost Androids to be market leaders. "In countries where devices are not subsidized by the mobile operators, competitive and component-based pricing will help drive volume".

CEO Tim Cook has repeatedly called China Apple's second most-important market, next to the United States. Perhaps this importance has something to do with his visit there this week.

Bold Predictions

IDC isn't exactly bullish about iPhone's future, particularly as smartphone adoption increases internationally, predicting that Windows Phone would beat out Apple's iOS by 2015. Two weeks ago, IDC made similar prediction about tablets: Android shipments will exceed iPad, also by 2015. By that reckoning, the firm predicts that Google's mobile OS will dominate the two major cloud-connected -- post-PC, if you insist -- device categories.

But I predict that Apple will win the mobile platform wars. Perhaps IDC tacitly agrees.

Show Me the Money

In platforms, profitability is everything. Typically, successful platforms share six common traits:

There are good development tools and APIs for easily creating applications
There is at least one killer application people really want
There is breadth of useful applications
Third parties make lots of money
The platform is broadly available
There is a robust ecosystem

But profitability matters most. Developers go where the money is.

IDC now lumps together PCs, smartphones and media tablets into the "smart connected devices segment". Among them, the firm sees Androids reaching 31.1 percent share in 2016, compared to 17.3 percent for iOS devices.

However, "we expect a large percentage of application developers to continue to focus their efforts on iOS, despite the platform's smaller overall market share, because iOS end users have proven more willing to pay for high-quality apps", Mainelli says.

Developers go where the money is. End users go where the apps are. Developers create apps where users are. iPhone 4S isn't an exceptional upgrade compared to its predecessor. There's no LTE, for example. Siri is interesting, for sure. But they're not compelling enough to explain iPhone's recent sales surge.

It is the broader ecosystem -- of apps, cases and peripherals -- that matters more. In the 1990s, Microsoft sought to achieve a "standard" platform for developers and succeeded with Windows. Apple is quickly doing the same around iOS, iPhone and iPad.

iPhone is unstoppable because the broader iOS ecosystem has such momentum -- and there iPad hugely matters. I don't believe iPhone can win the smartphone wars. But does it matter if iOS apps and devices win the platform wars?

Face.com: You can't stay 29 forever

Posted: March 29th, 2012, 9:24am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Are you 35 and claiming to be 29? Don't post photos to Facebook. Today Face.com added a new attribute to its facial-detection API: age detection. The startup claims the new attribute will let developers create apps that use three criteria -- minimum, maximum and estimated age -- to determine how old people are in photos.

While the technology surely will appeal to social networkers, the big boon could be marketers looking to maximize exposure to select demographic groups, such as 18-24 year olds. Developers can set the attribute to look for specific age segments, hence the marketing potential. But there are others, such as detecting fake IDs at establishments serving alcoholic beverages. Additionally, Face.com claims to have improved facial recognition by 30 percent in this release of the API.

Face.com launched in March 2009 and claims that 40,000 developers use its API, which still is in beta (Is nothing ever finished anymore?). There is a developer website, for anyone interested in using the API.

The company also offers several apps, including KLIK for iOS. Yes, the tech is available on Facebook.

Got Ice Cream Sandwich? Get Google Maps 6.5 for Android now

Posted: March 28th, 2012, 1:36pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Google isn't waiting for the install base of Android users to move to Ice Cream Sandwich, not that carriers or handset manufacturers help much (if you're waiting for that upgrade from Gingerbread, you know what I mean). Today the search and information giant updated Google Maps for Android to version 6.5, packing in capabilities specific to version 4.x. Don't you feel cheated? I would.

Google offers the best to a minority of users, and small is too big a word to describe them. According to Google's official stats, as of March 5, Ice Cream Sandwich accounts for a mere 1.6 percent of Android devices. But, hey, many of these users are the bleeding edge of influencers Google should want to reach -- and keep enthusiastic.

The big changes are to Navigation, which is a beta feature. Harlan Hile, Google software engineer, boasts: "So far, Navigation on Google Maps for Android has provided 50 billion kilometers of turn-by-turn directions, the equivalent of 130,000 trips to the moon, 334 trips to the sun, 10 trips to Neptune or 0.005 light years!"

The new version sports a redesigned screen on Android 4.x devices, which Hile says makes it "easier to enter a new destination or select from recent and favorite locations by swiping left or right". Additionally:

If your device has a high pixel density screen, such as those on Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy S II, Droid Razr and others, you’ll now get higher resolution map tiles that take better advantage of the pixels-per-inch on your screen. The result is a crisper, less cluttered map that is easier to read.

Changes may not be immediately apparent. "You'll start seeing the new style as you navigate around new areas on the map; however, you can see these changes immediately by clearing your cache from the Maps settings", Hile advises.

The early reviews are generally positive. User Elderon gives the app five stars: "This is probably the most important Android app on my phone. aside from the fact that I like Google the company, maps with GPS navigation was and is the biggest selling point for me. It works great for me (I can't find a way out of a paper bag lol). Wish maybe there were more addons in the lab option section. Anyways works great and is free, can't beat that". Elderon has Galaxy Nexus, which ships with Ice Cream Sandwich.

Keith says: "Brilliant and invaluable on Nexus S running ICS, but absolute disaster on Acer A500 running Honeycomb 3.2.1 -- crashes 9 times out of 10 within seconds of launch (other apps work just fine) So 3 stars for inconsistent performance, hope for improvement when ICS rolled out to tablet".

"The best app on android that isn't on iOS", says Jon, another Galaxy Nexus user.

Google Maps for Android (with Navigation beta) is available now. The app will install the appropriate version for your device. It's v6.5 for Ice Cream Sandwich.

Who bought 5 million Galaxy Notes, because I want to know

Posted: March 28th, 2012, 11:52am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today's big Samsung Galaxy Note announcement -- 5 million shipped in five months -- has me wondering "Who?" Is it you?

It's a big number for an over-sized smartphone, under-sized tablet measuring 146.85 x 82.95 x 9.65 mm, weighing 178 grams and packing beastly 5.29-inch display. On Dec. 29, 2011, Samsung announced shipment of 1 million Galaxy Notes. Just weeks ago Samsung put shipments at 2 million. That's a helluva jump in just three weeks.

I'm totally intrigued by the Galaxy Note concept, just not the size. It's too damn big for me. I can see loads of creative potential in the device. A January video by colleague Tim Conneally shows off Galaxy Note as a tool for artists and musicians. Ha! Try that with your puny iPhone, Bud.

In mid February, I mentioned in passing that a good friend back East planned to replace Galaxy Nexus with the Note. Three weeks later, he returned the so-called phablet. Top complaints: Pen accuracy, available pen apps and TouchWiz UI inferior to Android 4.0. He's in process of switching to Verizon; AT&T must reset his contract first.

My friend, Sebastian, really wants to like Galaxy Note, too, and he isn't put off by the size as much as I am. But he's a gadget geek and chases every newfangled thing. So I wasn't terribly surprised he ignored me and bought the phablet, knowing he could return it within 30 days.

My interest in Galaxy Note started as soon as Samsung launched the phablet internationally in October. The specs certainly impress: 1.5GHz dual-core processor; HD Super AMOLED display with 1280 x 800 resolution; 1GB RAM; 16GB storage, expandable with microSD card; 8-megapixel rear-facing camera with LED flash; 2MP front-facing cameras; 1080p recording and playback; touch and pen input; 4G LTE (US AT&T model); HSPA+; Bluetooth 3.0; WiFi N; 2,500 mAh battery; TouchWiz UI; and, unfortunately, Android 3.2. C`mon, give us some Ice Cream Sandwich, Samsung!

After seeing the phablet up close, I couldn't get passed the whopping size. I wear my phone in a belt clip and couldn't see the fit in my digital lifestyle. Sigh. Besides, I love Galaxy Nexus.

Galaxy Note's early sales success shows what's right about Android compared to iPhone: Differentiation, which, as I claimed in November, trumps Android fragmentation. Android OEMs can and do create compelling devices and so more choice for consumers. Samsung is leader by far, with, for example, Note, Galaxy S II series and TouchWiz UI (I like it more than my buddy, but agree that pure Android 4.0 appeals more).

AT&T started selling Galaxy Note here in the States on February 19 for $299.99, with two-year contract. AmazonWireless has the phablet for $50 less.

So, did you buy Galaxy Note? Why? I just got to know.

Photo Credit Samsung

'This summer, when hunger strikes, and all hope seems lost, a small device will change your destiny' -- the VIP Fridge Magnet

Posted: March 28th, 2012, 10:23am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Pack my bags, I'm moving to Dubai.

Local shop Red Tomato Pizza promises to make available a fridge magnet that you tap to place orders. For all I know, it's all gimmick. The promotional YouTube video is a smart production. Spoiler: You will want to order pizza after watching it.

I often rave about the importance of user interfaces, of making them as simple and straightforward as possible. This concept takes the crown. One button, attached to your fridge. Press and order. I love it! Say, can Apple's Siri do that, click and speak? To order a pizza? Now there's one for the gamer: Pizza advertisement pops up during Xbox Kinect play. Wave and order. That would be good UX, too!

The concept is creative. A Bluetooth-enabled magnet synced to your mobile. Tapping texts the pizzeria, which prepares and delivers your default order. Of course, it can be changed any time, but you'll have to call. Oh the inconvenience of nine button pushes!

If you live in Dubai, or will by summer, a magnet ordering page already is available.

Google, there's no good 'without doing evil'

Posted: March 27th, 2012, 1:28pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

When will someone stand up to the bully in the room? He roves around in intimidating manner boasting how kind he is. Hey, he can make friends without being evil. But bully is anything but good. That's how I feel about Google this fine Spring day.

Yesterday, "Google Play", the renamed Android Market, popped up on the black bar adorning my Google search page, with a beaconing red -- or is it orange -- "New". The service is now front and center with other Google services hawked from search, spotlighting an ongoing trend of aggressive integration that has rapidly accelerated under Larry Page's leadership. Microsoft spent nearly a decade under house arrest for doing less.

Google undeniably has dramatically increased cross-service, cross-product integration, particularly since the Google+ limited launch last summer. Just look at how much the Google search page has changed -- the company's other services are far more visible, from the black bar added nearly a year ago.

The Larry Page Era

There is heated controversy about some of the integration, such as "Search Plus Your World", or even +1. The question to ask: Is Google improving the quality of search and ancillary services by connecting them together, or extending monopoly into adjacent markets?

The answer is as much about leadership as anything else and how Page and his subordinates live up to one of Google's oft-stated philosophies, of which there are 10: "You can make money without doing evil". The bully in the room boasts the same.

I've never met Larry Page. I can only judge his character by how he runs Google. It's a better company since his ascension to chief executive a year ago next week. But are you better off? Google is better because it's leaner; Page axed many products and services during 2011 that weren't core to future business. Google also has created a digital lifestyle around search and mobile services, for anyone willing to buy into the entire experience.

Under Page, the search and information giant has accelerated release of core products and services. Iteration is fast-paced, compared to every non-startup. Google search is hardly recognizable from a year ago -- the black toolbar, integrated social and seemingly daily tweaks to the algorithm are among the examples.

Then there is Google+, which debuted not long after Page resumed CEO duties but surely was conceived during the transition period preceding it. Some reader likely will comment that no company could make the changes Google is without 12-18 months previous product development -- at least. But Google isn't any other company. Look at how much Android and Chrome have changed since their late 2008 introductions. New Chrome revs come about every six weeks!

The Google Monopoly

Everything comes back to search and how it anchors Google's integration push. Search is Google's lifeblood, accounting for the overwhelming majority of revenues. Google search also is a monopoly. The company's US search share was 66.4 percent in February, according to comScore. That's up from 55.2 percent in July 2007. In many other geographies Google's share is 70 percent or more.

Pew Internet puts US usage much higher:

Asked which search engine they use most often, 83 percent of search users say Google. The next most cited search engine is Yahoo, mentioned by just 6 percent of search users. When we last asked this question in 2004, the gap between Google and Yahoo was much narrower, with 47 percent of search users saying Google was their engine of choice and 26 percent citing Yahoo.

In the United States being a monopoly isn't illegal, and Google can rightly argue, as Microsoft did, to achieving market dominance through fair competition. It's what comes after that matters -- what Google does now that might be considered "doing evil".

US trustbusters prosecuted Microsoft for numerous antitrust violations, in a case filed in May 1998. Among the charges: Microsoft used its dominance in PC operating systems to gain unfair advantage into the adjacent browser market. The Justice Department and 20 states (initially) targeted Microsoft's integrating, or in legal parlance tying, Internet Explorer to Windows. Microsoft settled the case in November 2001, and the judge formally imposed government oversight a year later.

European authorities went further with their tying charges, ruling against Microsoft and compelling it to release versions of the operating system without IE and Windows Media Player.

Fair Competition?

The question then: Is all this integration, which makes Google better, really anticompetitive -- a monopolist bullying others and in process limiting consumer choice and stifling innovation? There's no easy answer to that question without a case going to court. But I'll ask some antitrust experts for a future story -- and I can confidently say there won't be consensus among them. US antitrust law allows lots of rough play. Then there is pace of Google's own innovation.

As an end user, I find much of this Google integration to be beneficial. But as a reporter long covering the tech industry, I am disturbed. Microsoft's problems came from a breakdown of leadership. As CEO, Bill Gates led the company to dominate the PC operating system and desktop productivity software markets. But he also overly obsessed about competitors, with AOL and Netscape top concerns during the mid to late 1990s.

I wonder if Page has the same character flaw. Because if I look closely at where and what Google integrates, social is core. Does that represent Page looking to the future and seeing search being social or protecting Google's monopoly against a dangerous competitor: Facebook.

Defacing Facebook

The social network has over 850 million users, the majority of whom share the kind of information Google can only dream about obtaining. There are many measures of Facebook's success, but one of the most important is engagement. Online Americans spend just shy of 7 hours on Facebook each month, compared to about 90 minutes for Google sites. Much of Google's integration push is about increasing engagement, and Google+ is an anchor to the strategy.

Google's recent, controversial privacy policy changes, which tie directly to search and across the vast landscape of tightly-integrated products and services, could be viewed as forward-planning or response to Facebook -- perhaps a little of both.

Pew Internet says that search's importance cannot be understated, given how many Americans say they typically find what they looked for (91 percent) and it is accurate (73 percent):

These findings are a backdrop for the ongoing policy debates about privacy, collection of personal information online, and the enthusiasm for targeted search and targeted advertising among companies. They also arise as Google implements a new privacy policy in which information about users’ online behavior when they are signed into Google’s programs can be collected and combined into a cohesive user profile. This includes material from Google’s search engine, the Google+ social networking site, YouTube video-sharing site, and Gmail.

Two weeks ago, former Googler James Whittaker, now a Microsoftie, made headlines for a post explaining why he left Page and Co. He lamented Google's Facebook obsession. "It turns out that there was one place where the Google innovation machine faltered and that one place mattered a lot: competing with Facebook", he writes. "Google could still put ads in front of more people than Facebook, but Facebook knows so much more about those people". Whittaker continues:

Larry Page himself assumed command to right this wrong. Social became state-owned, a corporate mandate called Google+. It was an ominous name invoking the feeling that Google alone wasn’t enough. Search had to be social. Android had to be social. YouTube, once joyous in their independence, had to be, well, you get the point. Even worse was that innovation had to be social. Ideas that failed to put Google+ at the center of the universe were a distraction.

Is Google now Facebook-obsessed? That's how it looks to me as an outsider. Over-zealous competitor obsession led Microsoft to nearly 10 years of US government oversight that stifled innovation there. Or perhaps Google just sees social as the future of search. Regardless there's a whole lot of integration going on that already has raised antitrust concerns, in Europe at least.

I'll end asking: Does all this newfangled integration -- Android, Chrome, Google+, +1, search and other services benefit you?

Will you buy Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone for $99? [poll]

Posted: March 26th, 2012, 6:54pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

If you feel like I've asked this question before, absolutely. Just without the price. Now that AT&T has announced availability -- and more importantly, pricing -- I ask again. Will you buy the Lumia 900?

AT&T starts taking pre-orders on March 30, with the phone available in stores on April 2 (What? Not April Fools Day?). Available colors are cyan, magenta and black, or you can wait until April 22 for white. Oh my. Decisions, decisions. Lumia 900 is one hotly anticipated Windows Phone and marks Nokia's biggest push into the US market in years. There's LTE, too, something your haughty, obnoxious iPhone friends don't have. So will you buy? Please answer in comments (with color choice, please) and take our poll.

That $99 requires a two-year contract and strikes me as mighty cheap for a smartphone this classy. Specs: 1.4GHz Qualcomm APQ8055 processor; 4.3-inch AMOLED display (yes, it's Corning Gorilla Glass), with 800 x 480 resolution; 512MB RAM; 16GB storage: 8-megapixel rear-facing camera with Carl Zeiss lens and dual-LED flash; 1MP front-facing camera; 720p video capture from rear camera and VGA from front camera; GSM 850/900/1800/1900 radio; WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100 radio; 4G LTE; Bluetooth 2.1+EDR; Stereo Bluetooth; WiFi; accelerometer; ambient and proximity sensors; gyroscope; 2 microphones; 1830 mAh battery; Internet Explorer 9 mobile; and Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango" Commercial Release 2.

On February 6, Microsoft Store started taking Lumia 900 pre-orders for $25 deposit. That's when I asked the "Will you buy?" question. To date, there are 2,943 responses to our poll -- and, whoa, were you interested when there was no price given and many people assumed $199.

One-quarter of respondents say they had preordered or would, with another 42 percent planning to purchase within three months. Only 18 percent don't plan on buying the phone. As I expressed a few days later, if Lumia 900 was as popular everywhere as with BetaNews readers, Windows Phone would be a huge success.

Commenting today, BetaNews reader "woe" captures my sentiment: "Flat out if this phone (which I consider very good) at this price does not propel Windows Phone, nothing will".

InfoDave is more pessimistic: "Remember the conversation around here, back in the day? Windows Phone was going to own the market. Now, we're going to have trouble getting people interested. Looking forward to any sales figures made available. I don't see hope till Windows Phone 8 ties it all together".

"I'd wait until after April 8th before making any 'doom-and-gloom' predictions", BBB40 opines, like InfoDave commenting today. "I have been waiting for the Lumia 900 before taking the WP7 plunge as I suspect quite a few people have. The Titan II also comes out that day. I'm curious to see if there is a surge in WP7 sales in April".

Like Lumia 900, HTC Titan II packs LTE, and, like its predecessor, a 4.7-inch screen! Surely, it's no coincidence that the first LTE Windows Phones launch on the same day. BBB40 is right to wonder about April Windows Phone sales figures.

AT&T will take preorders for Nokia's flagship LTE handset on March 30, 2012; sales start April 2. Will you buy the Lumia 900 Windows Phone?

Windows Phone certainly needs a good month, or quarter. At the end of January, Microsoft's US smartphone OS market share was 4.4 percent, according to comScore. That's a decrease of 1 point since the end of October. Can Lumia 900, or even Titan II, lift Windows Phone share -- or even the compelling "Smoked" marketing campaign?

We'll know for certain in a month or so. You can foreshadow the future by taking our poll above and in comments below answering: Will you buy Lumia 900?

Editor's Note: Do to a technical error, the poll did not display during the first 4,000+ pageviews. So poll numbers will be lower. Typically, the majority of responses come early on. I expect at best a few hundred responses, instead of a few thousand. Damnit.

Nokia and Microsoft save face by investing 18 million Euros in Finnish apps dev project

Posted: March 26th, 2012, 12:09pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Nokia has shown a score of developers the door since announcing its Windows Phone distribution deal in February 2011. Surely you remember the 3,000 Symbian developers off-loaded to Accenture? Is it cheaper to invest in new ones than keep the old? I ask because of today's Microsoft-Nokia announcement: Each will invest up to 9 million to fund AppCampus at Aalto University, in Finland.

The program is designed to help generate applications for Windows Phone and, get this, Symbian! Someone slap me aside the head and explain why Nokia doesn't just capitalize on the experience of existing Symbian developers. Easy answer: Both platforms need more third-party apps, and Nokia CEO Stephen Elop must make a desperate show of face, given his brutal axing of employees and ripping the Finnish heart out of Nokia's management culture.

Finnish prime minister Jyrki Katainenat calls the country "an early-adopter" and says that "technology innovation is deeply rooted in our culture". He praises the up to 18 million Euro contribution as a "critical investment in this growing ecosystem and represents an exciting opportunity and access to global markets for our local startup community".

Canadian Elop has already done so much for Nokia's home country. Last month, the company announced plans to lay off another 4,400 -- in manufacturing facilities located in Finland and other countries. Elop already had handed Nokia's crown jewels of innovation to Microsoft, after calling Symbian a "burning platform". I say he traded one for the other, in a deal that benefits Microsoft, where he was a divisional president before going to Nokia, more.

Nokia is doing so well with Windows Phone that its most innovative handset to date -- the 808 PureView, packing 41-megapixel camera -- runs Symbian.

"AppCampus offers an unprecedented opportunity for entrepreneurs to put their ideas into practice and create world-class mobile products," Ari Rahkonen, Microsoft Oy GM, says. Finland's Nokia glory days are over, since Microsoft assumed all major responsibility for platform, app and services research and development.

"We are proud to announce this new program, which will enable new and existing developers to create next-generation mobile apps and unique user experiences," Kai Öistämö, Nokia executive veep, says. Oh yeah? Then why has Nokia done so much to disenfranchise existing developers?

Or customers? As I explained last summer, the Windows Phone transition is killing Nokia, and blame squarely falls on Elop. If anything, the phone maker's situation has gotten worse, even after the fourth-quarter launch of Windows Phone Lumia handsets.

IDC and Strategy Analytics data show continued, and quite dramatic, Nokia smartphone share losses during the Lumia's launch quarter -- 28.1 percent to 12.6 percent and 27.6 percent to 12.4 percent, respectively.

Not that Windows Phone does any better. Based on actual global sales to end users, not shipments into the channel, during fourth quarter, Microsoft's smartphone OS market share plunged to 1.9 percent from 3.4 percent a year earlier, according to Gartner. That works out to about 2.7 million units sold and behind Samsung's homegrown Bada, following a trend that started in Q2 2011.

Still, there is modest glimmer of hope in some markets. According to Kanter Worldpanel, Windows Phone now outsells Symbian in Great Britain, with Lumia 800 accounting for 87 percent of Windows Phone 7 sales.

"There are strong signs that WP7 Nokia handsets are starting to make an impact on the European smartphone market though US sales, where the Nokia brand is weaker, remain underwhelming", Dominic Sunnebo, Kantar Worldpanel global consumer insight director, says. "The fact that WP7 sales have overtaken Symbian based on one handset is encouraging; however, Nokia will need to expand the range quickly in order to keep up with the slew of next generation competitor products being launched in quarter two".

However, Nokia's UK market share is in free fall, from February to February, 12.4 percent to 4.6 percent.

Much now depends on the success of Lumia 900, which AT&T will make available here in the United States on April 2nd.

Intel rises to the cloud

Posted: March 26th, 2012, 11:27am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Cloud computing presents both challenges and opportunities for personal computing giants. Microsoft is "re-imagining" Windows for cloud-connected devices. Meanwhile, Intel rethinks its microprocessor strategies for mobile devices and servers, seeking to embrace the cloud at both ends of the consumption supply chain. For these incumbents that defined the personal computing era, the post-PC era future requires leaping from the past, not clinging to it.

Where the "Wintel" marriage is likely to remain strongest is the server. Microsoft's post-PC -- what I call cloud-connected device -- strategy is two-fold: Providing direct, hosted services or applications businesses can host internally and expanding Windows' support for additional chip architectures. For its part, Intel develops microprocessors for more device categories, while optimizing server chips for cloud applications and services, such as the recently announced Xeon processor E5-2600 product family.

For a time, Intel and Microsoft will diverge on desktop and mobile PCs, particularly tablets. Windows 8 "is a completely reimagined operating system for us as an organization", Microsoft COO Kevin Turner says, in his keynote last week during Convergence 2012. "It not only runs great on Intel and x86, it will also be the first operating system on the planet that also runs on ARM and system-on-a-chip. So, the ability to have multiple architectures that we support with a consistent user experience is something that we're just very, very excited about".

Meanwhile, Intel plays catch up in microprocessors that compete directly with ARM. Intel specifically designed the Atom processor Z2460 platform, which some of you may know as "Medfield", for smartphones and tablets.

In January, Intel struck a multi-year, multi-device deal with Motorola Mobility, now owned by Google, for the processor family and others like it. Motorola -- and Lenovo, too -- plan to ship Intel-powered smartphones in the second half of this year.

"By developing the Medfield chip for mobile devices, Intel will open the doors for further innovation for mobile device OEMs by providing a very capable alternative to existing ARM based chipsets," Wayne Lam, iSuppli analyst, says. However, Intel still must solve some power-consumption issues that ARM already has surpassed, as well as gain share as virtual newcomer.

Serving the Cloud

It's the server where there is opportunity pursued but often overlooked in analyses of the Santa Clara, Calif.-based company's chip strategy for cloud-connected devices.

Intel is the overwhelming x86 chip market leader. During fourth quarter, PC and server microprocessors generated $10.9 billion in sales, up 14.2 percent year over year, according to IDC. Intel's overall market share was 80.3 percent, but much higher for servers: 94.5 percent.

As cloud connectivity increases so do demands for servers and storage capable of handling the load. This year, spending on digital technology products will account for 10 percent of the average household's disposal income -- or $2.2 trillion in total, says Gartner, which projects spending to reach $2.8 trillion by 2015.

"The shift to the personal cloud will accelerate rapidly in 2012 as consumers learn how to use new services on their devices", Andrew Johnson, Gartner managing vice president, says. "As cloud services become part of people’s lives, device vendors and platform providers must integrate cloud services in order to win customers in 2012 or risk being displaces by those that offer these services. Brands must stretch across multiple devices, platforms and services".

Many of these cloud-connected devices don't run Intel processors, but servers supporting public and private clouds and synchronization services do. Server sales are strong, with the majority running x86 processors. Globally, server revenue rose 7.9 percent year over year in 2011 and units by 7 percent, according to Gartner. The cloud is the key force driving demand.

"2011 was a year that saw worldwide server growth driven by mega datacenters and the explosion of client devices such as smartphones and tablets accessing Web content", Jeffrey Hewitt, Gartner research vice president, says. "We have definitely seen a more pronounced segmentation between hyper-scale datacenters and the traditional enterprise and mid-sized customer".

Intel's cloud datacenter microprocessor is the aforementioned Xeon processor E5-2600. "The E5 really is a bandwidth machine", Ajay Chandramouly, Intel IT Cloud Computing and Datacenter Industry Engagement manager, says. "As you add more cores to the processor, you have more data to get in and out of the CPU as quickly as you possibly can. Each of these cores is multithreaded, so effectively you have up to 16 cores, or 16 threads".

Intel also improved the caching technology such that "all the cores can access data simultaneously, so logically it's one cache but physically it's multiple slices", he adds. The E5 also bumps up to four-channel DDR3 memory, "which gives us a 30 percent bump in bandwidth".

Hybrid IT

The E5 isn't about the private or public cloud, but both, particularly among enterprises. There is need.

Analyst firms generate attention and client interest by creating buzzwords -- everything from Web 2.0 to Business Intelligence to Big Data. Among them: Hybrid IT, about which Gartner released a report earlier this month. The analyst firm defines Hybrid IT as the mixing of internal and external cloud services with long-standing network architectures.

The problem: The transition to the hybrid model may not move fast enough for employees. While Howard doesn't use the term "Consumerization of IT" to describe the trend, that's what it is. Rather than rogue devices, like smartphones and tablets, however, employees will bring the consumer cloud inside the corporate firewall.

"IT organizations that do not match the request for IT as a service run the risk of internal customers bypassing the IT organization and consuming IT services from the external cloud, thereby placing the company at greater risk", Howard warns. "IT organizations realize that they not only need to compete with the public cloud consumption model, but also must serve as the intermediary between their internal customers and all IT services, whether internal or external".

He emphasizes: "Hybrid IT is the new IT and it is here to stay. While the cloud market matures, IT organizations must adopt a Hybrid IT strategy".

That circles back to where I started, and where Microsoft and Intel cloud strategies are highly congruous. Microsoft's enterprise cloud is all about choice, providing businesses with cloud applications they can host internally or subscribe to externally. It's also the opportunity Intel seeks with Xeon processor E5-2600, providing the microprocessing platform to support the hybrid cloud.

Chandramouly claims that the "E5 really is a groundbreaking product. It addresses almost everything that affects performance. We increased the number of cores, cache, memory and integration".

Photo Credits: zzoplanet/Shutterstock

App developers should adopt the Moore-is-less principle

Posted: March 25th, 2012, 11:48am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Programmer Chris Boss has contributed some intriguing BetaNews commentaries and analyses about the state of application development and also Windows 8. Some readers call him old-fashioned, for his views on developing software. I disagree. Chris is new-fashioned, and this old dog could teach you young pups some new tricks.

I don't refer to developer tools but Chris' philosophy -- that applications should be lightweight rather than bloated. He contends that some of the tools commonly used today encourage bloat. I'm not knowledgeable enough there to make a case for or against anything. But I can comment on trends that demand less bloat and well-written apps that consume less disk space yet are powerful.

Right now, the sudden surge in cloud-connected device sales has put Moore's Law in reverse. Newer computing products have less processing power, smaller storage capacity and tinier displays than PCs. Big is out. Small is in. This is true as much for notebooks -- particularly the new class of ultrabooks -- as smartphones or tablets. The trend affects Windows developers as much as those creating apps for, say, Android or iOS.

Mobility Matters

On Friday, we joked in the newsroom about an IDC press release stating Slovak PC shipments fell 13.4 percent year over year in 2011 -- notebooks by 17.8 percent. I posted the note about the findings, asking "Can we blame iPad?" but was earnest. Individual markets such as Slovakia, which aren't yet saturated as are so-called mature ones like the United States, foreshadow sweeping trends. Earlier in the week, IDC reported Spanish PC shipments falling a stunning 33.7 percent in 2011.

Pockets of growth remain: PC shipments to Central and Eastern Europe grew 7.5 percent year over year in 2011, IDC says. Vietnam: up 9.8 percent. However, whether shipments are growing or not, one trend is consistent: Laptops account for the majority of PC shipments in all markets. Mobility matters.

Meanwhile, smartphone and tablet shipments are way up, and they drag down PC sales in many markets. "Major trends in client computing have shifted the market away from a focus on personal computers to a broader device perspective that includes smartphones, tablets and other consumer devices", Steve Kleynhans, Gartner research vice president, says. The firm predicts that the cloud will replace the PC as most peoples' personal content hub by 2016.

The increasing popularity of smaller devices, even laptops, puts Moore's Law in reverse -- and that's a trend likely to last for several years. Hell, Microsoft champions it, by touting the value of ultrabooks over other laptops and developing Windows on ARM. Suddenly, Moore is less.

The trend is by no means new. The first laptops lagged behind desktop PCs, in terms of processor, graphics and storage. Then about three years ago along came netbooks, which during their brief surge accounted for about 10 percent of PC shipments. Since, tablets have largely pushed aside netbooks, but their computing processing, graphics and storage capabilities are about the same -- or less. Each category shares other attributes: smaller physical size, tinier displays, cloud connectivity, near-instant on capability and less of everything compared to PC desktops or notebooks.

Flash Your World

Storage capacity is moving in reverse, an accelerating trend as smartphone and tablet sales accelerate and newer laptops use solid-state disks. Sure, you can buy a laptop with beefy 500GB or 750GB hard drive but that svelte ultrabook is more likely to have a puny, but more efficient, SSD. For example, Best Buy sells 13 different ultrabooks, 11 of which come with SSDs-only. Five pack 128GB storage, while the others have either 240GB or 256GB solid-state disks.

The good news, sold-state storage capacity is growing and viewed by itself is on Moore's Law-growth track. But within the larger market, it's a step backwards -- Moore is less -- compared to overall PC storage growth trends.

Globally, SSD revenue grew 105 percent year over year in 2011 -- to $5 billion from $2.4 billion, according to IDC, which predicts 51 percent compound annual growth rate through 2015. "The increasing use of flash in enterprise solutions, explosive growth of mobile client devices, and lower SSD pricing is creating a perfect storm for increased SSD shipments and revenue over our forecast", Jeff Janukowicz, IDC research director, says. The analyst firm expects SSD prices to fall to $1 a gigabyte by second half of this year, increasing adoption in PCs.

Meanwhile, solid-sate storage with even smaller capacities is standard among smartphones and tablets. iSuppli predicts that NAND flash in media tablets will rise from 1.6 billion gigabytes last year to 16.3 billion gigabytes by 2015. Media tablets share of NAND shipments will rise from 9 percent to 17 percent during the time period. The analyst firm expects iPad to consume the most NAND flash, with 72 percent market share, this year.

"Apple’s continued domination of the sales of NAND flash for media tablets reflects not only the iPad’s commanding market share lead, but its extensive memory usage" Dee Nguyen, iSuppli analyst, says. "In keeping with its status as a high-end offering in the tablet market, the iPad employs a larger density of NAND than its competitors. Because of this, Apple’s iPad will continue to drive the growth of NAND sales in the tablet market for the next several years".

Solid-state storage capacity on tablets is considerably less than ultrabooks or other laptops. iPad offers 16GB, 32GB or 64GB capacity, while most Androids top out at 32GB; a few come with more or micro-SD slots for storage expansion.

As storage decreases, need for more of it exceeds Moore's Law by several fold. Content isn't getting smaller but increasingly bigger, as people use more HD-capable cameras and camcorders. Already, more photos are taken with phones, many packing 5-megapixel cameras or better, than point-and-shoot digicams. That bloated, 500MB app suddenly is a storage burden when vacation photos and videos consume gigabytes on a 64GB or 128GB drive. Apps need to make room for content, which matters more to users.

App Diet Plan

Platform providers and developers cannot sustain the same approach to creating applications, as processing power, storage capacity and device and screen sizes decrease. Apple had the right idea with the App Store in 2008. Others followed suit, with Android and Windows Phone markets as leading examples. Mobile apps tend to be smaller, tighter -- and, granted, not necessarily as feature-filled as desktop counterparts. Apple's iPhoto for the Mac is a 725MB download, compared to 106MB -- still, pretty hefty -- for iPad; they sell for $14.99 and $4.99, respectively. Adobe Photoshop CS 5.1 Extended is 1.5GB, compared to 50.2MB for Photoshop Touch for iPad; they sell for $999 and $9.99, respectively.

Smaller and cheaper isn't necessarily bad. A developer can provide users with features they are most-likely to use -- and cut the bloat in the process. Meanwhile, the developer can sell additional apps that offer more functionality specific to tasks, rather than one, big bloated package that costs considerably more and puts all sales dollars in one basket. Truism: It's easier to sell several things for less than one item for much more.

The potential volumes are considerably higher, too. IDC forecasts smartphone shipments to exceed 1 billion units by 2015, for example. But there is plenty of opportunity now. "In December 2011, 47.6 percent of the total mobile audience in the US used apps, an increase of 13.3 percentage points", according to comScore's "2012 Mobile Future in Focus" report. "In Europe, 38.2 percent of the total mobile audience accessed mobile media via application, up 10.1 percentage points". More:

Apps are a critical component of the mobile media ecosystem, playing an important role in consumers' mobile device purchase decision while shaping their engagement with mobile media content...The strong rise in penetration of mobile media usage and continued adoption of different means of accessing digital content indicate significant opportunity for content creators, publishers and app developers as this behavior becomes even more ubiquitous.

Smaller apps for a larger range of devices -- and, for now, packing less oomph than PCs -- is the foreseeable future. Developers creating mobile apps are there today, in part because the platforms demand it. That's not so for Windows, where big is a motto only Texas can match. To embrace the future, which in part is Microsoft "re-imagining" the OS for touch and tablets, developers must start thinking Moore is less -- or less is more, if you like. That includes, Microsoft.

Chris Boss writes last week about currently available Windows 7 tablets:

If the principles of writing efficient software we learned years ago were implimented when writing software for today's Windows tablet computers, I think "fast and fluid" would definitely be the norm...

Today, Intel Atom CPU's are regularly criticised as being too slow, lacking power. Windows tablets (the reasonably priced ones) usually come with an Atom CPU. But it is programmers who are most likely to make this criticism. Why? Because their software runs too slow on these CPUs. But the problem is not the CPUs, but the software. A well-written WIN32 application can run very fast even on the Atom CPU.

He makes a good point. Windows developers can produce leaner software, and Windows Store gives them a means of doing so profitably. Microsoft puts the apps right in front of customers, inside Windows 8, and the opportunity to sell more apps for less.

Mmmm, maybe there's another principle here: More apps for less, and in the process trimming the bloat, offering users the tasks they need most and selling more apps instead of one big one. What could possibly be wrong with that?

Photo Credit: CLIPAREA l Custom media/Shutterstock

AT&T blames FCC for T-Mobile layoffs

Posted: March 23rd, 2012, 2:23pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

You'd never know that the execs over at AT&T are bitter about the failed T-Mobile USA merger or paying out $3 billion for absolutely nothing.

Yesterday, T-Mobile handed out 1,900 pink slips, mostly to employees working in call centers. Gee, that's not a vital area, now is it? Today, AT&T rallies to T-Mobile's defense, blaming not the nation's fourth-largest carrier but the Federal Communications Commission. AT&T's rationale: The carrier would have preserved those jobs if allowed to buy T-Mobile.

Of course, the blame game accomplishes something else: Absolves AT&T's responsibility. The consequences of a failed merger left T-Mobile limping along. Cutbacks or downsizing of some kind were inevitable. Last month during its quarterly earnings report, T-Mobile acknowledged net loss of 706,000 subscribers.

Stated differently: The failed merger weakened T-Mobile -- that and being the only major carrier without iPhone. But is the merger gone bust the FCC's fault or AT&T's -- or perhaps a little and a lot of both?

You know AT&T's answer to that question. Jim Cicconi, AT&T Senior executive veep of External and Legislative Affairs, posted after market close today:

Yesterday, T-Mobile made the sad announcement that it would be closing seven call centers, laying off thousands of workers, and that more layoff announcements may follow. Normally, we’d not comment on something like this. But I feel this is an exception for one big reason: only a few months ago AT&T promised to preserve these very same call centers and jobs if our merger was approved. We also predicted that if the merger failed, T-Mobile would be forced into major layoffs.

At that time, the current FCC not only rejected our pledges and predictions, they also questioned our credibility. The FCC argued that the merger would cost jobs, not preserve them, and that rejecting it would save jobs. In short, the FCC said they were right, we were wrong, and did so in an aggressive and adamant way.

Rarely are a regulatory agency’s predictive judgments proven so wrong so fast. But for the government’s decision, centers now being closed would be staying open, workers now facing layoffs would have job guarantees, and communities facing turmoil would have security. Only a few months later, the truth of who was right is sadly obvious.

So what’s the lesson here? For one thing, it’s a reminder of why 'regulatory humility' should be more than a slogan. The FCC may consider itself an expert agency on telecom, but it is not omniscient. And when it ventures far afield from technical issues, and into judgments about employment or predictions about business decisions, it has often been wildly wrong.

The other lesson is even more important, and should be sobering. It is a reminder that in government, as in life, decisions have consequences. One must approach them not as an exercise of power but instead of responsibility, because, as I learned in my years of public service, the price of a bad decision is too often paid by someone else.

AT&T did leave T-Mobile with spectrum in 128 markets and $3 billion breakup fee. If data throttling is any indication, AT&T subscribers, and I'm among them, will pay for executives' T-Mobile remorse for some time ahead.

As for the FCC. Did regulators' objection to the merger preserve competition, and jobs, or squash it? You tell me in comments.

Photo Credit: Jonnystockphoto/Shutterstock

Has an employer asked for your Facebook password?

Posted: March 23rd, 2012, 12:15pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

It's a serious question, following today's stunning privacy post from Facebook. Has an employer or prospective one asked you for your Facebook password, or that of another social media site; could be Google+, Tumblr or Twitter, among others?

The request might have come as condition of continued employment, and there threat of reprisal might seem, or even be, real given the current job market. Or perhaps a prospective employer said that you couldn't be considered for a new position without first giving up your password. Please answer in comments. This is one of those rare occasions I don't mind, and even recommend, anonymous commenting if answer is "Yes". There also is a poll. Please answer, and you can choose multiple responses.

Anyone who asks for your Facebook or other social media password(s) as condition of continued or new employment should be fired immediately. Any company that allows such a practice should be vilified and prosecuted.

The practice is an egregious privacy breech of widening circles. Particularly for Facebook, there are boundaries -- anywhere from no one to friends or friend of friends -- who can view one another's Facebooks. The employer voyeur doesn't just violate your privacy but theirs.

Erin Egan, Facebook chief privacy policy officer, makes the social network's position clear:

As a user, you shouldn’t be forced to share your private information and communications just to get a job. And as the friend of a user, you shouldn’t have to worry that your private information or communications will be revealed to someone you don’t know and didn’t intend to share with just because that user is looking for a job. That’s why we’ve made it a violation of Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities to share or solicit a Facebook password.

My question for Facebook: How far are you really willing to go? If I as an individual user violate your terms of service, the consequence can be fatal: Closing my account. Facebook, are you willing to similarly enforce the ToS against businesses, by pulling their brand pages -- even if they are advertisers? Nothing less shows your commitment to protecting Facebook users' privacy.

No one could rightly accuse me of being a friend of Facebook. The company needs to do much to put its privacy house in order, I contend. Facebook profits from pretty much everything that anyone shares on the social network. People talk about the omniscience of God. What about CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook?

Abuse of Power

Still, there's a difference. The existing or prospective employer is in a position of power over the employee or job seeker. There is a power imbalance, which legally is at the core of sexual harassment or discrimination statutes. The employer misuses his or her power for gain. The motivation isn't as self-gratifying or self-serving as sexual harassment -- or anywhere as demeaning or abusive. But it's a power imbalance leading to personal violation nevertheless, and potentially that of others.

Something else: Many companies have strict security policies about making and not sharing passwords. So why is Mr. or Mrs. Human Resources person so cavalierly demanding personal passwords from people they hire -- or fire.

Has an employer or prospective employer asked for your Facebook password?

Again, it's a power imbalance, and worse. HR manager is position of utmost trust, because he or she has so much access to employee information. Asking for the personal password from a position of power might seem to the HR manager and even those above him or her as serving the company's interest. Instead, the practice is a legal, as well as moral, quagmire.

US law prohibits asking about sexual preferences or religion, for example. Forced access to Facebook accounts can provide that information -- and more. Some smart lawyer can, and should, argue that existing statutes already cover Facebook password privacy prying because it reveals information companies aren't allowed to ask for during the employment process.

That some employers ask for what they shouldn't isn't surprising. When haven't businesses pushed the hiring and firing limits? That's how we got trade unions or laws governing what employers can ask you or me for.

Something else: Zuckerberg has repeatedly stated he wants to shake up standard mores about privacy, and Facebook's business model is about pushing down the body bubbles that separate us, encouraging people to share more and more publicly. But it's one thing to freely share personal information and another to be coerced or compelled to get or keep a job.

Photo Credit: Adam Gregor/Shutterstock

New iPad is now available in 35 countries

Posted: March 23rd, 2012, 9:40am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today, Apple released new iPad in 25 more countries, bringing the total to 35 plus one US territory since sales started one week ago. What a week, too.

Sales over the three-day launch weekend reached 3 million units. After initially positive reviews, the knocks started in droves. Consumer Reports' tests found new iPad to be quite hot, as much as 116 degrees F, setting off a web maelstrom of blogs, news stories and social media posts. CR plans to release a more formal, and final, examination as early as today. Other complaints claim the supplied charger is inadequate for new iPad's giant battery. BetaNews hasn't found the tablet to be too hot or to charge too slowly. But tongues will wag.

New iPad is now also available in: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macau, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. The tablet launched in these 10 plus territory: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, Puerto Rico, Singapore, Switzerland, United Kingdon, United States and the US Virgin Islands.

Distribution is key to success in the global economy, and one of the fundamental reasons iPad has sold so well since its launch nearly two years ago. Apple leveraged logistical operations established for iPod and iPhone. So far, only Amazon and Samsung have shown similar manufacturing and distribution wherewithal to compete with iPad, which is global media tablet leader, followed by Kindle Fire and Galaxy Tab.

BetaNews readers aren't exactly excited about Apple's tablet. According to our poll, which has an unusually low 848 responses, 47.17 percent of you won't buy new iPad. Meanwhile, little more than 31 percent have ordered (and most likely received) the tablet, while another 15.21 percent plan to get it within 3 months.

Based on your comments, and others around the web, new iPad's high resolution display -- 2048 x 1536 -- is the major, appealing feature. Every platform needs a killer app/feature to succeed, and the better-than-HD display is it for new iPad.

DisplayMate president Raymond Soneira finds after exhaustive, comparative testing: "The display on the new iPad decisively beats (blows away) all of the tablets we have previously tested, including the iPad 2...the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, the Barnes & Noble Nook tablet, and the Amazon Kindle Fire at the back of the pack".

But price and size matter, too. ABI Research predicts the media tablet market will dramatically change within five years. Today, Apple is market leader in the two major segments -- tablets priced above $400 and those with displays larger than 9 inches. These "wide-aspect" tablets accounted for 75 percent of tablet volumes last year -- the majority iPad 2. By 2016, sub-$400, 7-to-9-inch tablets will account for 60 percent of tablet market share, ABI predicts. Sales to emerging markets like India and Russia will open the way for lower-cost, smaller tablets -- and that's good for Android.

Frequent BetaNews commenter "woe" sizes up tablet competition by perhaps the most important metric:

1. iPad (ecosystem)
2. Kindle Fire (ecosystem)
3. Everything else (no ecosystem, no one cares)

Amazon and Apple device ecosystems are built in part on curation, offering an end-to-end hardware, software and services stack, which includes sync, apps and digital content.

Only Amazon has done any meaningful Android customization on tablets, making its curated experience similar to Apple's. ASUS has carved out a niche for Eee Pad Transformer, but nothing really reaching beyond Android enthusiasts and gamers. Amazon's continued success is good for driving up Android shipments against iPad, but it's bad broadly. Kindle Fire benefits Amazon's ecosystem and its customers willing to buy into the curated experience but not the expanse of third-party developers or larger Android ecosystem.

Will media tablet competition come down to iPad and Kindle Fire a year from now? I wonder.

5 things you should know about new iPad

Posted: March 22nd, 2012, 1:14pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Has less than one week passed since new iPad starting selling in 10 countries and one US territory? It seems like longer. Tomorrow, Apple's tablet will be available in 25 more. With more people set to buy new iPad, which sold 3 million units over the three-day launch weekend, time is right to discuss things you should know before plunking down your hard-earned cash.

There is suddenly lots of confusion about new iPad, with all these conflicting media reports -- blogs and news sites running praising reviews alongside stories about yet another fatal design flaw. You just don't know who to believe. Perhaps these five things will help you find clarity.

1. If you carry new iPad to Starbucks, employees will hand you a protective mat for your lap (made of the same material used for their cup holders). The coffee shop is super sensitive about hot things in your lap (and the lawsuits they might generate). There's good reason. Consumer Reports claims that Apple's newest tablet runs 10 degrees F hotter than the old one -- as much as 116 degrees F.

Nevermind that your big brick laptop probably runs even hotter and tickles with first-degree burns every time your fingers pass by the heat vent. Consumer Reports has everyone scared about the potential lap and hand hazards or the possibility your new iPad might melt into a Starbucks table.

Strange, though. My family has one of these new iPads, which doesn't seem the least bit overly hot.

2. It's best not to to charge new iPad during that quick trip to the relatives (because you'll be there a long time). The InterWebs are chock full of reports about how slowly new iPad charges, with some bloggers claiming the charger is too small for the big battery -- so much that it can't keep up with the drain. You don't want that 15 minute visit to be 15 hours.

Strange, again. Our new iPad charges up nearly as quickly as the older one. Granted, charging time wasn't exactly fast with iPad 2.

3. New iPad won't make you popular. If anything, you're more at risk carrying one. Two years ago, the original iPad could draw a crowd at the coffee shop. But now that everyone has an iPad, or wants one, it's kind of passé. Perhaps matters would be different if this and last year's models weren't almost indistinguishable even closeup.

You might instead draw attention you don't want. There are now 220 tablets for sale globally, according to ABI Research, and the majority are Androids. Fanboys are called the Android Army for a reason. They'll heckle and call you a Steve Jobs cultist. They'll preach about the benefits of choice over Apple's Way (or no way). The most aggressive will grab your iPad and perform and impromptu drop test. Eh, did you buy AppleCare+?

4. Your photos will look even worse. Apple's new iPad TV commercial touts the benefits of the greater-than HD display, with its haughty 2048 x 1536 resolution, and how your photos will look better. Banderstanch! Pics taken with your cheesy cameraphone and old Kodak digital clunker won't get better with age. The higher the display's resolution, the worse your low-res pics will look.

What about new photos taken with your swanky Canon, Fuji or Nikon digicam? HD brings out all your imperfections. There's a reason why more TV news anchors opt for plastic surgery now that broadcasts are HD. The lens doesn't lie, and there's no Photoshop for live television. There is Photoshop for iPad -- and iPhoto, too. Ten bucks per app might be the best new iPad investment you'll ever make.

5. 4G LTE is simply too fast. Besides the Retina display, Apple touts LTE as another big benefit. Too bad 4G is too costly to use. Wall Street Journal calls it a "video speed trap". Bigger pipes bring HD content faster but also burn through the data cap faster. How's a single two-hour movie to use up your monthly allowance, 2GB, from Verizon. Then the overage charges start.

I must say LTE is fast. I'm consistently seeing 27Mbps around San Diego on AT&T. But I'm scared to use it. :) Wouldn't you be?

That's a wrap and qualifier that Starbucks isn't really giving out lap-mats.

Are hacktivists more dangerous, or just more determined?

Posted: March 22nd, 2012, 11:07am MDT by Joe Wilcox

As if Anonymous didn't have enough to boast about. While cybercriminals accounted for the most breaches, "activist groups created their fair share of misery and mayhem last year as well -- and they stole more data than any other group", according to a report Verizon released today in cooperation with Australian, Dutch, English, Irish and US officials. The study attributes 58 percent of data thefts to hacktivists.

"The most significant change we saw in 2011 was the rise of 'hacktivism' against larger organizations worldwide", Verizon reports. "The frequency and regularity of cases tied to activist groups that came through our doors in 2011 exceeded the number worked in all previous years combined".

No shock, Anonymous brags a little, tweeting today: "Verizon Study Confirms 2011 Was The Year Of #Anonymous, With 100 Million Users' Data Breached By Hacktivists" -- and linking to a Forbes story.

Breaches by the Numbers

In total, cybercriminals and hackers compromised 174 million records, the second-highest level in 7 years, across 855 incidents. Breaches occurred in organizations spanning 36 countries. "While good old-fashioned greed and avarice were still the prime movers, ideological dissent and schadenfreude took a more prominent role across the caseload", according to the report.

"Hacking and malware have traditionally led the pack, but this year they’ve pulled away from the group even further while waving 'Hi Mom!' to the camera". Eighty-one percent of breaches came from hacking, up 31 percent year over year, and 69 percent from malware, which rose 20 percent. "An impressive 61 percent of all breaches featured a combination of hacking techniques and malware", Verizon reports.

"Findings from the past year continue to show that target selection is based more on opportunity than on choice. Most victims fell prey because they were found to possess an (often easily) exploitable weakness rather than because they were pre-identified for attack". Targets of opportunity: 79 percent. Easily done: 96 percent. "Most breaches were avoidable", Verizon concludes.

Ease and targets of opportunity cannot be overstated: "Perpetrators rarely know who they are hacking. In most cases it seems that they learn the identity of their victim after they have gained unauthorized access".

Differing Motivations

The report identifies a gaping disparity between hacktivists and cybercriminals. The former accounted for 3 percent of breaches, but stole the majority of data -- "over 100 million records. That’s almost twice the amount pinched by all those financially-motivated professionals...although ideological attacks were less frequent, they sure took a heavy toll".

Perhaps cybercriminals are lazy, by comparison?

Looking through the case data, it is apparent that money-driven crooks continue to focus more on opportunistic attacks against weaker targets. This may be at least partly because a good number of their brethren are enjoying jail time. Instead of major (and risky) heists, they pilfer smaller hauls of data from a multitude of smaller organizations that present a lower risk to the attacker. Think of it as a way to streamline business processes. Find an easy way to prey on the unsuspecting, the weak, and the lame, and then simply repeat on a large scale. This high-volume, low-yield business model has become the standard M.O. for organized criminal groups...

Nearly all data stolen by activist groups were taken from larger organizations. Furthermore, the proportion of breaches tied to hacktivism-related motives rises to 25 percent. This stands to reason, since a low-profile brand is less likely to draw the ire of these groups.

Hacktivists take more risks, and that includes targeting law enforcement agencies pursuing them.

Cybercriminals' predictability is strange comfort to IT security professionals. Verizon's claims that hacktivists "haunt organizations around the world" and their "proclivity to embarrass victims" make "this trend more frightening than other threats, whether real or imagined. Doubly concerning for many organizations and executives was that target selection by these groups didn’t follow the logical lines of who has money and/or valuable information. Enemies are even scarier when you can’t predict their behavior".

Victims certainly ranged a swath of organizations. Among the hackvistisms we reported last year:

There's a whole lot more to Verizon's 77-page report than hacktivism. It's worth reading.

Photo Credit: Rob Kints/Shutterstock

220 tablets for sale but you only want one

Posted: March 21st, 2012, 7:39pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

What's the saying about the rock that caused the avalanche? That might be the best analogy for iPad since its launch nearly two years ago. ABI Research says there are now 220 different tablets available globally -- the majority came after iPad. Judging by early new iPad sales, 3 million over the three-day launch weekend, many of you want just one.

But ABI says that will change, particularly as buyers in emerging markets scoop up smaller tablets. Surely that has to be good for Android and perhaps even Windows 8 someday.

"The majority of new entrant media tablet models have been in the sub-$400 segment that focuses on growth markets like India and China", Jeff Orr, ABI group director, says. "The strong wave of growth in this segment over the next few years is expected to be driven by the adoption in emerging markets".

Today, Apple is market leader in the two major segments -- tablets priced above $400 and those with displays larger than 9 inches. These "wide-aspect" tablets accounted for 75 percent of tablet volumes last year -- the majority iPad 2. By 2016, sub-$400, 7-to-9-inch tablets will account for 60 percent of tablet market share, ABI predicts.

Akin to tablets are ereaders. More than 30 models are available, and shipments grew 33 percent year over year in 2011. ABI predicts more modest 20 percent growth this year.

"Availability of competing models increases options for consumers and will help to boost ereader adoption", Aishwarya Singh, ABI research analyst, says. "However, the slower pace of digitization of local content will be the key market inhibitor for adoption of ebook readers, as well as media tablets, in the emerging markets".

I got to wondering about that and did some quick research on China. Competition there is fierce, with new ebook sellers coming to market (buy360.com, this month) and prices plummeting. In China, it's not unusual for ebooks to sell for 75 percent less than print. A movie typically costs 70 yuan at the cinema, while an ebook might be 2.5 yuan -- less than a can of soda at the theater.

Apple is rumored to be working on a sub-9-inch tablet, which, with iBookstore, would make it a fair competitor to ereaders -- as Amazon Kindle Fire already is today. Last month I asked: "Would you buy an 8-inch iPad?" Fifty-five percent of the 3,574 respondents answered "Yes".

"I have had a 7-inch Android tablet for over a year", commenter LS650 responds. "I really prefer the smaller format over my roommate's 10-inch iPad. If there were a smaller iPad I would definitely consider buying one".

Paul Smith: "I absolutely believe people would buy an 8-inch iPad, at a lower price".

"A smaller screen at a lower price point would be perfect for kids and other entry level users", JEPaul comments. "From a marketing perspective, these users would most likely stick with an apple product and ultimately upgrade to the bigger more expensive version. I see this as a win-win for Apple and the consumer".

So the question for ABI and other tablet forecasters: What if that 7-to-9-inch tablet is iPad? What of the 220 then?

Photo Credit: CLIPAREA l Custom media/Shutterstock

Will Windows 8 save Christmas?

Posted: March 20th, 2012, 10:08am MDT by Joe Wilcox

PC shipments slogged along during 2011 and will continue to do so this year. IDC says growth was a paltry 1.8 percent last year and will be a tepid 5 percent in 2012 -- tepid considering the year-over-year comparison is weak. Bob O'Donnell, IDC's veep of Clients and Displays at IDC cites the oh-so obvious reason: "Many consumers are holding off making PC purchases at the moment because tablet devices like Apple's iPad are proving to be a powerful distraction".

But he qualifies: "End user surveys tell us that few people consider media tablets as replacements for their PCs, so later this year when there is a new Microsoft operating system, available in sleek new PC form factors, we believe consumer interest in PCs will begin to rebound". Do you believe him? Pardon my skepticism. I don't.

iPad Distraction

That "distraction" amounts to 3 million iPads sold over the launch weekend, which includes Friday March 16. If a shiny new tablet and an existing PC are replacement enough for a new computer, then IDC's forecast is built on sand. That's the scenario I expect to unfold -- at least in so-called mature markets. Perhaps IDC analysts think so, too, since today's forecast offers something new: Breakdown of projected laptop and desktop shipments by mature and emerging markets.

IDC, like Gartner last week, assumes that Ultrabooks and Windows 8 will lift PC sales in the second half and that's where most of the year's growth will occur. However, both firms' computer shipment predictions came in below forecasts for every quarter of 2011, and the year; that's reason enough to question even 5 percent growth -- 4.4 percent, according to Gartner.

Jay Chou, IDC senior research analyst, concedes that "2012 and 2013 will bring significant challenges for Microsoft and the PC community. Windows 8 and Ultrabooks are a definitive step in the right direction to recapturing the relevance of the PC, but its promise of meshing a tablet experience in a PC body will likely entail a period of trial and error, thus the market will likely see modest growth in the near term".

Meanwhile, iPad will Pac-Man across the computing landscape gobbling up would-be PC buyers long before the first Windows 8 slate ships or manufacturers release compelling, and, more importantly, affordable designs.

Windows Octoberfest

No one doubts Windows 8 will ship this year. How can you miss Christmas? Microsoft did with Windows Vista and can't afford to put another lump of coal in partners' and customers' holiday stockings. Today, citing unnamed sources, Bloomberg reports that Windows 8 will be complete in summer and launch in October.

D`oh, of course it will. Early last month, I laid out the same timetable -- summer release to manufacturing and October launch. It's the only sensible one based on past Microsoft OS development milestones and Windows 8 Consumer Preview's release.

What is uncertain: Impact. How much will Windows 8 have on holiday PC sales and shipments during 2013 and 2014? Much hinges on Windows 8 slates, particularly considering how much better the new Metro UI is optimized for touch rather than mouse and keyboard.

"The real question is whether Windows 8 and ultrabooks will create the compelling offering that gets the earlier adopter of devices excited about PCs again", Ranjit Atwal, Gartner research director, says.

By the way, Gartner predicts that the cloud will replace the PC as digital home and work lifestyle hub by 2014.

Enterprise or Bust!

Not surprisingly, Microsoft expects success. "When you think about the hundreds of millions of units that we're going to sell in just that first year, it is an awesome thing that we're getting very, very excited about", Kevin Turner, Microsoft COO, says -- yesterday during the company's annual Convergence event in Houston.

Microsoft will take no chances and looks to cash in on Windows 8, regardless of how it affects PC shipments. The company is aligning supporting products, many aimed at the enterprise, for fourth quarter release. For example, yesterday, Microsoft affirmed Q4 release of Dynamics AX 2012 R2, Dynamics NAV 2013 and Dynamics GP 2013. Not surprisingly, Windows 8 Server is following similar release track. Perhaps even Office 15, if Windows on ARM devices release for Christmas with the productivity suite pre-installed.

Windows 8 is "enterprise-ready and consumer friendly", Turner says, calling it "an operating system without compromise". Previously, Microsoft separated key security and networking features from consumer and business versions. That's changing, somewhat.

"No longer are you going to have to make compromises as an operating system", he says. "Today a lot of companies have to decide, do I want end user flexibility, or do I want great security and management. Do, I want touch, or do I want the ability to have a traditional mouse and keyboard. Guess what, with Windows 8 we're taking the 'or' out, and we're basically inserting the word 'and'. You can have a great touch experience and with one click you can go right back to the desktop that you've come to know and love".

Consumerization of IT is reason enough to provide essential security and management capabilities across different Windows versions. But there is another: The competitive threat iPad and, eventually, Android tablets pose. These devices don't have to replace a PC, just adequately extend the lifespan of an older one -- and, yes, in the enterprise, too. Microsoft needs to ensure that Windows 8 slates appeal to businesses, the company's core market, as much as possible.

Some enterprises already are turning away. Bolstering a January IDG Connect Study, ChangeWave finds that one in five businesses will buy a tablet next quarter, with the majority overwhelmingly planning on iPad. That's 84 percent, up from 77 percent in November. Meanwhile, interest in all competing tablets declined.

"Fully 51 percent of IT and business decision-makers say they always use their iPad at work", according to the IDG Connect Study -- and, of course, that's the number who actually own the tablet. Sixteen percent have replaced their laptop with an iPad and 54 percent supplement it.

Qualification: The firms conducted these studies before Apple announced the new iPad.

Personally, I like Windows 8. I'm hopeful the operating system will reinvigorate relevance into the Windows PC. But Microsoft and OEMs can't ship soon enough. Can Windows 8 save Christmas for Microsoft and its partners? I answer "No" for holiday 2012. Perhaps "Yes" for holiday 2013. What do you say?

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Will you deploy Office 365 now?

Posted: March 19th, 2012, 6:27pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

We gave you the weekend to ponder the significance to your business. Now it's time to ask: Will you deploy Office 365 (or additional seats), following last week's price cuts? Are you now more likely to adopt cloud-based productivity apps?

Four days ago, Microsoft cut Office 365 prices by up to 20 percent, depending on the plan and number of seats. It's a hefty cut coming at a time of increased Google Apps acceptance among enterprises. Microsoft's calling card is familiarity -- cloud apps connecting to Office on the desktop while providing anytime, anywhere access.

Four basic Office 365 plans (six in all) are available, ranging from $4 (email only) to $20 (with Office 2010 pro subscription) per seat. For sense of changes, when Office 365 launched in June 2011, the higher plans ranged from $10 to $27 per user per month; $8 to $22 now.

By comparison, Google Apps basic pricing: $50 per user per year with annual subscription or $5 per user per month without one.

For some users, savings are bigger. Microsoft's Kirk Koenigsbauer explains:

We are also excited to make pricing changes to Office 365 for education. In line with our longstanding commitment to education, we will make our 'A2' service plan free to not only students, but also to faculty and staff. A2 includes the core capabilities of Exchange, SharePoint, and Lync and the Office Web Applications. Exchange Online and Lync Online are available today for academic institutions, and we'll launch the full Office 365 for education service starting this summer.

There is good reason. Google Apps is free to educational institutions. Well-accepted tech industry maxim: What students adopt while in school they are likely to continue using later in life.

Why Cut Prices?

Microsoft Office 365 price-cut objectives are six-fold:

Ratcheting up Office 365 adoption
Combating Google Apps competition
Extending Office desktop's enterprise appeal
Incentivizing more customers to move to the cloud
Upselling customers to additional cloud services (like Azure)
Preparing enterprises for Windows 8 and Windows on Arm deployments

Microsoft faces a big hurdle to enterprise adoption. Osterman Research estimates that 90 percent of Office 365 subscribers have fewer than 50 employees.

Our own research finds, not surprisingly, that price cuts spur demand, but there is substantial variability in the increase of demand at different levels of price reduction. For example:

At $20 per seat per month, 16 percent of mid-sized and large organizations are likely or definite adopters of cloud-based email services.

Dropping the price by $5 increases likely or definite adoption to 27 percent (an increase of 69 percent).

Dropping it another $5 increases potential adoption to 49 percent (an increase of 81 percent).

Dropping prices another $5 will increase demand, but only a modest 24 percent.

Microsoft is beginning to accelerate its emphasis on cloud computing, which Forrester Research predicts will grow from being a "$40 billion industry to a $240 billion industry just by 2020", Microsoft COO Kevin Turner says. "We actually think that number is light, maybe even by two, at the speed that we're seeing the cloud take hold".

Office 365 price cuts come ahead of other Microsoft cloud moves. Today, the company announced that Dynamics NAV 2013 and Dynamics GP 2013 will separately be available in calendar fourth quarter. Kirill Tatarinov, president of Microsoft Business Solutions, says they "will run on Windows Azure in an elastic Microsoft cloud". Additionally, Dynamics CRM Online is scheduled for two sets of updates this year.

So, will you deploy Office 365 now?

Microsoft Dynamics looks to the cloud

Posted: March 19th, 2012, 4:58pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today, Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft reaffirmed its commitment to bring business process software to Azure. Kirill Tatarinov, president of the company's Business Solutions group, promises that Dynamics NAV 2013 and Dynamics GP 2013, which are separately set to be available in calendar fourth quarter, "will run on Windows Azure in an elastic Microsoft cloud". Dynamics AX 2012 R2 is on track for similar release.

Dynamics NAV and GP are designed for small-to-midsize organizations. SMBs looking for an early taste of NAV 2013 will get their chance when a beta becomes available in May, says Tatarinov, during Microsoft Convergence 2012. The next AX version, which looks to be v2014, will evolve into an enterprise cloud service.

Looked at together, and with Dynamics CRM, Microsoft is ever-so-slowly, but methodically, building out cloud-based ERP, particularly for mid-size businesses and enterprises. "Last year at Convergence 2011 we announced that the entire portfolio of Microsoft Dynamics ERP solutions is moving to the cloud", Tatarinov says. With today's announcements, there's light in the distance, but no end of the tunnel yet.

During the main keynote, COO Kevin Turner touts a "new era for Dynamics", emphasizing: "It's a very exciting time to be in technology, and to be in IT". Microsoft tailors its products for private, public and hybrid clouds, an increasingly popular trend among companies selling enterprise software and services.

"The shift to the cloud, ladies and gentlemen, a year ago it was sort of talked about as a trend, now it's in full mainstream", Turner says. "We're seeing tens of millions of customers move to the cloud in very, very rapid ways -- and if you look at this particular quote from Forrester, it's going to go from a $40 billion industry to a $240 billion industry just by 2020. We actually think that number is light, maybe even by two, at the speed that we're seeing the cloud take hold".

That's a stunning proclamation about cloud computing's future.

The majority of cloud deployments are the hybrid type, Turner says. But his sales pitch should make former CEO Steve Jobs (if he was still with us) blush. Microsoft's COO boasts about giving customers choice of cloud solutions, but delivers a veiled caveat intended to be benefit: "As long as you have Active Directory completely deployed, and System Center completely deployed, you can really leverage the common technologies that we have across identity, virtualization, management, and development -- and no other company can provide that to you in the cloud".

Well, yeah, if the cloud requires Microsoft infrastructure, of course "no other company can provide that to you".

Not to be ignored, Microsoft revealed some data about Dynamics CRM, which competes with Salesforce.com: 33,000 customers and 2.25 million users.

"Dynamics CRM Online has been a poster child of what business solutions in the cloud ought to be", Tatarinov says. When it's the only major Dynamics product truly in the cloud, how can it not be?

"Later this spring, we will provide Dynamics CRM Online with capabilities that truly enable consumerized scenarios in the business", Tatarinov promises. "We will support a broad range of browsers in addition to Internet Explorer. And we will support a broad range of devices". Would you believe Android and iOS?

"Later this year we will update Dynamics CRM Online again -- and with that full update we will provide capabilities for social interaction and customer care scenarios", he continues.

Photo Credit: ra2 studio/Shutterstock

If new iPad sales are so good, where are the numbers?

Posted: March 19th, 2012, 11:40am MDT by Joe Wilcox

During today's conference call announcing Apple's cash dividend and stock repurchase plans, CEO Tim Cook said about new iPad's launch: "We had a record weekend, and we're thrilled with it". Later, in a one-sentence press release issued by the nation's second-largest carrier: "On Friday, March 16, AT&T set a new single-day record for its iPad sales and activations". Apple and AT&T today talked record sales without giving actual numbers.

So how many is "record"? Hell if I know. That's the point. "Record" means nothing without real numbers behind it. Did Apple and AT&T sell 45 iPads? That would be a record if sales were 44 during iPad 2's launch. Perhaps the number is 1 million, which would certainly be sales to boast about -- in just 10 countries. (Please jump to the exciting update below.)

Apple has reason not to reveal numbers today, if it plans to at all before the next earnings report. The company's dividend and repurchase plans are news enough to lift the stock. There's PR advantage to waiting a day or two and getting another lift on real iPad sales figures. Not that shareholders are all that giddy about the $2.65 dividend coming during fiscal 2013 first quarter. Shares are up a modest 2.31 percent in mid-afternoon trading.

Anecdotally, I saw lots of iPads yesterday. While my daughter shopped at Fashion Valley Mall here in San Diego, I walked around talking to a Verizon service rep about a major billing screwup. Easily 30 people passed by carrying new iPads. Around 3 pm PDT, there was a short line outside Apple Store. I asked inside. Some models had sold out, but there were still plenty available.

Around 9:30 this morning, Pacific Time, I called to check availability. White is the popular color. The store rep said that AT&T 4G models in white are sold out in all capacities, as are the 16GB and 32GB WiFi. The store has limited quantities of Verizon 4G iPads in all colors.

Apple started taking preorders on March 7 and new iPad arrived in stores on the 16th in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, Puerto Rico, Singapore, Switzerland, United Kingdon, United States and the US Virgin Islands.

On March 23, iPad store sales will start in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macau, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

I have to ask: Did you buy new iPad? Which one?

Update: Apple released the sales number hours after I posted this story. Unfortunately, I didn't see the announcement until evening. I depend too much on RSS, perhaps. Apple's press release popped way late.

The company says it sold 3 million iPads since launch day, which clearly is a record number. If the RSS timestamp is correct, Apple waited until after market close to reveal the sales figure.

What's not reflected in the number: How many discounted iPad 2s sold over the four days or since Apple cut the price of the 16GB model by $100 on March 7.

Bing Maps is lost on the Internet

Posted: March 19th, 2012, 11:14am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Is Microsoft's Bing having a meltdown? One of my colleagues just alerted me to troubles accessing Bing Maps. He gets an error message, as do two other BetaNews staffers. We're located in different parts of the country using various cable or DSL services. This is not a localized problem.

The outage appears to be broader than Bing Maps. I also can't get to Bing News, while someone else couldn't get Search, which works for me. Colleague Tim Conneally pinged Bing Maps while I wrote the first paragraph and got repeated timeouts. Are you having Bing troubles today?

While I wrote the paragraphs above, colleague Ed Oswald got this notice on the Bing home page: "Bing services aren't available right now. We're working to restore all services as soon as possible. We know you want to get back to searching. Please check back soon".

Now I can't access Bing at all.

Update 1:42 pm EDT: I've got Bing back, as do some of readers. Do you?

Apple will pay dividend, buy back shares

Posted: March 19th, 2012, 7:57am MDT by Joe Wilcox

"We are going to initiate a dividend and share repurchase program", Apple CEO Tim Cook told financial analysts this morning. Late yesterday, Apple announced a surprise 9 am EDT conference call today to discuss what it would do with its nearly $100 billion in cash.

During the September quarter, Apple will start paying a $2.65 dividend, which the company expects will amount to about $10 billion a year. During the December quarter, the Cupertino, Calif.-based tech giant will start the share buy-back program. Apple fiscal 2013 Q1 begins September 30.

Apple shares rose about .95 percent ahead of the announcement and 1.6 percent afterwards but before the opening bell.

Apple's cash horde has been a topic of shareholder concern, particularly since cofounder Steve Jobs died and the company's stunning calendar fourth quarter. Apple ended the quarter with $98 billion in cash, $64 billion outside the United States. "Apple's cash has increased for all the right reasons," CFO Peter Oppenheimer said during the conference call. The company generated $31 billion of the cash last year, $16 billion during fourth calendar quarter (fiscal 2012 Q1).

The amount of cash overseas, and not readily available, is a major concern. Apple expects to utilize about $45 billion of its domestic cash over three years. This morning, Cook said that Apple is satisfied the approach keeps enough cash on hand for running operations and for expansion (which could include acquisitions). The company still plans to open 40 stores during 2012, for example. Neither program affects future Apple product or research and investment plans.

Oppenheimer said Apple chose to use domestic cash to avoid the tax hit associated with that held overseas.

Apple will initiate the cash dividend sometime in July, during fiscal 2012 Q4, with the aforementioned payout coming in the September quarter. Oppenheimer said the dividend "would make us one of the highest dividend payers in the United States".

Apple is initiating the dividend in part to make the stock more attractive to new investors. The repurchase program is more about employees, by neutralizing the impact of equity grants and stock repurchase programs.

There were "17.7 million RSUs that had not vested" at the end of fiscal 2012 Q1, Oppenheimer said. Presumably, Apple employees hold most RSUs, or restricted stock units.

Cook said he is "confident about Apple's future". He touted fourth calendar quarter successes, such as 15.4 million tablets sold. Gartner forecasts 325 million tablet shipments in 2015, he said. "It's just a question of when", Cook said about tablet shipments exceeding PCs.

On Friday, Apple started selling the new iPad in 10 countries. "We had a record weekend, and we're thrilled with it" Cook said.

Why report news the way we do

Posted: March 18th, 2012, 8:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I have a reputation for provocative headlines and affirmative writing style, and this irks some readers. But I, and my colleagues here at BetaNews, strive for accuracy in reporting. You can bitch about tone and disagree with storyline and dispute posts' points. I confidently say that we report responsibly.

Following the lead of my predecessor, Scott M. Fulton, BetaNews steers away from rumor stories and the feeding frenzies that often envelope the news media -- sometimes even when the originating blog or news site is highly trusted. Some of you accuse me of being anti-Apple, but I treated with great caution January reports from "This American Life" and the New York Times about worker abuses at Foxconn factories producing Apple gadgets. The ensuing controversy was opportunity to repeatedly zing Apple, as many sites did -- obviously to drum up pageviews. BetaNews didn't. My agenda is responsible reporting, not standing for or against any company or product. The Mike Daisey scandal proves the wisdom of that policy and spotlights what's wrong with news on the web today.

This Chinese Worker Life

On January 6, esteemed public radio show "This American Life" aired "Mr. Daisey and the Apple Factory" -- its most popular segment ever and one removed from the web last week. Yesterday, TAL aired "Retraction", which followed Friday's stunning blog post by show producer Ira Glass.

For two months, following TAL episode #454 and a New York Times exposé, bloggers and journalists pounded Apple, with a relentless barrage of commentaries and stories about conditions at Foxconn factories. Protesters rallied against Apple, tainting the company's public image at a time of soaring popularity. My problem isn't TAL's report, but the others that followed. The feeding frenzy generally regurgitated what others' reported, rather than obtaining original sourcing. Bloggers and journalists treated hearsay as fact, perpetuating a massive circle-jerk.

But someone did choose to act responsibly. "Marketplace" reporter Rob Schmitz is on the ground in Shanghai, China, and followed up on some of Daisey's claims, leading to the smoking gun -- Daisey's translator during his China trip. Last week, Glass and Schmitz confronted Daisey, who suddenly reversed position and admitted to having exaggerated and even fabricated information.

In "An acclaimed Apple critic made up the details", Schmitz lays it out: "Daisey told 'This American Life' and numerous other news outlets that his account was all true. But it wasn’t".

He lied to BetaNews, too, but long before the TAL segment aired. In April 2011, Larry Seltzer wrote "The crimes of Foxconn, Steve Jobs and ourselves", a riveting review of Daisey's play "The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs", upon which TAL eventually based program #454. Larry used the one-man monologue as mirror for ourselves, but also questioned the veracity of Daisey's claims. (By the way, I republished Larry's review/commentary today with refreshed headline: "The crimes of Foxconn, Mike Daisey and ourselves".) Daisey responded to our April story and others in this blog post, which is more self-indictment in light of this week's confession.

Daisey blogged on Friday: "My show is a theatrical piece...What I do is not journalism. The tools of the theater are not the same as the tools of journalism. For this reason, I regret that I allowed 'This American Life' to air an excerpt from my monologue. 'This American Life' is essentially a journalistic -- not a theatrical -- enterprise, and as such it operates under a different set of rules and expectations".

Right. Accurate reporting is among those expectations and that sources tell the truth when asked if they are. After admitting to at least one undeniable lie, Daisey tells Glass and Schmitz about his monologue: "It’s not journalism. It’s theater".

Today, AllThingsD's Arik Hesseldahl asks my first question in hearing about TAL's retraction: "Who in their right mind would lie to Ira Glass?" Mike Daisey, unbelievably. Glass is a remarkably good, and long-time radio reporter/personality. He, like me, is a 1959er. My first love was, and remains, radio. I got my FCC Third Class license (back when tests were required) at 17, which allowed me to broadcast on air. Point: I can appreciate Glass' passion for the airwaves.

The Daisey debacle puts Glass and "This American Life" in a difficult position. I applaud their retracting the story so vocally and responsibly. Their problem is the risk every journalist faces: That a source will lie to achieve some other objective. In this case Daisey claims his passion about alleged atrocities in China. But surely there is money motive, which is one benefit of the notoriety received from the Apple-Foxconn scandal.

Hands-off Story

At BetaNews we largely stayed away from any hard commentary on this topic. Two stories ran. The first, "We must blame Apple for China", by Ryan Tyler, uses the New York Times report, not the "This American Life" segment, as foundation. The commentary mostly focuses on apologists defending Apple's behavior and logical fallacies of their defenses. I wrote the second, "Apple protestors make me really mad", questioning critics' sincerity and also expressing disgust about "bloggers and journalists looking to profit from the scandal -- riding the buzz to fame (in some cases infamy) and higher pageviews".

Among the reasons BetaNews did no more:

1. We didn't have access to sources in China to accurately report independently about working conditions there.

2. Any stories written about Apple were sure to reflect negatively on a public company, making accurate and responsible reporting and, therefore, reliable sourcing more urgent.

3. BetaNews' policy is to avoid news topic feeding frenzies, particularly when most sourcing is circular, meaning hundreds of reports going back to one or two blogs or news sites and our having no veritable, third-party sourcing.

4. A barrage of heavy pageview driving stories would be morally reprehensible, by exploiting Foxconn workers in yet another way (e.g., profit motive for the posts).

5. BetaNews is a small shop. We have limited resources. We use them as conscientiously as possible. I saw nothing conscientious about joining the anti-Apple chorus, recognizing that many blogs or news sites shift positions with the winds.

Good journalists are mindful of their sourcing, particularly those sources who aren’t identified. Sadly the state of the news media is this: Gossip and rumors rapidly replace factual reporting -- in large part driven by the Google-free economy. Too typically, there is one source, as aforementioned often a single blog post or news story. Using a single source is careless. Referring to another blog or news story as single source is wreckless. Reporting news based on a single, anonymous source is negligence. Re-reporting as fact, or seeming fact, a blog post or news story relying on a single, anonymous source is criminal.

The news feeding frenzies that follow give credence to a report's veracity, even if it's in fact flawed or out and out wrong -- often as is the case with many rumors. Just because everybody says something is true doesn’t make it that way. But often there is presumption of veracity.

"This American Life" is a program with otherwise impeccable reputation for being reliable, trustworthy -- for checking its facts. If TAL can't get it right when trying, how can blogs or news sites that don't?

Rarely a day goes by I'm not upset about the poor quality of news reporting, spurred on by the Google-free economy. The web would be better, we'd all be better informed, if more news organizations had the high journalistic standards of "This American Life". The Mike Daisey story is an aberration, and one TAL is taking responsibility for. There's an important lesson here that sadly I expect few will adopt.

Photo Credit: Andrii Muzyka/Shutterstock

It's an Apple and Microsoft tablet war now

Posted: March 16th, 2012, 12:14pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

The most interesting thing about the new iPad launch in San Diego isn't Apple Store, or people waiting in line there. It's the Microsoft Store down the way. In a brilliant, if overly optimistic, marketing move, the shop opened at 7 am PDT, one hour before Apple Store. The move was perhaps symbolic given the line waiting to buy new iPad, but nevertheless foreshadows competition to come. If you've been off-planet or other-dimension and missed the news, Apple's newest tablet is on sale today in 10 countries.

Two employees set up under a small canopy outside Microsoft Store, showing off tablets running Windows 8 Consumer Preview. New iPad has big resolution on a small screen, but Windows 8 wows more. The OS is fast and fluid -- alive! It's like a living thing. Many BetaNews readers are sour on Metro, but I'm a big fan. The motif is a leap forward in user interface design, while iOS is oh-so been there, done that.

Microsoft marketing for Vista used "Wow" as expression of surprise and delight. That's exactly the reaction Windows 8 generates -- well, on a tablet at least. You gotta utter "Wow". The only wow down the way at Apple Store: The short line waiting to buy new iPad. By the unofficial count, I was No. 121 at 7:35 am PT -- few compared to the hundreds more waiting for iPad 2 a year ago or the many thousands for iPhone 4 in June 2010. Perhaps Apple launches are now passé, or smart people preorder instead. When the doors opened, the number reached 130, and Apple employees had it cleared by 8:30 am.

What surprised me: The seemingly different character of the people waiting. It was a reversion of sorts, in the scariest way. I covered the original iPhone launch, in June 2007, outside Apple Store Montgomery Mall, in Bethesda, Md. What surprised me then: Diversity of the people waiting. Few were geeks at all, and most weren't die-hard Apple fans. Buyers represented a real cross-section of America. I could say the same about the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 launches and a little less iPhone 4S. But this new iPad crowd looked like an Apple Fanclub -- diehards from the era before Apple reached mass-market popularity.

They were so stereotypical, I repeatedly looked around for film crews. This bunch could have been pulled straight from one of Samsung's TV commercials mocking people who wait hours on end to buy the newest Apple thing. Perhaps everyone else was smart enough to preorder. The people in the front of the line waited from about 11 pm PT last night -- no time for Apple hardcores, or compared to earlier iPhone launches.

Microsoft is right to show off Windows 8 on tablets -- to anyone and everyone who will look. If the crowd I saw outside Apple Store is any indication, then anybody is a whole lot of somebodies. I tweeted this morning: "Love it! Smart competition. Microsoft Store here in San Diego opened at 7 -- one hour before Apple Store. It's Windows 8 vs iPad!" Gartner analyst Michael Gartenberg replied: "Except I can't buy Windows 8". He's right about that, but you can download the Consumer Preview to your tablet today. For free.

Still, Apple has a compelling tablet available to buy right now, while Windows 8 slates are holiday debuts at best. Current Windows 7 tablets can run its successor right now. But the compelling hardware, like the Samsung Series 7 demoed outside Microsoft Store this morning, is pricey -- around $1,300, or about $470 more than the costliest iPad (64GB WiFi/4G model). Then there's new iPad's display, which resolution and pixel density outclasses every Windows slate currently available.

Gartenberg claims the "Retina display is a major game changer. Wow". There's that "Wow" again. I agree; 2048 x 1536 resolution makes new iPad a transformative product. Apple will sell many tens of millions before the first Microsoft OEM assembles the first Windows 8 slate on the production line.

It's war, and you are the territory. Judging by the early-store opening this morning, Microsoft is ready to fight -- for mindshare now and market share later. Sigh. If only Microsoft would release its own, branded tablet.

The winner, if there is one, doesn't matter. Fierce competition means better products for you.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Which apps are ready for the new iPad?

Posted: March 15th, 2012, 9:08pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

If you preordered Apple's tablet or will stand in line to buy on March 16, one question surely must come to mind: Which apps will look good on the high-resolution display? According to Apple there are 32, but we know that's a fib. There's at least one more, and its omission stinks of a little dirty competition -- Apple against one of its developer partners.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company opened a new section on the iTunes Store: "Great Apps for the New iPad". Caveat: Apple doesn't explicitly say all the apps support the Retina display, just insinuates. Missing: Kindle 3.0 for iOS, which Amazon announced today. This competitor to Apple's iBooks app/iBookstore is ready for the new iPad's 2048 x 1536 resolution. Apple just isn't ready to let you know about it. Now why is that?

Perhaps it's just an oversight. While I wrote this post, two more apps showed up on the list. Good thing I checked before reporting 30. Newest apps are listed as updated or new on March 16.

Among the 32 apps in the section, only seven are free to download -- and among these only two are totally free. I applaud the approach of updating paid apps or those requiring subscriptions first.

Two years ago, soon after Apple announced but hadn't shipped iPad, I recommended against offering free content. Reasoning: To establish iPad as a more premium brand and also to give publishers one place they could actually charge for content (versus the free web). Instead, there is free content but also a healthy dose of stuff paid for upfront, added to via in-app purchases or available on subscription basis. The balance between free and paid is actually quite good.

The new iPad's Retina display offers a premium over every other tablet available, and it's sensible that developers charging for apps should cash in this benefit. Of course, free stuff will be updated in time. If you already paid for the app, it's a free update anyway.

Among the apps Apple highlights:

Barefoot World Atlas, which released today; $7.99.

Sky Gamblers: Air Supremacy, which also released today; $4.99.

Flight Control Rocket, which also released today; 99 cents.

The Daily, updated today; free to download, subscription required.

Infinity Blade II, updated today; $6.99.

Tweetbot, updated March 13; $2.99.

SketchBook Pro, updated March 14; $4.99.

The Early Edition II, updated today; $4.99.

Mass Effect -- Infiltrator, updated today; $6.99.

Solar Walk -- 3D System Model, updated March 16; $2.99.

Surely the list will grow overnight and over the coming days. Who knows, maybe even Kindle for iOS will appear there.

Windows 8 has an identity crisis

Posted: March 15th, 2012, 11:36am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Two weeks ago I asked: "So, what do you think of Windows 8?" Whoa, did you answer. I saved up your responses until today, when the first new iPad reviews hit and the Apple Fanclub of bloggers and journalists can't seem to write about anything else. Surely there's something better than that. Say, apologists, how did that iPad unboxing video work out for you?

Microsoft enthusiasts know that something better is coming along. Well, it's here right now for eager testers. The Apple Fanclub can have iPad. Many of you want Windows 8. But many BetaNews readers are disappointed, too, with the Consumer Preview released last month. You want your Start Menu back, you bristle at this mixing of touch-oriented Metro with the classic (well not so much anymore) desktop motif and you're concerned there's too much change coming way too fast.

I originally planned to title this story "Windows 8 is a winner", before thoroughly reading your comments. For most of you, as a smooth-performing OS, that characterization is accurate. But Metro and the new Start Screen receive, at best, mixed reaction. Many of you are not loving either. Hence, the final headline, which more reflects the core debate about Windows 8: Is it a PC or tablet operating system? Can it really be both?

Alexei Youditskiy: "Windows 8 is great!"

Harold Teasley "loves" Windows 8. "The interface is clean, useful and informative. Multitasking is very fast on my computer and the switching between Metro and Aero is fast and almost seamless...I love the idea of the operating system presenting me with the tasks I need to get to right on the home screen For those of you who enjoy drilling down through a bunch of icons to find out the weather or if you have emails you need to respond to more power to you".

Hector Macias Ayala: "This is stupid, even from a teenager who's excited to have a friggin' new UI, my whole activity on the PC depended on the Start Menu; everything I do is there, except just for Internet browsing, for which I have three icons in the taskbar, and a completely empty desktop. I hate having any icons there, and Win8 is all about having the stupid screen full of icons, and no wallpaper".

A reader going simply by David comments:

I installed Windows 8 on my laptop. My wife hates me right now, but I am still giving it a go. Many things are hard to find now, but they are there. It seems to me that Metro is a glorified Start Button. You can still get your Start button programs by going to the Charms bar and clicking on search. Scroll left to right to find most of the items in their program folders. Everything is left to right, which takes some getting used to. I also discovered that you can close Metro apps. You have to go to the upper left corner to get the currently open apps bar (like Charms bar on the other side). Right click on the app and click close. Done!

I think everyone is just jumping to conclusions on Windows 8 due to everything being moved around. Right now it takes me longer to do things, but maybe it will be better once I 'tweak' the interface to my liking. Metro is butt ugly compared to my iPhone/iPod Touch. I think this will be great on tablets and phones, but they seriously need to tweak things for the desktop/laptop. Last gripe: Why is the shutdown button hidden under settings in the Charm bar? It should be a little icon on the Metro screen or the Charms bar".

I can answer that one, David, and it also relates to why Microsoft removed the Start button: Windows 8 isn't meant to be regularly shut down.

Eoin Malins sees Metro as "fine for tablets", but "unusable on a desktop computer. I felt so stupid when I had to Google for how to reboot the computer. Whoever thought hovering your mouse in an empty corner of the screen to make a 'Charms' (stupid name) toolbar appear, then make you pick 'settings', 'power', 'reboot' should be slapped. It leaves you feeling like you're playing a poorly written Lucas Arts game".

Earth to Microsoft: No feature should ever make your intelligent users feel stupid. If it's not intuitive, the design is what's stupid.

Commenter tinypocket astutely observes: "If Microsoft really listened to people, we'd probably still have windows 3.1 interface. I remember many people hated the Start button when it first came out. Now, almost 20 years later, they take it away and people start throwing riots".

To reader plasticmonkey007 Metro is "just a giant step backward". Shawn MacLeod has more mixed-opinion, viewing Windows 8 as "useless as a keyboard and mouse OS, but it seems like it would be a pretty good touch-based tablet OS".

"I definitely think there's improvements to be made to make the new interface more mouse-friendly, which hopefully come in the final build, but it isn't as horrible as people make it out to be", tinypocket comments. "At least the performance as an OS I find is much better -- feels more snappy than even Win 7".

A reader going simply by John joins the chorus against mixed Metro and desktop motifs:

Microsoft this message is for you: You should have designed two completely separate new Windows 8 versions, one for desktop/laptop users and another for touch screen/tablet users. By combining the two versions and releasing just one OS, you have failed miserably as the desktop experience is crap, horrible and very frustrating experience. I, and I am sure millions of other users, will never upgrade to your horrible new Windows 8. Unfortunately, you must go back to the drawing board, and fire all the idiots who programmed this piece of shit.

Teasley sees the new UI differently: "Metro saves me loads of time. Metro isn't a bad interface, it just suffers from unsophisticated users who want to stay in the twentieth century. I'd prefer more control over my music and a way to put the tiles in folders, but the flaw isn't in Metro, it's in people who want to let their computers run their lives instead of having the computer package data for me in useful ways".

HornyToad doesn't like Metro, which makes for extra work. "A system that makes you click three or four times to get somewhere when its predecessor would let you get away with one click and/or a press of the Windows key is in regression. In the Developer Preview builds, you could deactivate Metro and revert to the 'old' Windows 7 interface".

Many commenters expressed their want to disable Metro and wonder why there isn't an option to do so. The tactic reminds of Office 2007, which introduced the Ribbon and no way to revert back to the old UI.

HornyToad sees the Metro off-switch provided in the older Developer Preview as a "smart move, especially for the upcoming Enterprise and Professional versions. At work, our IT guys have installed Win8 on several desktops and laptops, usually with lower specs than on my machine, and though the new OS works fine on them, too (albeit slowly), the complicated interface already makes them say they might skip this Windows version and hope that the next will be more enterprise-friendly. (Remember how many professionals did that with Vista too?)"

Nathan Ottenson is "absolutely blown away at how narrow minded so many of the users posting on here are. I was never much of a MSFT fan boy until I got my Windows Phone, and now they continue to blow me away time and time again". That said, "I agree there is a bit of a learning curve involved with picking up Win8, but I'm convinced that all the decision made in regards to navigating the GUI were done thoughtfully".

Expect more of your reaction to Windows 8 in upcoming stories. The Metro-vs-desktop, PC-vs-tablet debate is one you can continue in comments. My main interest: How will the UI change affect your business' plan to deploy Windows 8.

Photo Credits: Fer Gregory/Shutterstock (top); Microsoft (others)

'Siri, who is Frank M Fazio?'

Posted: March 14th, 2012, 10:10pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

I'm appalled by the sudden feeding frenzy about the Siri lawsuit, which was filed last week but only big-time hit the mainstream news yesterday. Now the damn thing is everywhere, and I've been asked to jump on the meat wagon and write something, too. Siri is the iPhone 4S "personal assistant".

It's all so pointless, going after Apple for beta software, about which advertising states "sequences shortened" for Siri's responses. New Yorker Frank M. Fazio is suing Apple because he bought a 32GB iPhone 4S from a Best Buy in Brooklyn on Nov. 19, 2011. Gasp, "plaintiff was exposed to Apple's representations regarding the Siri feature" -- that is according to the legal filing. Siri's alleged crimes: Failing to understand Fazio and giving him the "wrong answer". Apple's alleged misdeed: Misleading and false advertising.

I don't often have the lead party in a lawsuit so close to question. So I ask: "Siri, did you expose yourself to Frank M. Fazio?" To which she answers: "I don't know what you mean..." Mmmm, that could be regarded as a somewhat evasive response.

Fazio "would not have paid the price he paid for the iPhone 4S, if he had not seen these representations", according to the lawsuit. So, what, Siri is the only reason he bought iPhone 4S? Anyone reading this really believe that? I won't excuse my skepticism.

I'm confused. Why didn't Fazio return the phone? The lawsuit reads: "Promptly after the purchase of his iPhone 4S, Plaintiff realized that Siri was not performing as advertised?" Eh, what does, Bud? Stores have return policies for a reason. Did he not keep the receipt? He hasn't heard of eBay? Where iPhone 4S commanded top dollar last November. If Fazio knew "promptly", why didn't he get a refund promptly?

The legal filing presents some of these representations that so influenced the plaintiff -- a few from an Oct. 4, 2011 Apple press release. As a test, I ask Siri a question quoted in the PR: "Will I need an umbrella this weekend?" Siri produces a weather forecast and answers: "Yes, it's likely to rain this weekend". Holy heck, three days rain is coming!

From here, the lawsuit goes astray, and I hope the judge has a good watch and commonsense. The document refers to misleading Siri commercials that, for the most part, aired after Fazio bought iPhone 4S. What is he? A time traveller? Seeing the commercials in the future, they influenced his decision in the past?

"Is time travel possible?" I ask. Siri doesn't know and offers a web search. The first result leads to April 22, 2010 Discovery News story "Is Time Travel Possible?" "The short answer is that time travel into the future is not only possible, it's been done, and we've known about it for over a century", answers theoretical physicist Paul Davies. Oh my, I didn't know that.

I decide it's time for a direct question. "Siri, do you give inaccurate and misleading information?" "I'm sorry, Joe, I'm afraid I can't answer that". Oh? Man, those Apple lawyers are fast. Surely Siri has been instructed by legal counsel not to answer questions about an ongoing lawsuit. ;-)

I change tactics. It's time for a misdirecting question: "Siri, where is Steve Jobs?" There's a tinge of hurt in her response: "Apple doesn't tell me everything, you know".

"What is the distance between San Diego, Calif. and Caribou, Maine" (where I live to my hometown). "Here are the directions to San Diego," Siri responds, displaying a Google Map.

After a response like that I ask: "Siri, do you give people accurate information?" Suddenly, she is defensive: "This is about you, not me".

I'm not giving up that easy. "Who is Frank M. Fazio?" Siri doesn't know -- or won't say. "OK, how about a web search for 'Who is Frank M. Fazio?'"

According to the web search, he practices emergency medicine in Flushing, N.Y. But I've read that Fazio is from Brooklyn. So I ask: "What's the weather forecast for Brooklyn, New York?" "OK, here's the weather forecast for Brooklyn, NY today through this Monday", Siri replies, displaying it.

Mmmm. If Fazio's claim about misleading or inaccurate information is correct, then perhaps the web search found the wrong guy. What's a doctor doing suing Apple anyway? I could understand a lawsuit against a doctor using Siri as a diagnostic tool. Uh-oh, maybe that heartburn really was a heart attack (and Siri got it wrong).

If your Android is one of 1,000, you can stream Netflix

Posted: March 14th, 2012, 5:52pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Who says Android device diversity is bad for developers? There has been lots of blabbering on the InterWebs about fragmentation and how it hurts Android compared to iOS. Not at Netflix, which claims support for about 1,000 different Androids. Yowza!

Fragmentation is real. As of March 5th, 93.9 percent of the install base was on Android 2.x -- 62 percent on Gingerbread (v2.3.x) and 25.3 percent on Froyo (v2.2). Newest version, Ice Cream Sandwich (v4.x) accounts, for just 1.2 percent, and that's nearly six months after release.

Back in November, I decided that "Android fragmentation doesn't matter" and affirmed earlier today it's more a "perception problem". Reasoning: Diversity offers consumers more choice and increases competition among Android OEMs. But it's what developers think of Android that matters more.

Netflix uses a homegrown solution for automating and testing content streaming via its HTML wrapper on hundreds of different Androids. Some devices matter more than others. Amol Kher, engineering manager for Netflix Android, iOS and AppleTV teams, explains:

To put device diversity in context, we see almost around 1000 different devices streaming Netflix on Android every day. We had to figure out how to categorize these devices in buckets so that we can be reasonably sure that we are releasing something that will work properly on these devices. So the devices we choose to participate in our continuous integration system are based on the following criteria.

We have at least one device for each playback pipeline architecture we support (The app uses several approaches for video playback on Android such as hardware decoder, software decoder, OMX-AL, iOMX).

We choose devices with high and low end processors as well as devices with different memory capabilities.

We have representatives that support each major operating system by make in addition to supporting custom ROMs (most notably CM7, CM9).

We choose devices that are most heavily used by Netflix Subscribers.

Netflix can't test for 1,000 devices all the time, and so prioritizes. "We are able to reduce our daily smoke automation devices to around 10 phones and 4 tablets and keep the rest for the longer release wide test cycles".

From that perspective, yes, Android fragmentation is a problem. There is a subset of devices, and Kher doesn't name them, which are more compatible more of the time.

How's Netflix on your Android?

Android rules the world?

Posted: March 14th, 2012, 11:40am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Analysts love to make predictions. It's a no-risk gambit, because the forecasts are years away and nobody remembers if they're wrong. After thrice predicting that Windows Phone would beat out Apple's iOS by 2015, IDC has another for the same year: Android media tablet shipments will exceed iPad. By that reckoning, the firm predicts that Google's mobile OS will dominate the two major cloud-connected -- post-PC, if you insist -- device categories (the other being smartphones).

"As the sole vendor shipping iOS products, Apple will remain dominant in terms of worldwide vendor unit shipments", Tom Mainelli, IDC research director, says. "However, the sheer number of vendors shipping low-priced, Android-based tablets means that Google's OS will overtake Apple's in terms of worldwide market share by 2015. We expect iOS to remain the revenue market share leader through the end of our 2016 forecast period and beyond".

Well, hell, cancel my new iPad order. Give up my place in line outside Apple Store. Why bother if Androids will rule in just three years? Assuming that they will. Most analysts didn't see iPod coming. I remember forecasts showing Windows-powered portable media players would put iPod down. Who rightly anticipated iPhone's ascension? Or iPad's? Hell, even Android forecasts missed the mark.

The question isn't shipments but platform dominance, and they're inseparable. As I explained 17 days ago in long missive, "Apple is winning the platform wars", iOS is gaining rapid momentum. Since then, Apple released some startling numbers:

550,000 iOS apps are available -- 200,000 for iPad. Cough, cough, how many are there for Android tablets?
Apple sold 172 million iOS -- what it calls post-PC -- devices last year.
iOS devices accounted for 76 percent of Apple's 2011 revenues.
Apple sold 54 precent of all iOS devices during 2011.
Sixty-two million iOS devices sold in Q4.

Platform Problems

So does IDC's forecast take into account the larger platform and ecosystem around it? Not in any way that is obvious. So I will. Before Android can rule the world, Google and its partners must overcome some hefty obstacles:

1. Android fragmentation. In November, I proclaimed that "Android fragmentation doesn't matter". It doesn't, except when it does. Android phone manufacturers have done an excellent job customizing the user interface for their smartphones, so that their customized experience matters more than the underly Android version. That's good for competition and differentiation among Android handsets. Choice is good.

Fragmentation is by and large a perception problem, but also one that makes Android less appealing to many developers. Google sends the wrong message to everyone letting its Motorola Mobility subsidiary take as much as a year to update devices to Ice Cream Sandwich. Yeah, that sure instills confidence in the platform.

2. Amazon. Only Amazon has done any meaningful Android customization on tablets, creating a curated experience similar to Apple's. ASUS has carved out a niche for Eee Pad Transformer, but nothing really reaching beyond Android enthusiasts and gamers.

Tablet buyers rewarded Amazon. According to IDC, the retailer shipped 4.7 million Kindle Fires during Q4, jumping to second place market share during the launch quarter. Amazon's continued success is good for driving up Android shipments against iPad, but it's bad broadly. Kindle Fire benefits Amazon and its customers willing to buy into the curated experience but not the expanse of third-party developers or larger Android ecosystem.

Yet Kindle Fire is largely responsible for Android market share gains -- 44.6 percent during fourth quarter, up from 32.3 percent three months earlier, according to IDC. If Android is fragmented now, its future is fractured if a heavily customized version leads the market. During fourth quarter the two leading tablet operating systems were iOS and Amazon's Android, not Google's, with combined share of 71.5 percent. The two most successful tablet platforms offer similar, curated -- apps, ebooks, music, movies and, in the case of Amazon, online physical goods -- experiences.

3. Tablet reference design. During last year's Consumer Electronics Show, I observed: "The most important tablet is missing from CES, and it's not iPad 2". Google needed to take leadership over the Android tablet market 18 months ago. Amazon is filling the vacuum, culling Android and supporting apps to its own benefit, not the ecosystem's.

Google had the right idea with the Nexus line of smartphones, which first two generations set reference designs for Android manufacturers to follow -- and they did. Google has promised a tablet this year, but it's still missing. There needs to be a standard reference -- a baseline -- for Android OEMs.

4. Google device competition. Setting a reference design is harder now that Google owns a hardware manufacturer. Motorola devices put Google in direct competition with its partners. Already, Samsung is looking to beef up homegrown Bada and more broadly support Windows Phone. The South Korean electronics giant also is one of Microsoft's premiere partners for Windows tablets (see #8 for more).

5. Google integration. Since Larry Page returned as CEO in April 2011, Google has dramatically increased cross-integration of products and services, with +1, Google+ and "Search Plus Your World" among obvious examples. They touch just about everything Google does. But cross-integration is much broader and is glaring in Android 4.0.

By gluing its products and services to Android, Google lowers the appeal to third-party app developers. Some will argue Apple does the same with iOS, but it's lesser degree and nowhere as important. Google search arguably is a necessary utility, for example.

6. Antitrust spectre. All this integration, along with privacy issues, is drawing antitrust fire on two continents. The US Federal Trade Commission has subpoenaed Apple and others regarding its Google investigation.

Microsoft's US antitrust case stifled the company's innovation for more than a decade. Google could find itself in similar straights, which could negatively affect the Android platform during a crucial time of expansion.

7. Android tax. Microsoft now collects patent licensing fees from all major Android manufacturers but Motorola (okay, now Google). Apple is looking to collect duties on Android devices, too. According to sources speaking to Dow Jones, Apple offered to settle Motorola and Samsung patent litigation with one term being $15 fee per device -- that's as much as Microsoft is rumored to get.

The Android tax poses margin problems for manufacturers looking to release lower-cost tablets -- to reach the coveted $199 price Amazon commands today. That's harder if an Android OEM pays, say, $25 per device to Apple and Microsoft.

IDC's forecast is based in part on the assumption that low-cost Android devices will proliferate during the forecast period. That's less likely if more OEMs pay the Android tax or it increases.

8. Windows 8. IDC ignores Windows 8 and Windows on ARM, which Google can't. Like Gartner, the analyst firm separates tablets running the likes of Android, BlackBerry OS and iOS from those running Windows. IDC considers Windows tablets to be PCs. Surely the forecast would look quite different otherwise.

Microsoft's new operating systems are sure to pull away interest in so-called media tablets running Android or iOS. That's a bigger problem in context of the aforementioned 7 things.

One Thing is Certain

Interest in tablets is exploding. Shipments rose 155 percent year over year in Q4 -- up 56.1 percent from third quarter, according to IDC. For the year, manufacturers shipped 68.7 million tablets, the majority from Apple. Growth is so strong, IDC raised its 2012 forecast to 106.1 million units from 87.7 million. For 2016: 198.2 million tablets, which presumably is too low based on recent IDC mobile device forecasts.

ChangeWave says that 22 percent of enterprises plan to buy tablets during second quarter, with the majority overwhelmingly planning on iPad. That's 84 percent, up from 77 percent in November. Meanwhile, interest in all competing tablets declined.

Gartner claims that the cloud will replace the PC as center of people's digital lives by 2014. Smartphones and tablets lead the way.

The larger question is platform viability, and which one(s) dominate. It's too early to call Android, or even iOS, the one that rules.

March Madness: Win an Ultrabook

Posted: March 13th, 2012, 1:23pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

BetaNews is pleased to be a media sponsor of Newegg's March Mania Ultrabook-a-Day Giveaway, starting today and going for 21. Each day the tech retailer, in cooperation with Intel, will award one lucky winner an Acer Aspire S3-951-6646, ASUS Zenbook UX21E-DH52 or Lenovo IdeaPad U300s Ultrabook.

Why just watch March Madness when you can get a little crazy trying to win one of these sleek Ultrabooks?

"We are delighted to partner with Intel to offer slam dunk brands such as Acer, ASUS and Lenovo as giveaways for our sweepstakes", Bob Bellack, Newegg North America CEO, says.

"College basketball fans will find that the only thing more amazing than the Ultrabook is what they’ll do with it" Steve Peterson, Intel North America retail marketing manager, says.

Acer Aspire S3-951-6646 quick specs: 1.6GHz Intel Core i5 2467M processor; 13.3-inch display (with 1366 x 768 resolution); 4GB DDR3 memory; Intel HD Graphics 3000; 20GB SSD and 320GB 5400-rpm hard drive; 1.3MP WebCam; two USB ports; one HDMI port; WiFi N; Bluetooth 4; 3-cell battery; and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. Weighs: 2.98 pounds. Newegg sells the laptop for $799.99.

ASUS Zenbook UX21E-DH52 quick specs: 1.6GHz Intel Core i5 2467M processor; 11.6-inch display (with 1366 x 768 resolution); 4GB DDR3 memory; Intel HD Graphics 3000; 128GB SSD; .3MP WebCam; two USB ports; one micro-HDMI port; WiFi N; Bluetooth 4; 6-cell battery; and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. Weighs: 2.43 pounds. Newegg sells the laptop for $999.99.

Lenovo IdeaPad U300s quick specs: 1.8GHz Intel Core i7-2677M processor; 13.3-inch display (with 1366 x 768 resolution); 4GB DDR3 memory; Intel HD Graphics 3000; 256GB SSD; 1.3MP WebCam; two USB ports; one HDMI port; WiFi N; Bluetooth 3; 4-cell battery; and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. Weighs: 2.91 pounds. Newegg sells the laptop for $1,499.99.

Contest rules: Open to anyone 18 years or older living in the District of Columbia or any US state other than Rhode Island. Prospective participants go to the sweepstakes website and submit one entry. Newegg will award the Acer Ultrabook during week one, the ASUS during week two and the Lenovo during the final 7 days.

Ultrabook is a fairly new category of slim-and-light portables. Intel introduced the concept in May 2011. Lenovo announced Ideapad 300s in September; Acer the S3 in October; and ASUS the Zenbook also in October.

PC shipments fell sharply in 2011, and Gartner predicts paltry 4.4 percent growth for this year. The analyst firm sees Ultrabooks as one vehicle for reviving sales.

Okay, I appreciate your attention, but why are you still reading? Please enter the contest -- and good luck!

Photo Credit: Solvod/Shutterstock

Enterprises want iPad

Posted: March 13th, 2012, 9:42am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Microsoft had better hop to it and release Windows 8, because iPad adoption among enterprises is way up -- and that's without Apple really trying to sell tablets there.

Bolstering a January IDG Connect Study, ChangeWave finds that one in five businesses will buy a tablet next quarter, with the majority overwhelmingly planning on iPad. That's 84 percent, up from 77 percent in November. Meanwhile, interest in all competing tablets declined.

ChangeWave conducted the buying survey before Apple announced the new iPad, last week, which means the percentage might even be higher, given the new model's compelling, high-resolution display and $100 price cut on older, 16GB iPad 2.

Apple's gain comes with great pain for iPad competitors. "The impending release of the new iPad is also having an impact on business purchases of tablets made by other manufacturers", according to ChangeWave. The survey of 1,604 business IT purchasers "shows an across-the-board decline in next quarter buying of tablets from other manufacturers".

Buying plans for Samsung tablets fell two points to 8 percent. "Other tablet manufacturers showing a decline in corporate tablet share since the previous survey include H-P (4 percent; down 1-pt), Asus (3 percent; down 1-pt), Dell (3 percent; down 2-pts), and RIM/Blackberry (3 percent; down 2-pts)".

Surprising: Amazon ranks No. 3 behind Samsung. For what purpose would any enterprise want Kindle Fire?

The findings come a day after a bold prediction from Gartner: By 2014, the cloud will replace the PC as the "center of users' digital lives". The PC will remain; it simply won't be the hub. "Users will use a collection of devices, with the PC remaining one of many options, but no one device will be the primary hub", Steve Kleynhans, Gartner research vice president, says. "Rather, the personal cloud will take on that role. Access to the cloud and the content stored or shared in the cloud will be managed and secured, rather than solely focusing on the device itself".

The point: Enterprises are the key to change. They also happen to be Microsoft's core market. Every iPad, or other tablet, sold today is one Windows 8 or Windows on ARM devices won't see tomorrow. There's a general consensus among BetaNews commenters that Microsoft will retake the enterprise from cloud-connected devices after Windows 7 successors ship. But enterprises adopt new technologies slowly. That works for Windows PCs when enterprises sit tight or take their time evaluating something else. The behavior will work against Microsoft and its partners for businesses already deploying tablets -- and that really means iPad.

Remember, Windows 8 tablets are, at best, a fourth-quarter reality. Does your enterprise wait on what might come or what's available -- and good enough -- today?

Those businesses adopting iPads today are undergoing behavioral changes affecting PCs. "Fully 51 percent of IT and business decision-makers say they always use their iPad at work", according to IDG Connect. Sixteen percent have replaced their laptop with an iPad and 54 percent supplement it.

"Could a tablet 'completely replace' a PC or laptop for some users?", BetaNews reader crawdiddle asks, in response to the IDG Connect findings. "Of course it could. Some people, even many inside of corporations, don't have to run enterprise Windows apps and can get by having email access, web access, and something to read office documents. When the dust settles, some may find a tablet too restricting and choose from the other closely related 'lower end' computing devices like netbooks or ultra books".

Robert Johnson adds: "I use an iPad at work. But honestly, there are a ton of iPads around here and there's just not a ton you can do on them. It really is a device primarily for consumption but you have to jump through hoops to use it otherwise. From my experience, MS should have no problem in the enterprise. Consumers? That's a different story".

Perhaps, but there are plenty of consumption uses in business. What happens when enterprises start developing in-house apps for iOS -- not just for iPads but iPhones? Please answer in comments; I reserve mine for another post.

Photo Credit: leungchopan/Shutterstock

Rest in Peace, PC: 1975-2014

Posted: March 12th, 2012, 1:15pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Today, Gartner made a bold prediction about changing computing eras, claiming that the cloud will replace the PC as the "center of users' digital lives" by 2014. Welcome to the cloud-connected device era.

The implications are staggering, if Gartner is right, and keep in mind the firm's core customers are enterprises not consumers -- hence the audience for this staggering prediction, which isn't so unbelievable. Computing and informational relevance has been shifting away from the PC to cloud-connected devices for nearly a decade. I started earnestly talking and writing about it in 2005, when still an analyst at Jupiter Research. Like other trends, this one started slowly and now accelerates quickly.

"Major trends in client computing have shifted the market away from a focus on personal computers to a broader device perspective that includes smartphones, tablets and other consumer devices", Steve Kleynhans, Gartner research vice president, says. "Emerging cloud services will become the glue that connects the web of devices that users choose to access during the different aspects of their daily life".

Shifting Relevancy

The PC's relevance is rapidly diminishing, keeping with a long-standing trend of technological displacement -- a centuries old and fairly consistent phenomenon. Something new comes along and erodes interest in something else. The pace is slow at first reaching a crescendo, where there is a dramatic shift to the new from the old occurring within a short time span. Some older technologies continue for a time and disappear, while many others remain but in new niches. Some recent, and not-too-hard-to-grasp, examples:

Cottage industries and factories
Horse drawn carriages and trains
Trains and automobiles
Telegraphs and telephones
Mainframes and PCs
Digital music downloads and CDs

As I explained in February 2011 post "The PC era is over" and May 2010 analysis "The Windows era is over", the personal computer won't disappear just diminish in relevance. But we're reaching a point of rapid change, much like the PC and mainframes in the 1980s.

Computing and informational relevance shifted from the mainframe to the PC in part because of lower costs and greater availability. PCs cost much less than mainframes and made information more available, essentially more mobile, to more people. Similar transition is happening today, as cloud-connected mobile devices make more information available to more people in more places than do PCs. Computing and informational relevance is shifting once again. The mainframe didn't go away because of the PC era, the mainframe's relevancy simply declined. The PC won't go away, even though this story has a R.I.P. headline, but it's relevancy is declining -- and at accelerating pace. Enterprise adoption of cloud-connected device services is the tipping point.

"In this new world, the specifics of devices will become less important for the organization to worry about", Kleynhans says. "Users will use a collection of devices, with the PC remaining one of many options, but no one device will be the primary hub. Rather, the personal cloud will take on that role. Access to the cloud and the content stored or shared in the cloud will be managed and secured, rather than solely focusing on the device itself".

Trends Accelerating Change

In its assessment of changing relevancy, Gartner identifies five trends:

1. Consumerization of IT, which while a hot, current topic, has been going on almost as long as I've written about technology. The difference: More of the workforce is technologically savvy and demands better tech to get the job done.

Problem I see: Workers are killing themselves, by further blurring the line between home and work time and putting themselves in a role of always being available.

2. Virtualization accelerates the transition from the legacy PC era to its cloud-connected device successor. Enterprises can move forward without being held back by past investments.

3. Big data. In the PC era, software applications define businesses' technology investment. The cloud-connected era is information-centric, which is exposed cross-platform across many different devices regardless of applications. Data, and access to it, matters more.

4. Self-service cloud, which provides users more control over how they manage information and more access to it. Gartner says the "impacts for IT infrastructures are stunning".

5. Anytime, anywhere, on-anything informational access is just too compelling. The cloud solves security and privacy problems businesses face today, as workers haul confidential information on laptops and other mobile devices outside the firewall's confines. Meanwhile there is commingling of personal and professional data on PCs, smartphones and tablets. The cloud fixes that problem, too, and allows businesses to maximize their return on investment across multiple devices.

In the Year 2005

Perhaps it's no coincidence that 2005, the year Microsoft originally planned to release Windows Vista, marks the beginning of dramatic changes affecting the PC's future relevance. Many of the most popular, disruptive technologies in use today didn't exist before YouTube opened to the public in November 2005. Google bought the service 11 months later. In August 2005, Google bought Android; while seemingly innocuous then, it is hugely important to cloud-connected devices today. Google activates 850,000 Androids everyday.

In 2006, Facebook opened to the public and Twitter launched. Nearly all popular cloud services followed. Then came iPhone in June 2007, Apple's app store in July 2008, the first Android phone later that year followed by Chrome 1.0. Today, Facebook is the leading social network (with 850 million users); iPhone is the top-selling smartphone; Android is the global leading smartphone OS; and Chrome is the No. 3 most-used web browser. All this happened since 2005.

"Many call this era the post-PC era, but it isn't really about being 'after' the PC, but rather about a new style of personal computing that frees individuals to use computing in fundamentally new ways to improve multiple aspects of their work and personal lives", Kleynhans says. He is absolutely right. I've called the so-called post-PC era the cloud-connected device era since 2006. The personal computer is but one of the devices, rather than the central one. The cloud matters more.

I explained the importance to enterprises in March 2008 post "Do IT simply with sync". Synchronization is the glue sticking together the cloud and devices. Since that post, Apple, Google and Microsoft all advanced mature sync platforms.

Last week I asked: "Does iPad make the PC obsolete?" The new iPad, with its high-resolution display, is a metaphor for all cloud-connected devices. It's a symbol for how non-PC devices increase in relevance, as the PC diminishes.

You can believe Gartner or not. I'm a believer -- long ago.

Photo Credit: Fer Gregory/Shutterstock

You're not buying the new iPad, but somebody is

Posted: March 12th, 2012, 9:56am MDT by Joe Wilcox

If you want Apple's third-generation tablet, retail is the only option short of waiting. Apple Store Online now lists shipping date as two to three weeks. Pre-orders started March 7, with the new iPad coming to stores in 10 countries this Friday. Did you miss out?

For the majority of you, not at all. Last week I asked BetaNews readers "Will you buy the new iPad?" As of this morning, 54.56 percent had answered "No". That is from a small sample size, just 482 responses, which is atypical for buying polls and low compared to the story's pageviews. To me that says: So many of you are so uninterested in the new iPad, you couldn't be bothered to respond.

Just 28.35 percent of you preordered, with another 12.24 percent planning to do so within 3 months of the March 16 release date. Now might be a good time to think about ordering, given delays. Another 6.85 percent will order within 6 months or longer; surely Apple will have cleared the backlog by then.

A buddy of mine pre-ordered the 16GB WiFi white iPad and received shipment notice email on Saturday. He's golden, and likely to receive his tablet by March 16. He pre-ordered last Wednesday, hours after Apple announced the new iPad.

New iPad specs: A5X dual-core processor (clockspeed not given by Apple); 9.7-inch LED display with 2048 x 1536 resolution; 1GB (unconfirmed) RAM; 16GB, 32GB or 64GB internal memory; 5-megapixel camera; 1080p video recording and playback; accelerometer; ambient light sensor; compass; gyroscope; GPS; Bluetooth 4.0; WiFi A/N; HSPA+, 4G LTE (on some models); 11,666 mAh battery (unconfirmed); iOS 5.1. Dimensions and weight: 7.31 x 9.5 x .37 inches and 1.44 pounds (1.46 pounds with 4G radio).

High-res, Low-brow

New iPad's big change is the high-resolution display, supported by beefier battery and faster cellular data. "Can't remember ever looking at my iPad 2 and thinking 'Gee I wish it had higher resolution", RCS_hkt comments "The limitation for doing productive work, that I currently do on my desktop (with dual 24-inch displays) is the small screen size, not the resolution".

Reader KK is hot for the new display: "What are tablets other than big screens? The essence of the tablet is its screen. The New iPad has almost absurd resolution and there will only be a bit of optimized content available initially, but there can be no doubt that it's going to be a stellar experience". KK "did order an iPad 3 because I simply can't wait to experience that screen".

KK is upgrading from iPad 2. "I purchased the first XOOM and loved it. I tweaked and geeked it without respite. At Xmas, I was given an iPad 2 and the XOOM was given away soon after. The eco-system, OS, and total experience was so far superior that I forgot about all the tweaks I enjoyed making on my XOOM".

But among BetaNews readers responding to the buying question, KK was the exception, not the rule. Reader flamencoguy is "waiting for ASUS Transformer TF700T". John Crane has a "XOOM now, and will probably buy something from Samsung in a couple years".

Apple's 3rd-generation tablet is in stores March 16, 2012. Will you buy the new iPad?

Commenter vincentw56: "Nope"; trparky: "No, because Apple made it. Long live Android".

Meanwhile, capncoad is "pretty happy with my $80 HP Touchpad running ICS. Don't think i'll be caring about a new tablet for a few years. Pricing for iPads are simply too expensive for what I'd use it for". Ice Cream Sandwich on TouchPad? Delicious!

Ebay, Away!

Reacer benjitek preordered, "and I won't sleep much until it arrives ;-). I'm upgrading from a 64GB 3G/WiFi iPad 2 -- and am glad I opted for that model. Even though the 2 is sticking around as the cheaper Apple tablet alternative, the 64GB models are being phased out and 32GB will be the upper limit.Should help on eBay".

Concurrent with the new tablet's announcement, Apple lowered the price on 16GB WiFi iPad 2 to $399 and the 3G model to $529. Owners looking to unload smaller-capacity iPad 2s likely won't find their resale value as high as the original tablet. Still, they're not bad. This morning on eBay, used 16GB WiFi black iPad 2s averaged around $315. 64GB 3G/WiFi black iPad 2: $525 in auctions ending soon.

"Nope, have iPad 2", Gene Vincent answers. "It's fine. Only use it to lie in bed and browse the Internet. I take it with me when going out of town to check email and websites. Great for that. Will want to take a look at a Windows 8 tablet but definitely no iPad 3".

He's not alone. From comments to many BetaNews stories, lots of you are holding out for Windows 8 tablets.

"My dream machine I'm waiting for is a 12-inch tablet that runs full Win 8 plus can run Android through emulation or dual boot, and with a keyboard case for extended traveling", RCS_hkt explains. "That would replace my iPad 2 and my laptop".

Got something to add? At the least, please answer the poll.

Is $399 iPad 2 cheap enough for you?

Posted: March 11th, 2012, 3:05pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Last week, Apple lowered the price of iPad 2 16GB WiFi by $100 to $399 and the 3G model to $529. The move follows a pattern established for iPhone; during this release cycle 3GS is free and 4 is $99.

My question: Is $399 iPad 2 cheap enough for you? Cheap refers to price, not quality, although you're welcome to debate the latter in comments.

I got to thinking more about the price cut yesterday, while my wife and I shopped for a new Kindle Fire case. Not long ago, the local Best Buy had cell phones front and center as shoppers walked through the door. Recently, the store shifted handsets to the left and put tablets in this primo location.

Yesterday, the phone and computer sections were virtual wastelands, while buyers buzzed around tablets like busy bees fleeting to and from Spring flowers sampling the nectar.

By far, lower-cost models -- many also smaller -- drew most of the activity. During my 30 minutes in the store, not one person stopped to look at iPad 2 or Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. Best Buy sells WiFi 16GB models for $399.99 -- that's reductions on both. Actually, the electronics retailer has dropped the price on others, too. The 32GB models are now $499.99. Same is true of Sony S. Suddenly $400 is the new $500 for 9.7-inch or larger tablets at Best Buy.

But, again, shoppers buzzed around lower-cost, often smaller, tablets. I can't say whether it was more about price or size, but I expect both. Obviously, a half hour watching tablet shoppers in one Best Buy store is no measure of anything. A bit more revealing: According to Best Buy Online, the top-selling tablets are Kindle Fire ($199.99) and black iPad 2 16GB. The majority of tablets available in store cost $349.99 or more, with $399.99 the aforementioned new sweet spot.

Last September, I asked "Is $199 the right price for tablets?" after Amazon announced Kindle Fire. The poll is still open, and it's embedded below if you'd like to vote. Among the 2,172 respondents so far to poll question "What price would be low enough for you to buy a media tablet?" only 4.79 percent answered $399. By comparison: 12.38 percent, $299; 26.89 percent, $199. Fifty three point six eight percent responded $199 or lower.

On March 7, 2012, Apple lowered price on its older tablet by $100. Would you pay $399 for iPad 2?

Best Buy certainly offers plenty of tablets selling for less than $200. Among them: Archos 70b; Barnes & Noble Nook; Cody Kyros; Le Pan TC970; Lenovo iPad A1; and Skytex SKYPAD Alpha2.

Tablet competition is dramatically increasing and pulling away interest from PCs, and retailers like Best Buy are stocking up Androids, BlackBerries and iPads. "The use of applications such as email, social networking and Internet access, that were traditionally the domain of the PC, are now being used across media tablets and smartphones, making these devices in some cases more valued and attractive propositions", Ranjit Atwal, Gartner research director, says.

Last week, Gartner forecast that 2012 PC shipments would grow just 4.4 percent year-over-year, and that's off a weak comparison. IDC calls 2011 the worst year for PC shipments in a decade. Over the last four quarters or so, Gartner -- and IDC, for that matter -- have consistently over-estimated PC shipments. So that growth number is likely too high.

What price would be low enough for you to buy a media tablet?

Of course, there is a kind of calm in the PC market ahead of Windows 8's expected autumn launch. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows 8 PCs take that front-and-center spot at my local Best Buy come the holidays. But for now, tablets are the new fad, and the question: Is $399 iPad 2 cheap enough for you?

Some BetaNews readers already have expressed opinions. iPad 2 is "still way over-priced for what you get", Anthony Clark comments. ToeKnee: "Very cool, but really wanted $299".

Commenter Douglas agrees. "That's what I was hoping too. I knew we wouldn't see $199, but I thought $299 was within reason. I still haven't purchased a tablet, simply because the functions I'd want it for just don't justify the price. I'm afraid I don't think $399 will change my mind".

Woe: "Apple just -- Samsunged Android tablets".

Please answer the question in comments below. If you are interested in another tablet, or recently bought one, please share that, too.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Does iPad make the PC obsolete?

Posted: March 9th, 2012, 10:36am MST by Joe Wilcox

The question is really about the "new iPad" that Apple launched earlier this week. I say "Yes", for many people needing to upgrade their computers. Many of you will answer "No". Who is right?

The new iPad is a transformative device, extending on the disruption caused by the original model in April 2010 and its successor a year ago. The 2048 x 1536 resolution display is main reason. For many people, the new iPad will offer the best computer screen they can afford, and, if they get a 4G model, one that is always connected. New iPad is the poster child for the cloud connected-device era.

Imagine the creative and consumption possibilities of greater-than-HD display on a connected, whether cellular or WiFi, portable device. The high-res display widely opens up the tablet's utility for education, healthcare and publishing -- and every other vertical where portability and high resolution is a marriage of opportunity.

The new iPad puts tremendous pressure on Microsoft as it preps Windows 8 and Windows on ARM for future tablet sales -- as in holiday 2012 the earliest. Nothing running Android competes, or likely will for at least the next 12 months. Unquestionably, many people needing to upgrade PCs won't. They'll choose new iPad instead.

Chilling PC Sales

Many PC owners already chose one of the first two models, which along with smartphones are chilling PC sales. "The use of applications such as email, social networking and Internet access, that were traditionally the domain of the PC, are now being used across media tablets and smartphones, making these devices in some cases more valued and attractive propositions", Ranjit Atwal, Gartner research director, says.

Yesterday, Gartner offered a bleak forecast for 2012 PC shipments: 4.4 percent year-over-year growth, and that's off a weak comparison since 2011 disappointed -- the worst year in a decade, says IDC.

"PC shipments will remain weak in 2012, as the PC market plays catch up in bringing a new level of innovation that consumers want to see in devices they purchase", Atwal says. Consider this: Gartner's forecast takes into account two sweeping changes coming to the traditional PC market this year: Ultrabooks and Windows 8 -- and still the forecast is tepid.

"The real question is whether Windows 8 and ultrabooks will create the compelling offering that gets the earlier adopter of devices excited about PCs again", Atwal says.

Thirteen months ago today, I declared: "The PC era is over". Being over doesn't mean dead. It's a transition, with the PC's relevance declining before cloud-connected devices. The PC will be with us for years, it just won't be as important as other devices. New iPad will be the star child for at least the next two quarters and capitalizes on changing behavioral trends.

"Consumers will now look at a task that they have to perform, and they will determine which device will allow them to perform such a task in the most effective, fun and convenient way. The device has to meet the user needs not the other way round", Atwal says. Smartphones and tablets are more task-oriented devices than the traditional PC.

Even Microsoft now tacitly acknowledges that the PC era is over. What is Windows 8 or Windows on ARM all about? The Metro UI they share is optimized for touchscreen interfaces for portable devices. Windows on ARM is the future of Microsoft operating systems, and will transcend the traditional PC. Windows 8 is a lifeline to those individuals and businesses that need support for legacy applications, hardware and behavior, while providing a way, through Metro, to what Apple calls the "post-PC era". I call it the cloud-connected device era.

Microsoft will contribute to the decline of the traditional PC, which "will face more competition as we see new media tablets based on operating systems from Android and Microsoft, as well the new iPad", Atwal says. New iPad is here March 16.

Apple's New Crop

For Apple, the transition to the cloud-connected device era has brought breathtaking transformation. During fiscal first quarter 2012, iPhone generated nearly as much revenue as all Apple did in fiscal 2007 ($24.42 billion to $24.58 billion) -- the year the smartphone launched. During the same quarter, Apple revenue topped that for all of fiscal 2009 ($46.33 billion to $42.91 billion).

In June 2007, I stood outside the Apple Store Montgomery Mall in Bethesda, Md., with people waiting to purchase the first iPhone. A buyer named Steve told me: "I think this is a day that you're going to see a change in how computers, how handheld computers are done. It's a little marketing history. I'm seeing it that way...I think we'll look back in 10 or 15 years, and like on that day the gadget came out -- same thing with iPod -- it changed the game".

Chris, Steve and Eddie wait to buy first iPhone, June 2007

I appreciated the sentiment, but didn't really believe it. iPhone buyer Steve was right about the transformation and the looking back to it, just not the time period. iPhone was the top-selling smartphone in 2011, according to Gartner, a feat Apple accomplished in less than four years, entering the market from scratch. Apple followed iPhone with the App Store (in July 2008) and iPad (April 2010). The rest really is history, culminating in 25 billion app downloads over the weekend and 62 million iOS devices sold just in fourth quarter, according to Apple CEO Tim Cook.

Apple sold 172 million iOS devices during calendar 2011. By my math, considering 315 million cumulative sales, Apple sold 54.6 percent of all iOS devices in a single year, which indicates considerable accelerated momentum. Stated differently, according to Cook, iOS devices accounted for 76 percent of Apple revenues last year. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company already has moved to the cloud-connected device era.

Apple's success will quake other markets. Today IHS iSuppli forecast that media tablets would be fourth-largest consumer of semiconductors by 2014 -- that's up from 35th in 2010.

"Driven primarily by Apple’s iPad, the media tablet in four years is expected to scale semiconductor heights that took more than a decade for other products to attain, such as notebook PCs and cellphones", Dale Ford, head of IHS iSuppli electronics and semiconductor research, says. "This meteoric ascension will have major repercussions for the global semiconductor industry, as it realigns to accommodate the fast growth and vast size of the media tablet market".

Based on revenue, that would put media tablets just behind desktop PCs, but far behind laptops.

Intimacy is Why

How is iPad driving such industry change? Intimacy is part of tablets' appeal, something I failed to grok when Apple announced the original iPad in January 2010. Days before, I opined: "The world doesn't need an Apple tablet, or any other". Six months later, after actually using the device, came my mea culpa: "I was wrong about Apple iPad".

I made the change not because of any sales figures (Apple hadn't released any) but experience. I surprisingly found the experience using iPad to be intimate and reading to be immersive. Part of this immersive experience is the technology, but also how iPad is used. Apple's tablet is a sit down and focus device, as much because of size and shape as screen and user interface. The totality -- physical design and software benefits -- is immersion.

As I've repeatedly expressed: The best user interface is you. Human beings are tool users who experience and manipulate the world through five senses. Hands and fingers are important because they are active -- they’re how people tactilely manipulate the world around them. Touch is hugely important, and makes tablets more personal, the experience more intimate. The finger and touch are more natural, because they extend you. Good user interfaces build on the familiar -- and there is nothing more familiar than me, myself and I.

I predict that new iPad's high-resolution display will appeal as much for increasing intimacy and immersion as extending the device's utility to businesses. Many people will, by comparison, see their PCs as old, archaic -- like the cell phone to their landline -- obsolete, unnecessary. People still use landlines -- they haven't gone away. They're just not as relevant, and as relevancy decreases so does usage.

iPad will make the PC obsolete, or lead the way to it. Microsoft is following along with Metro on Windows 8 and Windows on ARM. It's no longer a question of if but when.

Photo Credits: Biehler, Michael/Shutterstock (top); Joe Wilcox (middle); Apple (bottom)

Will you buy the new iPad?

Posted: March 8th, 2012, 10:30am MST by Joe Wilcox

I just gotta ask. Apple launched the "new iPad" yesterday, with unexpected branding. It's not "3" or "HD", as rumored, just "new". Preorders started less than 24 hours ago, with the tablet coming to stores (or by FedEx to your home or office) on March 16th or 23rd, depending on where you live. Will you buy? Or perhaps you preordered already?

The new iPad's compelling feature is the high-resolution display, which is 2048 x 1536. That is better than 1080p HD (1900 x 1080). The models with cellular radios offer either faster HSPA+ or 4G LTE -- the latter of which won't be available from all carriers in all markets. Pricing is unchanged, as I expected. Apple typically offers more rather than sells for less. It's tradition. Prices range from $499 to $829. Is that low enough for you? Are the features compelling enough?

Please answer in comments, also explaining why or why not you will buy the new iPad. To help with the process, I've collected some specs and offer some for two other HSPA+/LTE tablets. iPad's big advantage over the Android competition is commitment. You will be asked to make one -- up to 24-months of data service. None is required with iPad. The 4G radio is there, but the user chooses to buy service rather than is compelled to.

So for example: The Motorola XYBOARD 10.1 is, except for display resolution and roaming radios, reasonably comparable to the new iPad. Verizon sells the 16GB model for $529.99 and the same capacity iPad for $629. However, Verizon requires a 24-month data contract for the Android tablet. Assuming the $30 month/2GB plan, that adds $720 to the price and makes upgrading to a newer tablet harder later (since you're locked into the contract).

Thirteen months ago, I posted: "The real reason Android tablets don't stand a chance against iPad -- onerous monthly data fees". Nothing has changed, other than carriers and competitors learning little from their mistakes.

I followed up in December with "Cellular data contracts doom Android tablets", based on stunning research conducted by NPD showing a spike in the percentage of consumers buying WiFi-only tablets. One major reason: Onerous data contracts. Another: Many buyers don't perceive the advantage of having a cellular radio. That makes Apple's way -- of offering 3G or 4G radio with optional data plan -- more sensible.

But, of course, WiFi-only Androids are available contract-free, and that's perhaps where comparisons might prove most interesting.

Three Tablets Compared

iPad: A5X dual-core processor (clockspeed not given by Apple); 9.7-inch LED display with 2048 x 1536 resolution; 1GB (unconfirmed) RAM; 16GB, 32GB or 64GB internal memory; 5-megapixel camera; 1080p video recording and playback; accelerometer; ambient light sensor; compass; gyroscope; GPS; Bluetooth 4.0; WiFi A/N; HSPA+, 4G LTE (on some models); 11,666 mAh battery (unconfirmed); iOS 5.1. Dimensions and weight: 7.31 x 9.5 x .37 inches and 1.44 pounds (1.46 pounds with 4G radio).

Pricing: 16GB WiFi, $499; 32GB WiFi, $599; 16GB WiFi and 4G, $629; 64GB WiFi, $699; 32GB WiFi and 4G, $729; 64GB WiFi and 4G, $829.

Motorola Droid XYBOARD 10.1: 1.2GHz dual-core processor; 10.1-inch display with 1280 x 800 resolution; 1GB of RAM; 16GB, 32GB or 64GB internal memory; 5-megapixel back-facing and 1.3-megapixel front-facing cameras; 720p video recording; 1080p video playback; HDMI and USB 2.0 ports; stylus; accelerometer; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; WiFi A/N; Bluetooth 2.1+EDR; 4G LTE; 7,000 mAh battery; Android 3.2 (Honeycomb). Dimensions and weight: 6.8 x 9.9 x 0.34 inches and 1.3 pounds.

Pricing, with WiFi and LTE, from Verizon: 16GB, 32GB or 64GB -- $529.99, $629.99 and $729.99, respectively. Without 2-year contract commitment: $699.99, $799.99 and $899.99, respectively.

Samsung Galaxy Tab 2: 1 GHz dual-core processor; 10.1-inch WXGA display with 1280 x 800 resolution; 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage; microSD slot (up to 32GB additional storage); 3-megapixel rear-facing and VGA front-facing cameras; accelerometer; barometer; gyroscope; GPS; WiFi A/N; Bluetooth 3; WiFi and HSPA+ (on some models); 7,000 mAh battery; Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich). Dimensions and weight: 6.9 x 10.1 x .38 inches and 1.4 pounds.

Pricing: To be announced.

Apple's 3rd-generation tablet is in stores March 16, 2012. Will you buy the new iPad?

Readers React

Some of you already have expressed strong, negative reaction in comments (not exactly unusual from the BetaNews community). I struggled to find one positive comment about the new iPad. Ah, that can't be good.

"This new iPad is completely underwhelming", Duke2010 writes. "Apart from the high-res screen it's nothing special at all. I was expecting something exciting from Apple".

Cristian Dragos: "More powerful than a 4 year-old Mac, but pretty much useless in doing some productive work. Don't really understand why would you need such hardware power on a tablet? If it would run a full desktop OS which would be used when docking to a docking station and could be used to replace a PC, then the hardware power would mean something".

"Strange, I have no desire to upgrade my iPad", frankwick comments. "Does this make me a old? A dork? Immune to Apple hype? What's wrong with me?!?!?"

So, what about you? Will you buy the new iPad. Please answer in comments below and take our poll above.

Who needs iPhone 4S LTE when you've got iOS 5.1?

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 3:37pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Wow, it's like magic. Apple frequently uses that word or some extension, right? Calling iPad "magical". Well something magical happened to an iPhone 4S one of my family members owns. Upgrading to iOS 5.1, which Apple released today, changed that cute signal indicator from 3G to 4G. What an upgrade! All for free, too.

But wait! My speed test isn't any faster. It's still slow mo as ever. I conducted three speed tests in a row from my apartment. Ah, cough, cough -- .16Mbps, .94Mbps and .60Mps downstream. Woohoo! Gimme some of that 4G, AT&T!

Of course, it's all a change in name only, and somewhat deceptive one at that. Apple had rightly called HSPA+ 3G until now. Other AT&T handsets call it "4G" and next-gen network phones like the Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket "4G LTE". There's enough confusion about what is 4G, without Apple mucking up things even more.

But the change means that Apple and AT&T can claim iPhone and the new iPad are 4G. Whoa, the marketing planets have aligned. Quick, call the Mayans or Nostradamus before the world ends. I can feel gravity's pull now! iPhone 4S is now 4G, even though it's HSPA+ and not LTE. Hey, it's just like the new iPad, which is 4G LTE. The reality distortion field caused by this thing is overwhelming!

No wonder Verizon can't get people to adopt LTE, with all this alternate-reality 4G hypnotism going on. AT&T claims it has the nation's largest 4G network -- all accomplished with LTE available in 28 metro areas compared to Verizon's 196. Last week, the folks over at big V acknowledged a scant 5 percent of their subscribers used LTE, which is real 4G.

Or wait, did that number go up today? I don't have a Verizon iPhone here. Does iOS 5.1 magically turn 3G to 4G there, too? Please tell me if yours changed. Either Verizon's network of, ah, 4G subscribers just got bigger or AT&T got some more marketing FUD to murky the 4G waters.

Apple shouldn't get off easier here, with a little more cuffing from me. The company gains even more from market confusion about 4G, considering there is no LTE iPhone. Suddenly the 4S -- and presumably 4, too -- appear to be more competitive to LTE Androids, all while Verizon pees away money on infrastructure upgrades and marketing.

I know this: Verizon LTE pulls down average 15Mbps from my apartment. Even AT&T's LTE is good for 8Mbps to 10Mbps, consistently. But iPhone HSPA+ is, well, you can see from the screenshot, 4G in name only.

Sometimes reality is stronger than the distortion field.

iPhoto comes to iOS, and you'll want it

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 1:53pm MST by Joe Wilcox

During today's media event, where Apple debuted new iPad and new Apple TV, software also took the stage, including the new iPhoto for iOS and updates to GarageBand and iMovie. All three apps are available for $4.99 each. Apple also released new iWork apps -- Keynote, Numbers and Pages -- and they sell for $9.99 a piece.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company updated the apps in part to support the new iPad's 2048 x 1536 resolution "Retina" display. Yesterday I answered "Why does iPad need a HD display?".

iPhoto completes the iLife suite for iOS and packs in lots of features. Users rely on a scrollable thumbnail filmstrip to navigate photos, and it's available in either portrait or landscape mode.

Not surprisingly, the app relies heavily on touch for everything. As I expressed recently about Samsung Galaxy note, the pen isn't mightier than the finger. Samsung heavily promotes the quasi-phone tablet's stylus -- eh, pen -- as selling point.

Human beings are tool users who experience and manipulate the world through five senses. Hands and fingers are important because they are active -- they’re how people tactilely manipulate the world around them. Touch is hugely important, and makes tablets more personal, the experience more intimate. The finger and touch are more natural, because they extend you. Good user interfaces build on the familiar -- and there is nothing more familiar than me, myself and I. Touch photos is very intimate, and Apple's choice of features for manipulating images is very personal.

Apple's marketing material makes the point, about using fingers to "crop out a distracting background (or maybe an ex-boyfriend)". What could be more personal than that!

Users can apply six photo effects, which number seems limited to me, with a simple touch. Apple also provides "brushes" for adjusting different areas of photos, such as "lighten", "darken" and "sharpen". These kinds of tools are common among photo-editing apps. Touch, with a little practice, promises more precision where, ah, touchups are applied.

iPhoto for iOS also can create online "Photo Journals", leveraging Apple's iCloud. It's one of several interesting alternative products to Facebook Timeline.

Another feature is less directly personal but no less meaningful. "Photo Beaming" wirelessly sends, say, a pic taken on iPhone immediately to iPad. No user intervention required.

iPhoto for iOS requires iPhone 4, 4S, iPad 2 or the new iPad. iPhone 3GS and original iPad users are out of luck.

Apple slashes iPad 2 price by $100

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 12:31pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Well, the price cut isn't as much as I predicted, but Apple today lowered iPad 2 pricing to $399 -- that's for the 16GB WiFi model. The WiFi plus 3G model is now $529. The price cuts came during a media event launching the "new iPad", which goes on sale March 16.

Essentially, Apple is keeping the older model available, much as it does with iPhone 3GS and 4 for lower selling price, potentially opening sales to buyers who wouldn't or couldn't pay $499 or $629 -- the starting prices for the new iPad WiFi and WiFi plus 4G models.

The pricing strategy is well-timed. The new iPad offers 2048 x 1536 resolution, compared to the predecessor's 1024 x 768 and offers faster wireless -- 4G LTE, as opposed to 3G. Other niceties include better camera and faster microprocessor. Those customers wanting more, will pay more. Those looking for an Apple tablet on the cheap can choose iPad 2.

Apple sold 55 million iPads since the tablet launched nearly two years ago -- 15.4 million just in calendar fourth quarter 2011. The price cuts are sure to nip margins, depending on how many people see $399 as low enough. Apple sold 40.45 million iPads, generating $24.95 billion revenue, during calendar 2011. That works out to $616 revenue per iPad. Even a drop by $50 average selling price would keep Apple margins well ahead of competitors.

Would you pay $399 for iPad 2?

Preorder new iPad today, in stores March 16

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 11:47am MST by Joe Wilcox

The wait is over. Today Apple officially unveiled the third-generation iPad, which is available for preorder today and will be in stores March 16, along with the new Apple TV. The company unveiled the new tablet during a highly-anticipated media event in San Francisco.

Prices are unchanged, ranging from $499 to $829, depending on storage capacity and wireless radios: 16GB WiFi, $499; 32GB WiFi, $599; 16GB WiFi and 4G, $629; 64GB WiFi, $699; 32GB WiFi and 4G, $729; 64GB WiFi and 4G, $829.

First countries to get the new iPad: United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Switzerland and Japan.

The new iPad, as rumored, packs 2048 x 1536 pixels. Yesterday, I explained why the new iPad needs an HD display. This one has a pixel density of 264 dots per inch.

The new tablet also adds 4G LTE support for AT&T and Verizon networks here in the United States. Verizon offers LTE to 200 million Americans in 196 cities. AT&T: 74 million Americans in 28 metropolitan areas.

200,000 apps available for iPad

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 11:23am MST by Joe Wilcox

Apple now offers more than 550,000 mobile apps -- 200,000 specifically for iPad. CEO Tim Cook revealed the number today during a special event launching the third-generation iPad. Over the weekend, Apple's App Store reached a mighty milestone -- 25 billion downloads since opening nearly four years ago.

Yesterday, Google rebranded Android Market. What's in a name? In this case lots of foreshadowing that should give open-source developers the willies. Google Play puts the search and information giant's brand front and center, removing Android altogether. Everyone with vested interest in Android should reflect long and hard on what that means, particularly now that with the Motorola Mobility acquisition Google can build its own branded devices.

Google Play clearly is about offering a branded store that more directly competes with Apple's iTunes operation, including App Store, selling digital content of all varieties. Apple's early lead makes iOS an appealing platform to developers and iPad, iPhone and iPod touch users. On tablets, Apple's early tablet lead puts Android at a disadvantage.

Android tablet shipments spiked during Q4, according to Strategy Analytics, but nowhere near parity with iPad. Respective market shares: 39.1 percent to 57.6 percent. However, Android unit shipments tripled year over year: 3.1 million to 10.5 million units compared to iPad's rise to 15.4 million from 7.3 million.

DisplaySearch puts Apple's tablet share higher, 59.1 percent, followed by Amazon (16.7 percent) and Samsung (6.7 percent). If anything, Amazon poses more direct competition to iPad than all Android. Looked at differently: Next to Apple, Amazon is the biggest competitive threat to all other Android tablet makers. In its first, partial quarter of availability, Kindle Fire topped 5 million shipments, according to DisplaySearch.

So Google Play also is about Amazon, and trying to prevent the retailer from fragmenting Android anew. The last thing Google wants is for Amazon, which like Apple offers a curated digital experience, to dominate the Android tablet market.

From that perspective, major division in the Android camp is good for iPad and iOS app sales.

Apple sold 172 million 'post-PC devices' in 2011

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 11:13am MST by Joe Wilcox

Last year's iOS device sales reached 172 million, Apple revealed today during a special media event for the third generation iPad. CEO Tim Cook said "Post-PC devices" account for 76 percent of Apple revenues.

Apple ended 2011 with 315 million cumulative iOS device sales. A week ago, Google said that cumulative Android device sales had reached 300 million, with 850,000 activations per day.

Android and iOS are engaged in a brutal platform war that likely will define the next major computing era (much still depends on what Microsoft accomplishes with its next-generation Windows PC and mobile operating systems). By activations, Android sets a brisk pace for iOS. "We get an activation rate of one million per day by mid August of this year," Asymco's Horace Dediu says about Android. "If it continues then we could see 1.5 million per day by end of 2013".

For iOS device sales, 2011 was the break-out year -- 156 million, according to Asymco's calculations. The real figure is 16 million higher. By my math, then, Apple sold 54.6 percent of all iOS devices in a single year, which indicates considerable accelerated momentum. During fourth quarter alone, Apple sold 62 million iOS devices, Cook said.

According to company financial filings, for calendar 2011, Apple sold 92.95 million iPhones and 40.45 million iPads -- generating $61 billion and $24.95 billion revenue, respectively. For all calendar 2011, Apple generated $127.84 billion revenue. The two products accounted for 67 percent of the company's sales for the year (again referring to calendar and not Apple's fiscal year, which is offset by one quarter).

Cook didn't specify fiscal versus calendar year. I assume calendar for now.

Verizon stiffs 3G Android owners

Posted: March 7th, 2012, 8:22am MST by Joe Wilcox

There's no Ice Cream Sandwich for you, baby. Verizon has announced the smartphones and other devices eligible to receive the sweet Android 4.0 dessert, and all but two are 4G LTE. That's right, if you're among the 95 percent of Verizon subscribers on 3G, and you've got Android, no upgrade is planned.

Only 5 percent of Verizon subscribers currently have LTE, even though the service is available to over 200 million in 196 metro areas. Verizon offers about two dozen LTE smartphones, tablets, netbooks and modems/mobile hotspots. Only 15 devices make the cut.

By my quick count, Verizon offers 10 LTE handseets. Some of them will get the ICS middle finger, too. Ah, what about flagship Google phone Galaxy Nexus? It's not on the list! (Clarification in response to some of our readers. Yes, Galaxy Nexus ships with Android 4.0, but the non-Verizon, HSPA+ models are favored for updates. Didn't Google officially drop developer support for Verizon's model last month?)

There is some good news here. Android loyalists who bought the Motorola XOOM a year ago will see their LTE tablet get Ice Cream Sandwich.

Now if only Verizon would say when ICS updates will be available.

The list, straight from Verizon:

HTC:

HTC ThunderBolt

DROID Incredible 2 by HTC

HTC Rhyme

HTC Rezound

Motorola:

Motorola XOOM

DROID BIONIC

DROID RAZR

DROID RAZR MAXX

DROID 4

DROID XYBOARD 8.2

DROID XYBOARD 10.1

Samsung:

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7

LG:

Spectrum by LG

"We will continue to update this list as additional details become available throughout the year," says Verizon's Albert Aydin.

What if iPad HD isn't LTE?

Posted: March 6th, 2012, 5:03pm MST by Joe Wilcox

If iPhone 4S is any measure, perhaps LTE isn't important after all.

I asked the same question right before Apple announced the 4S in early October and honestly expected that 4G LTE would give Android handsets competitive edge. Not the least. According to Gartner, iPhone sales reached 35.46 million during calendar fourth quarter -- all without LTE. iPhone ranked tops in sales for the quarter and the year. The point: Sure, mobile geeks will pine for faster data. But will anyone else? Nah.

Consider Verizon as case study. During fourth calendar quarter, the carrier sold 7.7 million smartphones. Verizon activated 4.3 million iPhones. Divide it up, and Apple's handset accounted for 55.8 percent of Verizon smartphone sales. By comparison, the United States' largest carrier sold 2.3 million 4G LTE devices, which includes mobile hotspots and tablets. At best, LTE devices accounted for 30 percent of smartphone sales. However, since that number includes other devices, iPhone outsold LTE smartphones by about 2 to 1.

Verizon currently offers about two dozen LTE devices, including smartphones, tablets, netbooks and modems/portable hotspots. Yet, last week the company acknowledged that only 5 percent of subscribers had switched to LTE. This from the carrier with the largest LTE network by leaps and bounds -- 196 cities and reaching 200 million Americans.

Sprint and T-Mobile are only just talking about building LTE networks, while AT&T's falls far behind Verizon. The nation's second-largest carrier offers eight LTE devices, four of them smartphones. Service reaches 74 million Americans in 28 metropolitan areas.

That's another reason to wonder about LTE -- the infrastructure isn't yet there. Only one carrier has the reach right now. Something else: LTE adoption is even less advanced in major international markets, which HSPA/HSPA+ is more mature. According to Pyramid Research, there were just 7 million LTE connections in the United States at the end of 2011, representing 47 percent for the entire planet.

Meanwhile, LTE device sales here accounted for 71 percent of the global number. More than 200 LTE devices are available around the world. However, "the majority of products are currently aimed at PCs, with three out of five devices models being discrete modems, either routers or PC add-on devices", Jan ten Sythoff, Pyramid's analyst at large, says.

Apple could easily wait another release cycle -- and, judging by iPhone, most customers won't care.

Why should they, when iPad is available with WiFi-only and cellular-data models. There is no cellular contractual commitment, as there is for Android 3G/4G tablets, so users have less urgency to future-proof, particularly considering that a new iPad likely will come in about a year (based on current release cycle). By comparison, people choosing iPhone 3GS, 4 or 4S over LTE Androids, are generally locked into 2-year data contracts -- and still they chose Apple.

Analyst numbers are scant, but there is no indication from anyone that LTE has done any more for Android tablets than smartphones -- considerably less considering iPad's market lead. Apple generated $616 revenue per iPad during calendar 2011, which suggests at best modest sales of the $629 entry-level 3G model.

Still, Apple could use the third-generation iPad to break ground on LTE, since the battery drain wouldn't be as noticeable on a tablet as a smartphone. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company could pave the way for iPhone 5 LTE -- or whatever it will be called.

Then there is the rumored 2048 x 1536 resolution display, which is primed for HD video content -- something LTE would better enable streaming or downloading where available. Here is San Diego, I've seen downstream LTE speeds of 27Mbps.

Based on the current crop of Apple rumors, the next iPad does pack LTE. But they've been wrong many times before.

Ultimately only one thing matters. Do you care? Apple launched the original iPhone without 3G support at a time when it was becoming standard -- and still the smartphone sold well. Apple sold 55 million iPads cumulatively through the end of 2011, all without LTE. The question: Just how much does LTE matter to you? Would it keep you from buying the third-generation iPad? No-LTE support certainly hasn't stopped millions of people from buying Apple's tablet. Would it stop you? Please answer in comments.

Why does iPad need a HD display?

Posted: March 6th, 2012, 2:02pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Tomorrow, Apple holds a media event where the next iPad is expected to launch. There are rumors aplenty, with the most consistent being higher-resolution display -- 2048 x 1536. That's mighty big for a small screen. While the Apple Fan Club banters around rumors like Depression Era kids kicking tin cans, I wonder about the fundamental question: Why does iPad need a high-res display?

It's not an idle question; 2048 x 1536 is unusually high resolution in computing. My Lenovo ThinkPad T420s display is 1600 x 900. Apple's 15.4-inch MacBook Pro is available with resolution up to 1680 x 1050. Then there is 1080p, which is 1920 x 1080. By many measures, iPad with greater-than HD resolution would be exceptional. That's nice to have, but do you really need it on a 9.7-inch screen? Someone does, and Apple is right to go after the market opportunity. For starters: Education, healthcare and publishing. Simply put: An iPad HD would be a transformative product.

Already, Apple has demonstrated the value of greater resolution -- and with it higher pixel density -- with iPhone 4 and 4S. While only 3.5 inch displays, resolution is 960 x 640 and 326 dpi. I recently took out iPhone 4S for a test drive after using Galaxy Nexus for several months. The Android handset has 1280 x 720 resolution (that's 720p) and 316 dpi on a 4.65-inch screen. I expected to find the iPhone 4S to feel puny compared to Galaxy Nexus, but that's not the case. I actually prefer the smaller screen with high resolution.

Size matters in portable devices, and there's much to be said for smaller. An iPad with 2048 x 1536 resolution would be transformative. Nothing available anywhere else could compete and likely wouldn't for at least 12 months, and likely longer. Current and announced Android tablets top out at 1280 x 800 resolution.

Solutions architect Chris Koerner has prepared a compelling chart comparing iPad's rumored resolution to that of other devices. As he observes, "you could watch a full resolution HD movie and still have some space for content. On a 9.7 inch screen!"

Like iPod nano

Think of the new iPad like iPod nano. Apple introduced the diminutive music player in September 2005 to replace the iPod mini, which was the standard copied by competitors. Just as their larger devices arrived for the holidays, Apple transformed the category with the tiny nano. iPod sales dramatically rose with launch of the mini in early 2004 and simply skyrocketed after the nano. A greater-than-HD iPad would similarly redefine the tablet category, likely leading to a huge spike in sales and expansion of the addressable market.

More importantly, iPad would be rightly positioned to further sap PC sales. Imagine the creative and consumption possibilities of greater-than-HD display on a connected, whether cellular or WiFi, portable device. Timing would put tremendous pressure on Microsoft as it preps Windows 8 and Windows on ARM for future tablet sales -- as in holiday 2012 the earliest.

For many people, iPad would offer the best computer screen they could afford. That's assuming Apple keeps current pricing, which is my expectation. iPad has reached that point, where Apple typically makes dramatic improvements for the same price. This is historical practice.

Assuming 2048 x 1536 iPad is reality, rumors about discounted iPad 2 make sense. Apple could easily offer an 8GB or 16GB iPad 2 alongside its successor without cannibalizing sales. The lower-cost model -- I anticipate $299 -- would open up sales to people who couldn't or wouldn't pay $499 or more for a tablet.

Something else: There also are persistent rumors Apple will launch new Apple TV tomorrow. That makes more sense if there is an iPad HD. Right now Apple TV tops out at 720p resolution. If the tablet goes HD, timing would be right for Apple TV's boost and iTunes Store content for both devices.

Marriage of Opportunity

That brings me to larger and potentially more lucrative market opportunities. The first two iPads are more consumption devices for consumers, despite content creators' and businesses' interest in them. An iPad HD would widely open up the tablet's utility for education, healthcare and publishing -- and every other vertical where portability and high resolution is a marriage of opportunity.

In January, Apple launched a major e-textbook initiative for one of its most important markets, education. High-resolution display offers all kinds of interactive, digital content options that make print as archaic as papyrus. E-textbooks are interesting at current iPads' 1024 x 768 resolution and compelling at 2048 x 1536, when mixing text, photos, video and live content.

Same reasoning applies to publishing and there trendsetters transcending print, and more importantly online (where valuable content is given away freely). It's time people actually paid for content again. iPad as an e-zine platform is much more compelling at 2048 x 1536 resolution.

Healthcare is full of possibilities. MRIs, X-rays and other diagnostic imaging demands clarity -- and there iPad's improved resolution and pixel density could be transformative.

How about HD gaming or the possibilities around typography? A portable, greater-than-HD display opens up the tablet to lots of uses and, for Apple and its partners, loads of new market opportunities.

All depends on the rumors being true.

Install Windows 8 Consumer Preview on Your Mac

Posted: March 5th, 2012, 6:52pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Today, Parallels updated its Mac virtualization client to support installation of Windows 8 Consumer Preview. Parallels Desktop 7 also supports OS X 10.8 "Mountain Lion" Developer Preview. Microsoft released its test OS last week and Apple last month. Mountain Lion is expected to release in late summer and Windows 8 a month or so later.

Parallels Desktop 7 for Mac also offers a utility for downloading, as well as installing, Windows 8 CP. The virtualization software released in September, followed by several feature-enhancing updates, including support for new operating systems.

"Additionally, Parallels Mobile users can remotely access and control their Mac and its Windows 8 virtual machine, applications and files, via their iPad, iPhone and iPod touch", according to a company blog post today.

The update, like others, is available free to existing Parallels Desktop 7 users. Potential, new customers can download a trial version. The software retails direct for $79.99, for the full non-upgrade product. However, Amazon sells it for $59.89.

Parallels Desktop 7 for Mac requires OS X 10.5.8 or later on an Apple computer running Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, i5, i7, or Xeon processors. Minimum RAM requirements: 2 GB, although at least 4 GB is recommended for running Windows 8 CP in a virtual machine on OS X Lion.

VMWare Fusion 4 is another option for running Windows 8 CP virtualized on a Mac. VMware announced support for the Preview last week. However, Parallels attests to easy download and installation using its New Virtual Machine Wizard.

Virtualization sandboxes testing software, so that if something goes wrong, the computer is protected from ill-effects. Personally, given that the Consumer Preview can be installed separately on a different partition, I would risk it, using Apple's Boot Camp. I'm not alone, and apparently Windows 8 runs pretty sweetly even on MacBook Air.

There are a number of virtualization options for Windows users. Colleague Mike Williams offers instructions for installing Windows 8 CP using Oracle VirtualBox.

Thanks to Windows Live, Ovi Share is dead

Posted: March 5th, 2012, 3:46pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Microsoft's silent Nokia takeover, which started with last year's Windows Phone agreement, is starting to pick up momentum. This afternoon Nokia emailed that Ovi Share will close up, effective the last day of May; I signed up for the service three years ago (gasp, or was it longer).

It's just one of the many Ovi services headed for that great graveyard in the cloud, as Windows Live replaces each and every one. Well, that is until Microsoft officially rebrands Live services some time before Windows 8 launches.

Ovi's days were numbered as soon as Nokia launched the Lumia 710 and 800 smartphones in October. The service primarily is for sharing photos and videos -- capabilities already built into Windows Phone.

Windows Live SkyDrive anchors WP 7.5 sharing, and it's a service Microsoft heavily promotes. Ovi Share didn't stand a chance, and I'm surprised the closure announcement didn't come sooner.

I suspect Nokia waited until near the launch of Lumia 900 LTE here in States, which is imminent.

Here's Nokia's official communication:

You are receiving this email because you have previously used the Ovi Share service. Ovi Share is an online service that enables Nokia users to upload and share files, typically photos and videos.

As of 30 May 2012, we will be discontinuing the Ovi Share service. If you have files stored using Ovi Share, please click here for detailed download instructions. If you already have another copy of your files existing on your computer or another sharing service, you do not need to do anything.

You will continue to have access to Ovi Share until 30 May 2012; however you will not be able to upload new files after 13 March 2012.

Why are we making this change?

The Ovi Share shutdown is part of Nokia's revised services mission to focus on mobile and location based services. As a result, the Ovi Share service will be closing. However, you will still be able to use your Ovi Share username and password to access other Nokia services. We encourage you to use one of the many online photo-sharing services as a way to store and share your photos and videos moving forward.

What does this mean for you as an Ovi Share user?

If you do not have a copy of your files any other place other than Ovi Share, you will need to download those files before 30 May 2012. To download your files to your computer, please click here for detailed instructions. After 30 May 2012, your files will not be accessible from the Ovi Share service and will be deleted. If you already have another copy of your files existing on your computer or another sharing service, you do not need to do anything.

If you have any further questions about this service change or need help downloading your files, please contact Nokia Care by going to [nokia.com] and then selecting “Contact Support.”

Nokia apologizes for this inconvenience, and we thank you for using Ovi Share.

Sincerely,
Nokia

That March 12th date fits in nicely with rumors about when AT&T will begin selling Lumia 900. The carrier typically launches new handsets on Sundays, so that makes the 11th or 18th most likely candidates.

Photo Credit: forestpath/Shutterstock

New Internet Explorer commercial is better than the browser

Posted: March 5th, 2012, 10:10am MST by Joe Wilcox

Last night, while watching "The Walking Dead", I breezed past an Internet Explorer 9 ad, while fast-forwarding commercials. I actually stopped to watch the last 15 seconds or so. Perhaps it was the one here or another similar. I'm uncertain, since Ryan Gavin, Internet Explorer General Manager, says the TV spot above airs tonight and I already deleted the recorded program.

I must say, though, there's something appropriate about an Internet Explorer commercial running during "The Walking Dead" -- that's assuming where I saw one last night. I also fast-forwarded commercials during a show about kittens my daughter watched, and perhaps I saw the ad there. Considering IE's declining usage share, there's metaphor here in the AMC drama.

But life springs new from good marketing, and the IE spot is catchy. It's fast and fluid -- hell, like the ad professes the browser is. The tagline is compelling: "A more beautiful web" is: "a story"; "alive"; "artistic"; "high definition".

"The spot you see above features the work of Keith Rivers, a Seattle-based filmmaker who became part of our team for this project, and Alex Clare, a British singer-songwriter, whose music has been on repeat in our cars and offices for the past two months", Gavin says.

But I see something more compelling about the IE spot: Commercial fast-forwarders like myself will still get branding impact. Boston College professors Adam Brasel and James Gips have done some amazing research in this area, finding that DVR fast-forwarders who skip commercials pay more attention to the TV, which makes sense if they're looking for when to hit the play button. Brasel and Gips also found that centrally placed brands get noticed more. According to the researchers:

Although fast-forwarding harms ad effectiveness overall, there is considerable variance between commercials. Fast-forwarding viewers focus their attention on a small central portion of the screen. Only brand information within this central diagnostic area is visually attended to, and the disparity in visual attention between central and peripheral brand information attention is strongest for fast-forwarding viewers.

They emphasize: "Although the advertisements last little more than a second and lose all audio and narrative consistency, those with strong central branding can break through fast-forwarding and still achieve brand memory".

Centrally-placed IE branding and benefits (e.g., "fast", "fluid", etc.) define the commercial. Microsoft should adopt this approach to more of its TV spots:

Centrally place brands or products on the screen, since fast-forwarders are more likely than regular viewers to remember the brand or product.
Increase brand exposure, since, according to Brasel and Gip's research, both fast-forwarders and regular viewers better remember brands or products centrally placed for 12 seconds or more.
Combine story-line with long brand exposure, which better reaches those who fast forward and those who do not.

Overall, I really dig the new IE commercial, but see hidden value in the centrally-placed branding. Do you see the new ad as a winner?

Apple App Store at 25 billion downloads: What's your fav?

Posted: March 5th, 2012, 8:38am MST by Joe Wilcox

Over the weekend App Store reached a momentous number of downloads: 25 billion. That achievement comes in less than four years; App Store opened for business in July 2008. Our question for you: What's your favorite?

Better: What are your favorite 10 downloaded iOS apps? Or you could answer: Which one, or which 10, do you use the most? Please answer in comments, and if you prefer some other mobile platform more tell us about it and the apps that make it matter most to you.

The times they really are a changing' for Apple. While the United States remains Apple's most important market, China is second, for which the 25 billionth app suggests and even foreshadows for future increased importance. Chunli Fu of Qingdao, China downloaded "Where's My Water? Free" as the record-setter. Apple will reward him with a $10,000 iTunes gift card.

Apple sales to China reached $13 billion in fiscal 2011, and the company pushes hard into the market -- not just with iOS devices. Already Apple touts features specific to Chinese users in OS X 10.8 "Mountain Lion", which is scheduled to release in late summer.

"We’d like to thank our customers and developers for helping us achieve this historic milestone of 25 billion apps downloaded", Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior veep for Internet Software and Services, says. "When we launched the App Store less than four years ago, we never imagined that mobile apps would become the phenomenon they have, or that developers would create such an incredible selection of apps for iOS users".

At the end of February, the Cupertino, Calif.-based company had paid out over $4 billion to developers. Apple takes a 30-percent cut of sales; developers get the rest. The company now claims 550,000 apps -- 170,000 designed for iPad -- for sale in 123 countries.

Circling back to the fav question, top-10 paid apps at Apple's store this morning:

1. Draw Something by OMGPOP

2. Be Jeweled

3. Midway Arcade

4. Where's My Water

5. Evi

6. Scramble with Friends

7. Fruit Ninja

8. Angry Birds

9. WhatsApp Messenger

10. Munch Time.

Top-10 freebees:

1. Draw Something Free by OMGPOP

2. Camera Awesome

3. Move the Box

4. Hidden Objects: Gardens of Time

5. Police Chase Smash

6. Temple Run

7. Flashlight

8. MLB.com at Bat

9. Scramble With Friends Free

10. Instagram

As you can see, games dominate the top charts for free and paid apps. Did you hear that, Nintendo and Sony? There's a reason why Apple is bringing Game Center from iOS to Mountain Lion.

Since I'm asking for your favorites, here are my 10 most-used iOS apps, in alphabetical order: Amazon Kindle, Economist, Facebook, Feedly, Google+, New York Times, Shazam Encore, Vevo HD, Vimeo and WSJ. Which do I use the most? Feedly and Shazam Encore. WSJ will fall off the list, as I cancelled my subscription last week. The Journal wanted more than $200 for an online-only sub -- a hefty price hike from last year -- and I told the customer service rep: "No way!" I had a digital Wall Street Journal subscription since 1996.

As you can see, I don't play games. I also have spent more time on Android recently, so my iOS apps list would be broader if using the platform more. What are your favs?

9 Windows 8 editions is 7 too many

Posted: March 2nd, 2012, 10:57am MST by Joe Wilcox

Two is enough. Windows 8 and Windows on ARM.

Based on a registry key found in Windows 8 Consumer Preview, there are potentially nine different editions coming later this year: Windows 8 Starter; Home Basic; Home Premium; Professional; Professional Plus; Enterprise; Enterprise Eval; Ultimate; and ARM. The six Windows 7 editions already are too many. Nine is bad gone way worse and shows that Windows 8, for all the courageous changes, is too much about the past way of thinking. Microsoft is looking back at the old PC model rather than looking far enough ahead to the cloud-connected device era.

Apple's approach of offering one desktop OS for consumers, small businesses or enterprises is better. But Apple exists in a competitive market. Microsoft generally competes against itself in PC operating systems. The Redmond, Wash.-based company has a monopoly on x86 processors, as determined by European and US courts. Differentiation typically drives competition, hence the number of toothpaste varieties. But Windows isn't toothpaste, because one product essentially owns the market. You't can sell Windows the same way as toothpaste, by trying to artificially create differentiation where it doesn't organically exist.

Self-Competition

But that's the approach Microsoft has tried since Windows Vista and it's an abysmal failure everywhere but one new edition: Enterprise. Businesses only can get this OS by signing up for or already participating in annuity licensing contracts with Software Assurance -- for which they pay more upfront. Microsoft imposes this requirement. There is nothing about Enterprise edition that requires it.

In February 2006, when working as an analyst for Jupiter Research I blogged "the version strategy may also allow Microsoft to do something not done in more than a decade: Raise desktop operating system prices, a tact that can be difficult to take in a market where one product dominates and where monopoly and a contentious antitrust case cast long shadows". That's exactly what happened by introducing Ultimate and strong-arm licensing tactics for Enterprise.

Microsoft wouldn't need to artificially differentiate Windows if there was competition. Monopoly creates three problems for the software giant:

Limited product choice -- because there isn't organic competition.
Self-competition -- where older versions of the monopoly product compete with newer ones.
Sales stagnation -- selling essentially the same product to the same customers over and over.

Before someone jumps to comments and argues against sales stagnation, consider this: Ten-and-a-half years after its release -- and Windows Vista and 7 in between -- XP is still the most widely used version. Sure, Microsoft sold over 500 million Windows 7 licenses, but the majority went to customers using XP and not Vista.

Keep It Simple, Stupid

There are many reasons for this situation, but one is often overlooked. There are two Windows XP versions: Home and Professional. Microsoft added another four with Vista, kept a high number with 7 and looks to be preparing to up the number with the next version. The number of editions creates customer confusion and unnecessary barrier to adoption.

Perhaps matters would be different if there was more natural competition or if Microsoft based Windows editions on something meaningful. But in looking at how Microsoft has divvied up features, they're arbitrarily done. This approach is more sensible in consumer markets where there is competition and differentiation a necessary byproduct.

The versioning strategy works better with Office, another monopoly product, because customers typically buy the software separately. Three-quarters of Windows sales are through PC OEMs. The artificial differentiation forces -- or worse, fails to -- computer manufacturers to make hardware choices based on the operating system. There's a mishmash of hardware and software capabilities, all so Microsoft can offer multiple Windows editions.

Three Office editions are available at retail: Home and Student, Home and Business and Professional. Two others are volume-license only. Microsoft sells three of the Windows 7 editions at retail, which is tacit admission six is too many. Basic and Starter come on new computers and Enterprise is license only. Conceptually, Windows 8 Professional Plus would make another available through retail.

One is Enough

In late 2005, when meeting with Microsoft executives and later blogging about the version strategy, I strongly recommended there be one Windows edition. The idea: Microsoft would externally release a single Windows version and, at most, keep internal versions for licensing purposes. After all, most customers buy Windows on new PCs anyway.

OEMs would license Windows based on capabilities, and for them, different versions could make sense. Customers would make purchasing decisions around price and PC capabilities rather than trying to decide if a laptop with Ultimate is comparable to a similarly priced computer with Home Premium.

The single-version approach isn't so radical. Apple does it, as Microsoft once did. Windows 95 came in one version, for consumers and businesses, and the OS was a huge sales success. Certainly, the single-version approach isn't the only reason. Nevertheless, simplicity made marketing Windows 95 easier and is more important now than 17 years ago. In 1995, Windows competed against products like Mac OS, OS/2 and DR DOS. Today, Android, iOS and OS X renews competition and, for the mobile operating systems, in markets where Microsoft has no monopoly position.

Two is Better

But one isn't the best approach anymore. Two is better: Windows 8 on Intel processors providing backward compatibility to older applications and bridge to the future with Metro UI and native coding around WinRT; Windows on ARM for mobile PCs, tablets and newer device categories.

Microsoft might still get this versioning thing right, if there is only one Windows on ARM edition, which conceptually is possible since the operating system will only be available on new hardware. Microsoft plans no separate software sales. There Microsoft could offer a single license to all OEMs or make them pay based on capabilities they implement in the hardware. But to the buyer, there is one version and choice about capabilities offered by hardware and software together.

Windows on ARM is the future of Microsoft's flagship operating system. There Microsoft faces lots of competition, looking at Android and iOS lead on media tablets and smartphones. Simplicity is key to effective marketing. Metro introduces change enough, without Microsoft overcomplicating Windows on ARM -- or Windows 8, for that matter. Simplicity sells, complexity smells, and this is truer in marketing than almost anything else.

Apple's approach is better and undermines the sales value of Windows. With Snow Leopard, Apple lowered the desktop price to $29.99, or $49.99 for a Family Pack. Current version Lion costs less -- $29.99, which covers upgrades for multiple PCs in a household. So my cost for three Macs in our home was effectively $9.99 a piece. Windows 7 Home Premium retail upgrade from Amazon: $106.29 per license.

And Microsoft wants to increase the number of confusing Windows editions and attempt to create arbitrary value around them? I sure hope not.

It's March Madness for Chrome and Internet Explorer

Posted: March 1st, 2012, 7:39pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Trouble looms ahead this month for Chrome, while Internet Explorer is poised for a growth surge. Behind this March Madness both browsers share something in common -- their ties to either Google or Microsoft products or services. Chrome will be penalized for one, while IE is set to gain from the other.

Chrome is one of the decade's stunning success stories, in part because of Google's rapid innovation that puts out a new version about every six weeks. But Google also benefits from ties to its other products and services, with search being high among them. Recent browser usage share growth reversals reveal just how much -- in January and February stats compiled by Net Applications.

NetApps plans to close a technical loophole that helped Chrome game the system, so to speak, although Google's intention surely was more about keeping/getting users than raising usage stats. Concurrent with Chrome 13's release, Google started prerendering hidden pages from its search portal to speed up queries. With Chrome 17, Google extended the capability to the browser's "omnibox".

"Chrome is the only major desktop browser that currently has this feature, which creates unviewed visits that should not be counted in Chrome’s usage share," according to NetApps. "However, the pages that are eventually viewed by the user should be treated normally".

In February prerendering "accounted for 4.3 percent of Chrome's daily unique visitors. These visits will now be excluded from Chrome's desktop browser share".

That could work out to a significant nip, in March, to Chrome usage share growth, which already hit a wall in January. Through December 2011, Chrome usage share grew for 14 consecutive months. On January 3, Google announced a temporary downgrading of Chrome's page rank -- how high it appears in searches -- following a minor scandal with a third-party ad agency. The marketer paid bloggers to write about Chrome, which violates Google policies on sponsored links. The search and information giant treated itself like other advertisers, lowering Chrome's search ranking for 60 days.

The result: Chrome usage share declined in January, and again last month. NetApps released February data today. From December to January, Google usage share fell from 19.11 percent to 18.94 percent -- and to 18 percent last month. Google is scheduled to lift Chrome's page rank over the weekend. The questions: How much lower would the browser's usage share be without the prerendering benefit? How will its absence affect March, even as Google pushes up Chrome's search ranking? There may be answer when this month's stats are released on April Fools Day.

Internet Explorer's situation is just the opposite. Chrome's January usage drain was IE's gain. Usage share rose 1.1 points month on month to 52.96 percent share, but dipped to 52.84 percent in February.

Yesterday, Microsoft released Windows 8 Consumer Preview, which already passed 1 million downloads today. The operating system comes with Internet Explorer 10 Platform Preview 5. Integration into Windows benefits IE.

The question: Will enough people download Windows 8 and use IE10 to boost browser usage share? Surely there has to be some benefit, say, if someone mostly or mainly using Chrome switches to IE10, even temporarily, to test the browser. Usage share isn't finite like market share. The latter typically tracks X over Y time period. The other measure takes into account that people can, and do, use multiple browsers -- and that's more likely when testing a new version of Windows.

So as Chrome looks down, IE conceptually looks up -- and movement for either browser can affect others. In February, Firefox usage share was 20.92 percent, up from 20.88 percent. Safari also gained, rising to 5.24 percent from 4.9 percent a month earlier. Chrome losses could be their gains.

Photo Credit: camicuibus/Shutterstock

US iPhone ownership catches up to Android

Posted: March 1st, 2012, 3:14pm MST by Joe Wilcox

That's one of the startling data points from a report that Pew Internet released today. The non-profit "fact tank" asked American adults what kind of smartphone they own. Twenty percent responded "Android device", up from 15 percent in May 2011. iPhone: 19 percent, up from 10 percent during the same time period. Pew concluded the newer survey in February.

The percentage of people saying they own iPhone nearly doubled between surveys, which is stunning growth compared to Android. Meanwhile, BlackBerry ownership fell to 6 percent from 10 percent. Those respondents describing themselves as Windows Phone owners was unchanged, at 2 percent.

The surge in iPhone owners surely reflects Apple's calendar fourth quarter success in smartphone sales -- 37 million globally. AT&T, Sprint and Verizon sell iPhone in the United States, collectively activating 13.7 million of the handsets during Q4.

More broadly, 53 percent of American adult cellular handset owners have smartphones. "Since 88 percent of US adults are now cell phone owners, that means that a total of 46 percent of all American adults are smartphone users", according to Pew. That 46 percent is an 11 point increase from May 2011.

"Two in five adults (41 percent) own a cell phone that is not a smartphone, meaning that smartphone owners are now more prevalent within the overall population than owners of more basic mobile phones".

Survey questions about devices like smartphones often have a higher margin of error because people often don't know what they have. For example, someone might know they have a Samsung phone but not be sure whether it runs Android, Bada or Windows Phone.

However, aggressive marketing raises awareness, and cell phones are heavily advertised across mediums and retail channels. As such, Americans are surer about their handsets. For example, the proportion of cell phone owners unsure what device they owned fell to just 4 percent in February from 13 percent in May. Pew put the margin of error for data pertaining to cell phone owners at 3 percent.

Pew conducted its survey between mid-January and mid-February. The report, authored by Aaron Smith, senior research specialist, is available now.

Windows 8 Consumer Preview: 1 million downloads first day

Posted: March 1st, 2012, 1:30pm MST by Joe Wilcox

That's the official count as delivered rather surreptitiously via the Building Windows 8 twitter account. I guess some things just can't wait for a press release or blog post.

The tweet: "One day later...one million downloads of the Consumer Preview".

Considering this is pre-release software and a hefty download, 1 million is an impressive start for Microsoft.

The Redmond, Wash.-based company unveiled Windows 8 Consumer Preview on Leap Day, during Mobile World Congress in Barcelona Spain. The Preview follows another, for developers, released in September 2011. During yesterday's media launch event, Windows and Windows Live president Steven Sinofsky said that Microsoft has made 100,000 code changes between the previews.

The rush to download the software isn't surprising. Not since Windows 95 has the operating system changed so much, and the change is far from over. Separately, Microsoft is testing Windows on ARM, which leaves behind legacy apps as Microsoft attempts to push the Windows paradigm forward -- to cloud-connect devices, which includes non-PC form factors. Windows on ARM is the future of Microsoft operating systems, but the transition will be long for anyone relying on legacy code.

Both operating systems share similar user interface motif, Metro, although Windows 8 also has a desktop motif to support legacy apps. But something is missing from the desktop -- the Start button introduced with Windows 95 and refashioned for Vista. Microsoft is pushing instant-on capabilities in Windows on Intel or ARM processors. Who needs a Start button if the PC is always on?

Metro is a tile-like user interface with active content behind it. In many ways the approach fulfills Microsoft's Active Desktop vision that failed during the late 1990s. Not surprisingly, reaction to Metro is mixed, if BetaNews commenters are any measure. From a look elsewhere around the Web, I'd say they are.

But in a brilliant commentary today, BetaNews reader and software developer Robert Johnson explains why Metro is so important and Microsoft's user interface approach is truly visionary. He writes:

Microsoft is blazing a bold new path into a future where chrome is used when appropriate (Office, Visual Studio, etc.) and when it's not necessary (Metro apps). This is why so many people don't like Metro. The don't like the apps. They don't like the start screen. It's way too different from what they're used to. But I can't help but think that regardless of how many of us go kicking and screaming into the future of software interaction, Microsoft is on the right track.

Metro represents something else. It is the bridge from past to future, and the future is Windows on ARM or Intel processors without legacy code, and that's a transition years -- even a decade or more in process. Consider that more than a decade after launch, Windows XP is still the most widely-used operating system. XP and Windows 7 still look much alike. Metro is an alien being.

BetaNews reader frankwick expresses a sentiment I expect to hear lots among IT managers: "I would lose my job if I deployed Win8". He responds to Robert's commentary:

I agree that it is forward thinking. I am glad they are thinking differently. What I do not like is how they are crippling the traditional desktop in favor of the touch UI. I manage 7,000 desktops and cannot imagine unleashing Win8 (in its current form) to my users. I have users that sit in an office, sit in trucks, and work in plants. Can you imagine what would happen if I gave them a computer without a Start button?

Change will be hard, and Microsoft is courageous to attempt it.

Perhaps Microsoft can boast 2 million downloads tomorrow or even the next day. My question: How many of those 1 million downloads will still be used a week from now or a month?

Camera Awesome for iPhone first impressions review

Posted: February 29th, 2012, 5:54pm MST by Joe Wilcox

There are few apps that could pull me away from Galaxy Nexus, the current Google phone, to iPhone 4S. But SmugMug's Camera Awesome is close. Real close. If you're an iPhone shutterbug, this app is for you -- or so I believe after a brief test late today.

Photo buffs can find no shortage of apps for iPhone. But Camera Awesome literally lives up to its name, improving the photo-taking process -- not just enhancing images later. The app provides tools for easing image composition, adding effects before or after taking the pic and automatically post-processing your work -- what SmugMug calls "Awesomizing".

I got email about the new app this morning during the Windows 8 Consumer Preview hoopla, when there wasn't time to leave my chair to pee, let alone try something new. Oh, but I wanted to.

SmugMug is a true testament that the Google-free economy hasn't ruined all the Internet. SmugMug is a family-run photo sharing site that charges for its services and is profitable doing so. It's no free ride. The photo services, which cater more to pros, are exceptional, too. What's that axion? You get what you pay for.

This is not a full review of Camera Awesome, since I simply couldn't spend enough time using the app today, but more of a first impression --and, whoa, is it good. If you're looking for a thorough review, I suggest Katherine Boehret's over at All Things Digital, which I deliberately didn't read before conducting and writing about my quick test.

One Helluva Kit

Camera Awesome is free from Apple's App Store, although SmugMug charges for some extras, as I learned when trying to choose a filter before taking a photo. The app isn't for post-processing pics taken using iPhone's camera feature. Rather you take photos from within Camera Awesome instead.

There are so many useful tools, some people might be overwhelmed at first. But they are pleasingly presented in an uncluttered user interface that hides features behind drop-down or pop-up menus. Camera Awesome distinguishes itself right away by letting the photographer set exposure point as well as focal point. In my test photo below, I misunderstood and set the exposure where I wanted the focus, so the kitty's collar is sharp but not his face.

Other useful tools surprised me. There are four for composing photos, such as leveling the horizon or following the rule of thirds. I was simply stunned to see a composition option for following the Golden Ratio, which is one of the best means of composing really good photos. If this app provided nothing more than these great composition tools, I'd rate it a keeper.

Other options include image stabilization and two burst modes, with SmugMug claiming capability to shoot 9 images in quick succession.

To the Cloud

I used the SmugMug app to "Awesomize" the photo above, but I could have done much more. Camera Awesome presents some nifty effects that can be applied when taking a photo or afterwards. SmugMug provides some for free, but others require in-app purchases. I found this out when trying to apply automatic post-processing presets, which cost 99 cents for nine of them -- they're a bargain. Other goodies include filters, textures and frames, among others.

To my surprise, images aren't stored in iPhone's Camera Roll by default, although there is an option to do this. That's because SmugMug looks to the cloud instead. However, cloud archive also is turned off by default. For people with SmugMug accounts, which cost from $40 to $150 a year, Camera Awesome will archive photos online. But there are options to post -- that is share -- to other services: Facebook, Flickr, Picasa, Photobucket, SmugMug, Twitter and YouTube.

"YouTube?" you ask. Camera Awesome is also video awesome, offering a surprising feature. The big problem with phone video is timing. You see something to shoot, fumble with the video app and the moment is gone. You miss the shot. Camera Awesome captures 5 seconds of video before you even hit record. Well, that's what SmugMug claims. In three sample videos of a digital clock, I didn't see the promised "video time travel" benefit.

Something else: Those cool composition tools and photo effects are available for video, too. But I simply didn't have time to amply test them.

Aspiringly Awesome

Presentation is everything in photography, and same should be said of promoting photo apps. Now this is marketing. From the Camera Awesome product page:

awesomize [ˈô-səm-īz]
verb
To trick your friends into thinking you’re a famous photographer.

How's that for aspirational? Good products make you feel better about yourself, or in this case photos you take.

Well, that's if you've got iPhone. Don't expect to see Camera Awesome on Android or Windows Phone anytime soon. The SmugMug Family loves their Macs and other Apple products. This passion translates to the apps, which favor Apple platforms. Still, SmugMug supports Android, but finds coding for the platform problematic.

SmugMug CEO Don MacAskill tweeted this morning about Camera Awesome: "On Android: It's coming. It's hard. Hardware fragmentation up the wazoo. Insane memory limitations. Ugh. But I want it! So building it!"

For now, Camera Awesome is available from Apple's App Store. The app requires iOS 4.3 or later and supports iPad, iPhone and iPod touch but is not a native iPad app.

So, what do you think of Windows 8?

Posted: February 29th, 2012, 2:05pm MST by Joe Wilcox

I must be candid. The best product reviews come from you. You're the audience BetaNews reaches, and you use software in real ways that no benchmark can measure. So once again, I ask for your review -- this time Windows 8 Consumer Preview, which is now available for download as upgrade or in a virtual machine.

Your first impressions will matter to other readers, or even a thorough review. Please comment to this post. I'll collect first impressions/short reviews into a separate post. However, I'd love to run your review, with name, photo and bio instead. Please email joe at betanews dot com to contribute a review. To everyone: Please provide specs on your test systems, which will be valuable reference for other Consumer Previewers.

Several reader byline reviews is no problem. We can't write enough on Windows 8 or offer too many reactions to the Consumer Preview. An IT manager, software developer, small business owner or Windows enthusiast will have different impressions.

Windows 8 Consumer Preview is available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, if you don't have it yet.

Some of you have already shared first reactions in comments, which I bring here to whet other readers' interest in contributing, too.

"This preview release is awesome", alshawwa comments. There are "big improvements over Windows 8 Developer Preview. I dont have a touchscreen; just by using it with a keyboard and mouse, I still like it. Dig in the new stuff you will find a lot of cool additions".

Pedro Innecco:

So far I don't like it. :(

I find the Metro applications clumsy. I find the Metro apps too simplistic for a desktop OS. The calendar and people apps, for instance, are way limited when comparing to a traditional desktop counterpart.

I said it before and I will say it again: I like Metro but leave it for tablets. The desktop aspect of Windows seems to have been cast aside even if Microsoft says otherwise.

Brian Butterworth encountered some regional quirks:

I'm just a little bit peeved that the installer has totally ignored that I said 'United Kingdom', and I've had to find all the UK settings myself, otherwise the date is the wrong way round and the keyboard unmapped. Bit crap for a beta, honestly.

The 'finance app' seems to only have US things in it, too. Had a problem with the connection to Windows Live and the password being recognized. Needed a reboot to sort.

Still hate Metro, in particular now because you can't drag the background to scroll, as you can on Android.

Just trying to link the Photos app to Flickr and the screen wapper requires you to scroll around to sign in and approve the app. Had to sign into Flickr first with my Facebook account to get the Facebook connect to work in Pictures...

Strange Music app doesn't seem to be able to access the 30,000 MP3 files on the PC. At least it's not a blank white screen like Messaging.

Reader charliemaggot encountered some problems, too. He "installed into a clean VMWare image". He's frustrated by Metro and desktop behavior. "Running anything just throws you back to the standard Win7 desktop, but without a Start menu. That's pretty annoying. What's the point of having a whole new UI experience if you keep reverting the user back to the old style. "I hope I'm either doing something amazingly wrong, or this isn't even close to the final version".

"The Windows app store is kinda cool", bigsexy022870 comments. "Not a huge amount of app yet. But what's there is pretty cool. Something they should have did long ago. There's alot of cool stuff that really is fun to play with".

So what do you think of Windows 8? Please answer in comments or email joe at betanews dot com if you'd like a review published with your name, bio and photo.

Reminder: Windows 8 Consumer Preview is available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions.

Photo Credit: Microsoft

Who is downloading Windows 8 Consumer Preview? You are!

Posted: February 29th, 2012, 10:32am MST by Joe Wilcox

Yesterday I asked: "Will you try Windows 8 Consumer Preview?" It's here, and many of you are rip-roaring ready.

Windows 8 is Microsoft's most important OS release since XP and quite possible ever. The company is reinventing Windows for the cloud-connected device era. There is major emphasis on mobility and syncing you across devices. The new Metro UI revives and fulfills Microsoft's Active Desktop concept attempted in the 1990s and abandoned by Windows XP's launch in October 2001.

Not all BetaNews readers getting the Windows 8 preview are excited about Metro. "I will be upgrading the Developer Preview machine to the latest version", says Brian Butterworth. "As I will be using it with a keyboard and mouse I will be looking forward to improvements on that front. I still can't see me actually liking Metro, but I really want to be sure".

Commenter carigis is "not really into the look of metro either".

BetaNews reader thomas.tmc has run the Windows 8 Developer Preview since its September release "without even a hiccup. W8 DP has been phenomenal". He runs the software on a "budget box I built in Oct. 2007 for Vista: AMD Athlon 64 x2 4400+, 4 GB RAM, Radeon HD 5450 (upgrade installed Feb 2011), [and] dual display".

He has advice that should be good for Butterworth and carigis:

Metro Start takes a little getting used to, but even if used as just a place to find and launch programs (which I rarely used the old Start menu for) it's a significant improvement. Since I use menus on the taskbar (folder on desktop/desktop taskbar toolbar) for launching my most commonly used apps though, I rarely even see the Metro screen except at start up. I suspect that I will use it more when there are better apps available from the newly opened store however.

Ayan Sarkar "can't wait". Oh yeah? So do you have the software already? James Portelli: "Can't wait to get my hands on Windows 8 Consumer Preview!!" Is it in your hands, James?

Robert_IT is "blowing away three desktop boxes in my home lab and loading Windows 8 on all three. Might even splurge on a touch screen monitor or buy a Samsung Slate if I like it enough. If it will run on my wife's MAC I would install it there as well just to piss her off. LMAO".

carigis "will try" the Consumer Preview "although the Developer Preview only lasted about 24 hours on my pc when I tried that.. I found the interface tedious, having to keep going into the Metro screen with the desktop basically being an app, not having the usual start button...We will see if it lasts more then a day".

Microsoft offers two options for previewing the software -- one in a virtual machine. That's John Crane's choice. "I plan on installing it and running is as a guest OS using Virtual Box, running on a 64 bit Windows 7 machine".

TomL_12953 answers: "Sure I will. I doubt I'll deploy it, though, until it's the only choice on new PCs. My users already complain when their icons get rearranged. Can you imagine the outcry with a whole new paradigm? I'll probably install it in VirtualBox on people's PCs and let them play with it for a while and get used to it.

Khurram Javed: "Definitely installing it on my-not-so-high-end PC and my Mom's laptop as well ;)".

S-o-o-o-o have you got it already?

Photo Credit: Microsoft

Microsoft releases Windows 8 Consumer Preview

Posted: February 29th, 2012, 8:45am MST by Joe Wilcox

Not since Windows XP has Microsoft promised so much and delivered it so quickly. Today, in Barcelona, Spain, Microsoft officially announced what we all knew was coming: Windows 8 Consumer Preview. The software is available for anyone to download and try, and its timing almost certainly assures -- short of atomic blast, alien invasion or Mayan end-of-the-world predictions come true -- that Windows 8 will release to manufacturing by end of summer and launch in time for holiday PC sales.

Microsoft has greatly improved the look, feel and functionality of Windows 8 since releasing the Developer Preview in September. Given release timing, the software available today should be considered near-final code. Expect few changes before the release candidate, assuming Microsoft even sees need to make one publicly available. The Consumer Preview is available to anyone with a PC capable of running it.

Windows "Reimagined"

Windows and Windows Live president Steven Sinofsky made the formal announcement, as expected, at a press event during Mobile World Congress. "With Windows 8, we reimagined the different ways people interact with their PC and how to make everything feel like a natural extension of the device, whether using a Windows 8 tablet, laptop or all-in-one" Sinofsky says. "The Windows 8 Consumer Preview brings a no-compromises approach to using your PC".

Microsoft has made 100,000 changes to Windows 8 code since the Developer Preview, Sinofsky told event attendees today.

Along with the desktop software, Windows 8 Server Beta and Visual Studio 11 Beta, which developers will want for creating apps for both operating systems, are available. Microsoft didn't release Windows on ARM, which is available to select testers preinstalled on hardware.

For most users, Windows 8 Consumer Preview will offer a dramatically different experience because of the tile-like Metro UI. Those stepping back to the more traditional desktop will find the Office Ribbon.

Today's Preview also makes available the Windows Store, which is built-in to the new operating system. Here Microsoft takes a more curated approach to third-party software, which promises to improve security, diminish piracy and assure more developers are actually paid for their work.

Internet Explorer 10 jumps to Platform Preview 5, with today's OS release. Microsoft has increased the browser's role in Windows 8, which extends HTML 5 capabilities throughout for developers and people using their apps.

Home-Grown Fun

The new user interface is extremely polished -- and modern. Suddenly Apple's OS X is outdated. Metro looks even better now than in any previous Microsoft demo or screenshot. To make the point -- from visual and user experience perspectives -- Windows 8 includes a plethora of homegrown apps. These include:

Bing Maps
Bing Weather
Calendar
Mail
Messaging
Music
People
SkyDrive

The new apps extend the "glance-and-go" approach Microsoft uses for Windows Phone and similar delivery mechanism -- tile-like user interface. Related: Settings roam with users across devices when signed in with their Microsoft account ID. So these new apps are live, connected via Microsoft cloud services.

"I can start a project on one Windows 8 PC and finish it on another", Microsoft's Kent Walter explains. Settings and themes also roam via the cloud. "If you share your Windows 8 PC, anyone else can have their own personalized, cloud-connected experience by signing in with their Microsoft account".

Cloud services are clearly core to Windows 8. They, and the live tiles, revive and fulfill Microsoft's Active Desktop concept attempted in the 1990s and abandoned by Windows XP's launch in October 2001.

What You Need

Microsoft doesn't support prerelease software but does provide a forum for users. There's a FAQ that provides system requirements and other information. Regarding those, Microsoft says the operating system can be installed on any Windows PCs. More specifically:

Processor: 1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster

RAM: 1 gigabyte (GB) (32-bit) or 2 GB (64-bit)

Hard disk space: 16 GB (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)

Graphics card: Microsoft DirectX 9 graphics device or higher

Additional requirements to use certain features:

To use touch, you need a tablet or a monitor that supports multitouch.

To access the Windows Store and to download and run apps, you need an active Internet connection and a screen resolution of at least 1024 x 768.

To snap apps, you need a screen resolution of at least 1366 x 768.

Download links: Windows 8 Consumer Preview 32-bit and 64-bit versions; Windows 8 Server Beta; Visual Studio 11 Beta.

Photo Credit: Microsoft

Apple steals Mobile World Congress' thunder

Posted: February 28th, 2012, 3:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Early today I asked colleague Tim Conneally in group chat: "What happened to Mobile World Congress? One day of announcements and nothing else?" Because Day 2 is unusually light on product news. Perhaps that's good thing for participating vendors, because late this morning Apple stole the show.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company dispatched email invites for a March 7 event, presumably announcing iPad 3. The message teases: "We have something you really have to see. And touch". Well, Apple did Microsoft a favor by not sending invites tomorrow, when Windows 8 Consumer Preview debuts at Mobile World Congress. Or perhaps someone at Apple wisely considered that Microsoft's announcement is simply too big to thump -- or that getting in ahead steals thunder enough.

Blogs and news stories that would have been written about MWC product announcements will go to Apple rumormongering and speculation. The gravity well is just too great. (I got in my MWC quota before writing this post, but still...)

Twitter buzz around #ipad and #ipad3 was so great Mashbable posted a 20-page slideshow of tweets. What? There's no other news today? It's this kind of response that sucks the soul out of trade shows like Mobile World Congress.

Mashable editor Lance Ulanoff tweeted this morning: "Eric Schmidt is on stage at #MWC talking global tech gap, blissfully unaware of the Apple news that just blotted out the sun. #iPad".

Apple has done this many times before, let loose an invite or rumor during some big event or before (if not during) a competitor's product announcement.

What Timing!

Apple's newest iPad comes at a time of great tablet uncertainty. I chatted to Tim Conneally today about MWC announcements: "Lighter on tablets, here and CES [Consumer Electronics Show]" -- that's after more than 100 new ones announced at both 2011 events. Tablet announcements are few at MWC 2012.

So far the only real stand-outs -- and they're not much for new hardware -- are Samsung Galaxy Tab 2.0, Galaxy Note 10.1 and Sony P, which goes on sale here in the United States from AT&T on March 4. That's three days before Apple's event. It's lousy timing for Sony.

Meanwhile some executives attending MWC acknowledged that their Android tablet sales aren't meeting expectations, which is a polite way of admitting being whipped by iPad. "Honestly, we're not doing very well in the tablet market," Samsung executive Hankil Yoon said yesterday during a MWC roundtable.

That's startling coming from the company ranked third in tablet sales, according to NPD DisplaySearch. Apple is leader, with 59.1 percent market share, followed by Amazon (16.7 percent) and Samsung (6.7 percent).

Meanwhile, Google's Andy Rubin gave reporters attending the mobile event grim numbers: 12 million Android tablets sold to date. That compares to 55 million iPads sold through end of 2011 -- 15 million, or more than all Android tablets -- just in fourth quarter.

Now along comes Apple's event announcement and presumed March launch of iPad 3. Want to guess what tablet everyone will talk about now. Apple just raised the cloak of invisibility on every other tablet, perhaps other than Amazon's Kindle Fire.

Burning Ring of Fire

Regarding Kindle Fire, there is the lingering question about a smaller iPad to compete. Two weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal reported rumors about the tablet's little sibling. I asked: "Would you buy 8-inch iPad?". Besides comments, there was a poll, to which 3,554 people responded so far. That's a healthy sample size. Results: 55.09 percent yes and, obviously, 44.91 percent no.

The spread is enough to win an election, but lacks when planning product marketing. Consider the context: It's obvious Apple would sell an 8-inch tablet for less than the 9.7-inch model, which starts at $499, I suggested bottom price of $299 in the story accompanying the poll. Yet only little more than half the respondents would chose the smaller, lower-cost tablet. As for those responding no, there's no context to determine whether they would buy a costlier iPad or none at all.

Apple rumors, like those about Microsoft products in the 1990s, have pull. Following just the rumor of 8-inch iPad, BetaNews reader Jessica changed her tablet plans: "I was thinking of buying a Kindle Fire, but am now thinking of waiting for the smaller iPad. The only reason I don't want am iPad is because it is so expensive. But for only about $100 more I would reconsider".

Imagine what happens now. Apple just froze pretty much most tablet sales by sending out the invite. Yes, I'll ask a buying question when the new iPad is announced.

BetaNews reader dougau cracked me up: "I'm loving all these 'would you buy' articles, Joe. I have a feeling 75 percent of BetaNews users would spend $500.00 for a bag of shit if it had a Apple logo on it". Is he right? It's not a frivolous question. Apple's invite couldn't take away from Mobile World Congress announcements, if there wasn't so much interest in that logo and the products behind it.

Photo Credit: SFerdon/Shutterstock

Will you try Windows 8 Consumer Preview?

Posted: February 28th, 2012, 10:22am MST by Joe Wilcox

The so-called consumerization of IT starts now. Sure people haul Androids, iPads, iPhones and other gadgets to work -- and mix together personal and professional data, and behavior. But workers the world over will soon have something else to haul into the office, and, whoa, may March roar in for many network managers.

Tomorrow, during Mobile World Congress, Microsoft plans to debut Windows 8 Consumer Preview. It's not an IT preview, but, c`mon, you know where the software is going. Many of you will slap this puppy on to every PC you can, including that employer-issued clunker. Talk about March Madness, as Windows 8 storms the enterprise by every backdoor possible.

Or so I contend. You can prove me right or wrong by answering question: Will you try Windows 8 Consumer Preview? And where? What computer? Personal or professional? What hardware configuration? Please answer in comments.

Microsoft says that pretty much any PC running Windows 7 is pimped and ready for an 8 date. You bring the wine, I've got flowers. The computer may be ready, but are you? Windows 8 will demand much from users, starting with the many user interface changes and enhancements. But the operating system also offers much, in terms of potentially improved productivity and security.

The changes have sparked much debate about Windows 8's suitability, particularly in the enterprise. My opinion: Windows 8 adoption will be low, similar to Vista. Most enterprises have recently deployed Windows 7 or will have done so by the time its successor ships. I see October as likely timeframe. From that perspective, most enterprises wouldn't deploy Windows 8 anyway, so now is a good time for Microsoft to make those radical architectural and user experience changes to prep its core market, businesses, for Windows 9. Consumers will take what's on their shiny, new PCs, and they'll bring them to work -- pushing enterprises to adapt and manage Windows 8 faster.

BetaNews reader Froderik asks: "Will Microsoft have a Win8 'Tech Beta' cycle or just release consumer previews to all & sundry?" I don't see how. The Consumer Preview is for everyone, followed by a release candidate for all. Otherwise there's not enough time to release gold code and get Windows 8 on new PCs for holiday sales. Think: Consumerization of Windows, at least this release cycle.

Many of you have used the Developer Preview released in September 2011. To my surprise, reactions are mixed. Commenter nilst2011: "Windows 8 is a joke. It is for tablets but not desktops. Who the H would like to sit and point at a screen with his/her arm for 8 hours a day? No way! The last OS worth its name is Windows 7. I did give it a last chance some weeks ago, and I am still running it and like it".

I expect to hear complaints lots like this one during the Consumer Preview. Absolutely, fatigue is a problem using vertical touchscreens, but users don't have to stay in the Metro UI; they can fall back to the older desktop motif (granted, with Office Ribbon makeover).

BetaNews reader Emi Cyberschreiber is more enthusiastic: "I like windows 8, I'm using, of course, [the] Developer Preview as my main OS since September, and it's been amazing -- lighter, faster, better (not counting bugs) than Win7 SP1 and with a cool new UI, nice new integration, like Xbox Live, SkyDrive, etc...For me it's fine, and I will get it on RTM. I like it now and I will like it more since it's getting better with each new build".

So, will you try Windows 8 Consumer Preview?

SAP deploys Samsung Android smartphones, tablets

Posted: February 28th, 2012, 9:03am MST by Joe Wilcox

What's all this dirty talk about enterprises going gaga for iPads? During Mobile World Congress, Samsung announced that SAP will deploy Galaxy S II smartphones and Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablets internally. Oh my, perhaps there is a place for Android in the enterprise. But how much room alongside iPad?

SAP CIO Oliver Bussmann says the Android devices will be available to the company's "global workforce as part of our internal device-agnostic strategy. SAP software running on Samsung's Android devices will allow our workforce to do business in the moment". From an enterprise management perspective, he expressed confidence that SAP "can secure our business data on these devices using an extensive range of IT policies".

Among enterprise software, Samsung Androids will run Sybase Afaria 7.0 "mobile device management system". Employees also will use Exchange Account Management for securely sending emails. Technology managers will have granular control over what apps can be downloaded, what devices can be connected and how passwords are used, among other capabilities.

The companies didn't disclose how widely the Android devices would be deployed.

During Mobile World Congress, SAP also announced the aforementioned Afaria 7.0. The highlight new feature is a redesigned user interface.

"The consumerization of IT is driving our innovation path and commitment to providing customers with the industry’s most comprehensive, robust and streamlined mobility management platform, including mobile device management", Sanjay Poonen, SAP Global Solutions president, says. "The new, delightful UI significantly enhances the end-user experience while helping reduce management costs for enterprise IT".

SAP's goal is to make enterprise software more "personal".

Afaria 7.0 client software is available for iOS -- to mention before someone does in comments. And, of course, Android, as well as other operating systems.

'Discovery' and 'social' define Vimeo for iPad

Posted: February 27th, 2012, 7:57pm MST by Joe Wilcox

That was unexpected. This evening I tried out Vimeo for iOS 2.0 and much prefer the Android version released last month during Consumer Electronics Show. Conceptually, Vimeo for iOS offers more, so I expected to appreciate it more. Instead, I find the Android app to be cleaner and more intuitive on a tablet. Then, again, I'm not the target audience.

The new Vimeo app's big stand-out benefit is native, iPad support. The other explains why I'm perhaps tripping over perceived complexity: The app's approach and capabilities are more like Vimeo's website, where I have spent scant too little time over the last 12 months or so. If you frequent Vimeo on the web and often use features there, you might just love the app on iPad. You're the audience the video-sharing site wants to reach.

To be clear, the user experience differences I observe with Android pertain more to tablets. I find the phone apps to look and feel similar enough.

Vimeo released the app earlier today during Mobile World Congress 2012.

"We’ve taken what we learned while creating our previous apps and applied it to the updated iOS to improve overall design and usability", Joseph Schmitt, Vimeo lead mobile developer, says. "We’re especially pleased with the awesome iPad user interface, which the Vimeo community has eagerly awaited".

I assume that community will appreciate the iPad UI more than me. The Android app feels more fluid to me, and the iOS app more cluttered and, well, in my face. Those attributes reflect something about platform differences, closer ties to Vimeo's website and emphasis on video discovery and social sharing -- both of which are hugely desirable benefits. No doubt, after a couple hours, Vimeo for iOS 2.0 will fit me better.

Definitely, if you use Vimeo lots -- whether to watch or post videos, or both -- this app is for you. Discovery tools, like at the Vimeo website, are exceptional. The app provides quick access to all the vitals about your uploads and what the heck you've been watching. Taking cues from the website, users can view from or save to their Watch Later queues, Like or access Liked videos, comment and share clips as well. Sharing options reflect some of the services where Vimeo is popular. Facebook and Twitter are givens, as well a Tumblr and WordPress.

Like on Android tablets, there is video-editing capability, something I'm definitely interested to try out but didn't have time to this evening. Users can tap into the Vimeo Music Store from the editor for adding soundtracks to clips. Of course, content creators can upload videos, including those in HD, from the app.

Vimeo is smart to finally support iPad. "We’ve seen mobile traffic triple since we launched our original iPhone app in early 2011", Schmitt says. I'm not surprised. According to comScore report "2012 Mobile Future in Focus", which released last week: "By the end of 2011, iOS was driving 60.1 percent of all connected device traffic in the US from iPads, iPhones and iPod touches. In contrast, the Android OS accounted for only 32.4 percent of traffic".

More remarkable: "A breakdown of tablet traffic by platform indicates that iOS has a substantial lead, driving 90.4 percent of all tablet traffic in December 2011". So absolutely, iPad is where Vimeo should want to be, while improving the iPhone and iPod touch experiences -- and making them more familiar to those people frequenting the website.

Vimeo for iOS 2.0 requires iOS 4.3 and above running on iPhone 3GS, 4 or 4S or iPad.

The best smartphone isn't at Mobile World Congress

Posted: February 27th, 2012, 4:41pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Now why is that? I want to know. Don't you?

For weeks, persistent leaks and rumors teased about Samsung Galaxy S III and how the phone wouldn't debut at Mobile World Congress. Boy Genius Report has deets that are to die for: 4.8-inch 1080p display, 1.5GHz quad-core Samsung Exynos processor, 8-megapixel rear and 2MP front-facing cameras, ceramic case, 4G LTE and Ice Cream Sandwich.

You can stop drooling on the keyboard now. Or if you haven't been then perhaps you misunderstood that 1080p. It doesn't refer to video playback but to the actual screen resolution. Can you say pocket Blu-ray, baby? I can already feel Samsung droid boys' swagger before iPhone idolaters and their puny 3.5-inch Retina displays. Not to be forgotten, but definitely mourned for momentary glory: HTC One X, announced yesterday, that suddenly is quite literally oh-so yesterday.

That's all assuming the Boy Genius has got the right specs. Certainly previous track record would suggest they're golden. If S3 is the measure of greatness, then Apple had better start re-evaluating iPhone 5 plans now. ;-)

Big question, assuming rumors about no MWC Galaxy S III launch are true: Why not? Hey, I've got some possible reasons:

The S3 simply isn't ready.
Galaxy S II is still selling well and Samsung doesn't want to hurt sales by announcing S3 too soon.
Galaxy S III won't launch soon (even though announcing in Barcelona, Spain, and shipping many moons later is typical).
If launch is aways off, Samsung doesn't want to give up too many details for concern competitors (Can you say Apple?) will copy or prepare counter-marketing.
Samsung plans a simultaneous global launch. The Galaxy S II arrived in major markets China and United States long after other countries. That's a mistake not to repeat.

I rarely write about rumors, but BGR rarely misses and there's great context to fit Galaxy S III into a story.

Photo: Boy Genius Report

Windows Phone isn't good enough for 41MP Nokia 808 PureView

Posted: February 27th, 2012, 1:21pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Wow, Windows Phone is so bleeding-edge that Nokia's hot new 41-megapixel camera phone runs Symbian. You know, that "burning platform" CEO Stephen Elop dumped for Microsoft's mobile OS. Perhaps that burning should have had different context, as hot for high-brow hardware. Because a 41MP camera always with you is smokin'. I'm on fire. Aren't you?

The Finnish-phone maker announced the Nokia 808 PureView during Mobile World Congress today in Barcelona, Spain. The 41-megapixel camera phone might just be the showstopper -- that despite Microsoft's Wednesday event launching Windows 8 Consumer Preview. There's some real software and hardware innovation here that shows Nokia isn't dead yet and shouldn't have turned over so much research and development to Microsoft. The lost R&D is Elop's doing, and again supports my contention he's killing Nokia.

Nokia has long lead the market for exceptional camera phones, even with the popularity of iPhone 4 and 4S for candid shots. The 808 PureView is no exception -- well perhaps it is, for so considerably advancing the art. Too bad: Burning hardware and software overlay an operating system Nokia no longer has use for. Please, someone get a hanky so I can cry over Symbian's grave.

I am Your Density

Pixel density is perhaps the biggest problem with the size of sensors used in devices like camera phones. The 808 PureView's sensor has an active area of 7728 x 5368 pixels. Actual pixels used depend on image sizes. For example, 7152 x 5368 pixels at 4:3 ratio or 7728 x 4354 pixels for 16:9. Increasing the number of pixels (hence, giving more megapixel rating) over a small sensor area produces all kinds of problems -- with noise and artifacts among the top ones.

The phone maker tries to solve these problems with some nifty engineering. Nokia's Ian Delaney explains:

The technology means that taking typically sized shots (say, 5 megapixels) the camera can use oversampling to combine up to seven pixels into one 'pure' pixel, eliminating the visual noise found on other mobile phone cameras. On top of that, you can zoom in up to 3X without losing any of the details in your shot -- and there’s no artificially created pixels in your picture, either...

The oversampling technology also allows for significantly improved low light performance than previous camera phones, Compared to a typical optical zoom camera used at full zoom, the Nokia 808 PureView captures over 5x more light. Under normal lighting conditions, performance is also enhanced, as this combination allows for faster shutter speeds, reducing the effects of camera shake.

Nokia has produced a white paper explaining PureView technology.

Zoom is another benefit for both photos and videos. For pics, think of it as cropping to go. For the most part, a zoom lens isn't practical in camera phones, and a prime, fixed focal-length lens tends to produce better images anyway. Digital zoom typically reduces photo quality. But with a 41MP sensor, digital zoom is workable, or so Nokia claims -- 4X lossless zoom at 1080p and 6X at 720p, both shooting 30 frames per second. Photos 3X.

Delaney espouses another benefit:

Great video is nothing without great audio. Here the Nokia 808 PureView also sets a new standard. The Nokia 808 PureView is the world’s first video recording device to allow recording without distortion at audio levels beyond the capability of human hearing. This allows you to even in the harshest of environment capture stereo CD-like audio quality.

It's a Phone, Too

Nokia makes some pretty big promises about the 808 PureView's photo and video capabilities. The sample images below, which the company claims are untouched, are stunning. Consider the context: The photographer must be mountain climbing, too. His phone is the camera.

That brings in the other benefits, of carrying one device for making phone calls, checking GPS location or taking photos and videos while out on the mountain.

Nokia 808 PureView key features: 4-inch AMOLED screen; capacitive touchscreen (Gorilla Glass); 16GB storage, expandable to 48GB with microSD card; 41MP camera with Xenon flash and f/2.4 Carl Zeiss lens; HSPA+ (up to 14Mbps), WCDMA 850/900/1700/1900/2100, GSM/EDGE 850/900/1800/1900; WiFi N; Bluetooth 3; GPS; Near Field Communications; FM transmitter; 1400 mAh battery; and Symbian Belle Feature Pack 1.

Nokia did not immediately reveal availability or pricing.

Save us from the stylus! Samsung unveils Galaxy Note 10.1!

Posted: February 27th, 2012, 10:05am MST by Joe Wilcox

I am seriously having Windows Tablet PC déjà vu. Today, at Mobile World Congress, Samsung unveiled Galaxy Note 10.1 -- a tablet with stylus (okay S Pen, as the South Korean electronics giant calls it). So much for capacitive touchscreen tablets -- really, Apple's emphasis on fingers -- liberating us from the stylus. There are reasons why Tablet PC failed, while iPad succeeded. The pen isn't mightier than the finger.

Galaxy Note 10.1 is essentially a larger version of Galaxy Note, which Samsung is promoting heavily here in the United States. Difference: No telephony on the larger Note, which display is 10.1 inches. AT&T sells the 5.3-inch Note for $299.99, although Amazon has it for half as much. I know three people who bought the smaller Note. Two returned theirs, and the other says he will this week. Reason: The pen, which is supposed to be the device's main benefit. Complaints range from accuracy problems to less need for the stylus than expected.

I'm looking at the 10.1-inch model and wondering how it can be any more appealing than its sibling, particularly with last-year's hardware. Like Galaxy Tab 2, which Samsung announced yesterday at MWC, the new Note comes with dual-core processor. Samsung, what have you got against quad-core?

Key features: 10.1-inch display with 1280 x 800 resolution; 1.4 GHz dual-core processor; 3-megapixel rear-facing camera with LED flash; 2MP front-facing camera; 16GB, 32GB or 64GB storage; microSD slot (storage expandable up to 32GB); HSPA＋ (21Mbps) 850/900/1900/2100, EDGE/GPRS 850/900/1800/1900; WiFi; 7000 mAH battery; S Pen; TouchWiz UI; and Android 4 (Ice Cream Sandwich). The tablet measures 256.7 x 175.3 x 8.9 mm and weighs 583 grams.

Samsung didn't immediately announce availability or specific SKUs. Some models won't have HSPA+ radios, for example.

Pen Pushers

JK Shin, president of Samsung's IT & Mobile Communications division, says the larger tablet "takes productivity on a Note to a whole new level. With a larger, fully utilizable screen and superior performance, it combines the intuitiveness of handwriting with all the versatility of digital content to let users be more productive across all of life’s demanding tasks -- whether working, learning, or simply creating their own stories".

I'm not convinced the pen is mightier than the finger. Human beings are tool users who experience and manipulate the world through five senses. Consider how people interact with items for sale in retail shops. First they look, and then they touch. People examine objects they desire as much with their hands as their eyes.

Hands and fingers are important because they are active -- they’re how people tactilely manipulate the world around them. Touch is hugely important, and makes tablets more personal, the experience more intimate. The stylus increases complexity, creates distance, even when considering people write -- or do they? I almost never use an ink pen and paper. For many people, if I'm even remotely indicative, the stylus is even less familiar than keyboard and touchpad.

The finger and touch are more natural, because they extend you. Good user interfaces build on the familiar -- and there is nothing more familiar than me, myself and I.

That said, there is an argument for a stylus when looking at markets like China and the complexity of communicating complex language scripts. Voice is more natural than the pen. Speech-to-text would be better user interface than stylus, then.

Granted, there are artists, who draw with pens and perhaps Galaxy Note 10.1 is for them. Samsung includes Adobe Photoshop Touch for Android, catering to that market. But Samsung isn't going after artists with either Note but the mass-market. I don't see how a pen-based tablet is for the masses. These are niche devices, at best, and the stylus more liability than asset.

"We are demonstrating Samsung’s commitment to extend the mobile category and are working with key partners like Adobe to provide extraordinary experiences for users that enable them to be more productive, express themselves creatively and add a touch of fulfillment to their lives", Shin says.

Oh yeah? If people felt so much "fulfillment" from the stylus, we'd all be using Windows Tablet PCs today rather than iPads or Androids.

Is this tablet for you? Have you tried out the smaller Note (and how do you like it)? Please answer in comments.

Panda Cloud Antivirus 1.5.2 improves on-demand scanning speed

Posted: February 27th, 2012, 8:20am MST by Joe Wilcox

Panda Antivirus has announced a maintenance release for Panda Cloud Antivirus 1.5.2, promising better performance, a new search engine for its toolbar add-on and a wide number of bug fixes.

Panda Cloud Antivirus is designed to minimize its impact on system resources by tapping into cloud-based processing power to do much of the security tool’s leg work in analyzing, blocking and attempting to remove malware infections. This makes it especially suitable for deployment on low-spec and older PCs.

Although version 1.5.2 is described as a “maintenance release”, it does promise some major improvements. The headline features are improved on-demand scanning speeds, particularly on Windows 7 machines. It also promises improved integration with the Collective Intelligence backend server that it uses to identify malware, which should mean that protection against new malware variants is obtained quicker than before.

Panda Cloud Antivirus 1.5.2 also updates its optional toolbar to version 3.0, replacing Yahoo! with Google as its search engine.

There are also numerous bug fixes and stability improvements: files are now deleted without slowing down the computer, while there should be no more blue screens of death when drivers are being unloaded. Issues reported by AV-Comparatives scanning certain types of folders have also been resolved, and an upgrade prompt should no longer appear every 20 minutes either.

Version 1.5.2 also promises to fix various disinfecting issues regarding malware sharing a specific format and characteristics, as well as malware running in memory under certain conditions.

Panda Cloud Antivirus 1.5.2 is a free download for PCs running Windows XP or later. A beta of the forthcoming Panda Cloud Antivirus 2.0, which includes a firewall in addition to antivirus protection, is also available for testing purposes only.

Photo Credit: Andrea Danti/Shutterstock

New Samsung mobiles are oh-so last year

Posted: February 26th, 2012, 10:23pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Samsung wasted no time announcing new devices during Mobile World Congress 2012, and what a strange lot, too. There's a projector phone and successors to the original Galaxy Tab that, by the specs, are last year's models. That's right, Galaxy Tab 2 has no quad-core processor for you.

Galaxy Beam stays in the past, too, running Android 2.3, rather than newest version Android 4.0 -- aka Ice Cream Sandwich.

Samsung didn't give pricing or availability in its Galaxy Beam announcement, keeping to MWC's awful tradition of announcing in Barcelona, Spain, but not shipping for many months later.

"Galaxy Beam provides mobile freedom, enabling a unique shared experience around digital content for everyone—anywhere and instantly—from a smartphone as slim and portable as any on the market", JK Shin, President of Samsung's IT & Mobile Communications division, says.

"Galaxy Beam is a device borne out of Samsung’s insight and innovation, demonstrating Samsung’s commitment to providing extraordinary experiences for consumers with products that let them express and fulfill themselves".

Oh? That would be "extraordinary" as in 5-megapixel camera and aging Android? Well, there is projection -- up to 50 inches. That's good enough to rent a movie from Android Market and have an impromptu movie with friends. Hey, Last night's Oscar winner, "The Artist", anyone?

Galaxy Beam basic specs: 1 GHz dual-core processor; 4-inch WVGA display (800 x 480 resolution); 768MB RAM; 8GB storage; microSD slot (up to 32GB additional storage); 5-megapixel rear-facing and 1.3MP front-facing cameras; HSPA (14.4Mbps/5.76Mbps) 850/900/1900/2100; EDGE/GPRS 850/900/1800/1900; 2000 mAh battery; and Android 2.3.

Samsung also unveiled Galaxy Tab 2 in two sizes, and the latter is a bit beefier than the original (could that be to avoid nuisance patent suits from Apple?). Again, the specs aren't exactly earth shattering. Other than Ice Cream Sandwich, I struggle to see much different from predecessor models.

7-inch Galaxy Tab 2 basic specs: 1 GHz dual-core processor; 7-inch WSVGA display (1024 x 600 resolution); 1GB RAM; 8GB, 16GB or 32GB storage; microSD slot (up to 32GB additional storage); 3-megapixel rear-facing and VGA front-facing cameras; HSPA+ (21Mbps) 850/900/1900/2100; 4000 mAh battery; and Android 4.0.

10.1-inch Galaxy Tab 2 basic specs: 1 GHz dual-core processor; 10.1-inch WXGA display (1280 x 800 resolution); 1GB RAM; 16GB or 32GB storage; microSD slot (up to 32GB additional storage); 3-megapixel rear-facing and VGA front-facing cameras; HSPA+ (21Mbps) 850/900/1900/2100; 7000 mAh battery; and Android 4.0.

Samsung didn't immediately announce pricing for the two tablets, which begin shipping in March.

HTC One X is all quad-core goodness

Posted: February 26th, 2012, 6:54pm MST by Joe Wilcox

It's Mobile World Congress, where handset manufacturers announce phones they won't ship for months. HTC will do a little better, offering the new HTC One family of smartphones starting in April. Flagship handset One X is loaded for bear, with 1.5GHz quad-core Nvidia Tegra 3 processor and 4.7-inch 720p display.

Is it me, or does the One X look a little like a beautified HTC Titan II but running Android, packing more cores and offering higher-res display? Or perhaps these HTC phones all kind of look the same. Whatever, the One family (pictured), particularly the X, looks lots like HTC trying to regain some of its Android mojo.

If you're willing to wait those aforementioned months, AT&T will carry HTC One X minus two cores but with 4G LTE -- that's a 1.5GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 processor for you, bud. Hell, so much for that quad-core goodness.

Other features: Super LCD 2 non-PenTile display, 32GB storage, 1GB DDR2 SDRAM, 8-megapixel f/2 rear-facing camera, 1080p video capture, Beats By Dr. Dre Audio, HSPA+ (up to 21Mbps), Sense 4 UI, Dropbox integration via Sense, 1800 mAh non-removable battery and, of course, Ice Cream Sandwich.

"The best moments in life are captured with a photo or remembered by a song, so it was key for the HTC One series to improve these emotional experiences with an amazing camera and authentic sound experience", Peter Chou, HTC CEO, says. "We are very focused on creating a camera and audio experience customers will love and use often and we believe the HTC One series delivers this in a way never seen on a phone before".

Seeing is believing, and I haven't seen yet.

Along with the flagship phone, HTC announced the smaller One S, which shares same camera and audio benefits, Dropbox integration and also Sense 4 and Android 4. T-Mobile USA already announced plans to carry the phone. Other specs: 4.3-inch qHD Super AMOLED display (with 960 by 540 resolution), 1.5GHz dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon processor, 16GB storage, HSPA+ (up to 42Mbps) and 1650 mAh non-removable battery.

Finally, there is the One V, which design borrows from the HTC Legend. The One V is low-end and, for right now, sans carrier. The smartphone has 3.7-inch display (with 800 x 480 resolution), 1GHz single-core processor, 512MB RAM, 5-megapixel rear-facing camera, 1500 mAh battery, Dropbox integration, Sense 4 UI and Ice Cream Sandwich.

Apple is winning the mobile platform wars

Posted: February 25th, 2012, 5:04pm MST by Joe Wilcox

In October 2009, I explained why "iPhone cannot win the smartphone wars". Many of the reasons then still hold true today. But I wrote that analysis before Apple released iPad. So, 10 months later I followed up with "Apple can still win the mobile platform wars, but it won't be easy". Now, 18 months later, as Mobile World Congress starts in Barcelona, Spain, I claim: Apple is winning the mobile platform wars, but achieving ultimate supremacy won't be easy.

In August 2010, I observed: "Pundits already are predicting iPhone's death brattle before the great Android god. I wouldn't write off Apple just yet. The mobile wars are bigger than smartphones, as Apple already has shown". Little has changed since. Android apologists still predict victory over iOS, while ignoring fundamental platform gains that put Apple in front.

Dollars and Sense

The numbers add up where they matter most, as they have trended for well over a year. At the end of 2011, Apple had 315 million cumulative iOS device sales. The 55 million iPads sold to date account for 17 percent of the total and iPhone, with 175 million sold, 56 percent.

If my flu-socked brain matter calculates right, Apple generated around $656 per iPhone and $616 per iPad during calendar 2011.

Update: But profits are more revealing. After I posted, on February 26, Asymco released a cost breakdown for iPhone that works out to $330 profit per handset.

Something else: During fiscal first quarter 2012 (synchronous with calendar Q4 2011) Apple generated more revenue ($46.33 billion) than all fiscal 2009 ($42.9 billion). iOS drives revenue increases at an alarming pace.

Platform Perfection

The point: There are several metrics that define successful computing platforms, with money being the most important. Apple rakes in cash from iOS at accelerating pace, which trickles down dollars to third parties of all kinds, whether they be software developers, hardware manufacturers or other partners, like retailers and wireless carriers. Everyone wants to associate with a winner, which Apple and iOS increasingly are.

As the month ends, so come two Apple milestones: 25 billion app downloads and $4 billion paid out to developers.

Quick example of the benefits: I recently received email from developer Presselite, about 3 million downloads of its Vintage Camera app during first month on Apple's App Store. There are free and 99-cent versions available. Developers go where the money -- and distribution -- is.

But money isn't everything. Typically, successful platforms share six common traits:

There are good development tools and APIs for easily creating applications
There is at least one killer application people really want
There is breadth of useful applications
Third parties make lots of money
The platform is broadly available
There is a robust ecosystem

Platforms succeed for combinations of reasons leading to network effects. In November 2011 "Mobile Platforms: The Clash of Ecosystems" four VisionMobile analysts explain:

It is clear that Apple’s iOS is a clever implementation of a mobile application platform coming from a company with the right kind of experience and DNA. Strong network effects between users and app developers are inherent to iOS ecosystem design...The unprecedented success of Apple iOS is a testament to the advantages of application platforms. All new platforms introduced after the original iPhone, including Android, attempt to copy Apple’s application platform recipe.

iOS has all six platform attributes covered, but so does Android. In fact, in January, British analyst firm Ovum predicted that Android will become the most important platform to developers within the next 12 months, replacing iOS.

Ovum's Adam Leach explains: "A smartphone platform's success is dictated not only by the pull of consumers and the push of handset vendors and mobile operators but also by a healthy economy of applications delivered by third-party developers". Except the platform is bigger than smartphones, including tablets, too. So Ovum's analysis is short-sighted. Nearly one-quarter of iOS sales in calendar 2011 were iPads.

Assessing Android Tablets

Android tablets have failed to significantly challenge iPad, despite predictions otherwise. For example, in January 2011, BMO Capital Markets analyst Keith Bachman predicted that "the number of players participating in Android tablets will replicate the success Google has had on phones" and that they would "reach unit parity" late in the year.

Android tablet shipments did spike during Q4, according to Strategy Analytics, but nowhere near parity with iPad. Respective market shares: 39.1 percent to 57.6 percent. However, Android unit shipments tripled year over year: 3.1 million to 10.5 million units compared to iPad's rise to 15.4 million from 7.3 million.

By every measure that matters, and not just price, Amazon's tablet directly competes with iPad. Unlike other Android device manufacturers, Amazon takes complete control over the entire stack -- software, hardware, cloud services, retail sales and customer support. Kindle Fire features an Amazon-customized version of Android 2.x, its own Android app store, music and movie stores, ebook store, web browser and customized media consumption software and services. This curated approach reminds of Apple. Amazon is creating a curated experience that matches Apple's and exceeds it in some respects.

Apple faces another change, more uncertain, and not from Android. Microsoft seeks to outflank iOS with Windows 8 and Windows on ARM. Then there is Windows Phone's possible future on Nokia tablets. Microsoft isn't DOA yet in emerging mobile categories, just lying in critical condition. The company is awake from the coma. The question: How much brain function is left? The answer will come with next-versions Windows execution, which looks promising enough.

Differentiation, Dummy

As the mobile platform wars rage, Apple has several unique advantages over competitors, which significance shouldn't be ignored. The next 12 months will determine whether Apple can keep winning the platform wars or fall behind Android. To be clear: Apple winning doesn't make Android a loser. The market is rapidly consolidating around Android and iOS.

Update: In Barcelona, on February 27, Android chief Andy Rubin said that device sales had reached 300 million and daily activations 850,000, which are impressive numbers.

Key Apple differentiators:

1. Distribution. In January 2011 post "Why is iPad successful?" I explained ecosystem's advantages mainly around manufacturing and distribution. The latter is hugely important. Apple iOS devices are available from about 40,000 outlets globally. iPhone: more than 230 carriers in more than 100 countries and expanding. So the platform has huge reach, and that's ignoring 315 million cumulative sales -- install base of users buying apps.

See #3, #4 and #5 about app distribution advantages.

2. Apple Store. Apple operates more than 360 retail shops worldwide, and they give iOS huge boost over Android. In May 2011, I opined that "Apple would be nothing without its retail stores". They provide an important point of customer service and bring added confidence about buying iOS devices over others. If something goes wrong, Apple Store can fix or, often, replace the device.

Example: With iPhone 4S, Apple offers an upgraded warranty service for $99. AppleCare+ extends coverage to 24 months and up to two phone replacements (for $49 service fee). If an iPhone 4S buyer drops the phone and shatters the glass, Apple Store replaces the smartphone. Apple would be smart to offer similar option for iPad 3; it's what I would do and expect Apple will.

3. Unified platform. Apple controls the entire stack -- hardware, software and services -- and distribution. This control assures developers and users a consistent experience across iOS devices. Nothing on Android compares.

4. Software distribution. When Apple issues an iOS update, every supported device gets it. By comparison Android updating is fragmented. In November 2011, I asserted that "Android fragmentation doesn't matter" in part because carriers and OEMs already do so much customization, such as HTC Sense or Samsung TouchWiz user interfaces.

I stand by this opinion for Android 2.x on phones and even 3.x on tablets. Nevertheless, because Google doesn't exert enough control over Android, the market moves slowly to Android 4.0, which in many respects exceeds iOS 5. Hell, Google now owns Motorola and most of its own devices won't get Ice Cream Sandwich until second half of 2012 -- if ever. As of February, according to Google's official stats, only 1 percent of Android devices ran Ice Cream Sandwich.

5. Curation. Apple offers a curated app, OS, device and user experience compared to fragmented Android. Sure, Android OEMs offer more choice, but also greater uncertainty for users and developers. Only Amazon offers as much a curated platform as Apple.

"You" or "i"

Mobile devices are by definition "connected", but iOS is considerably more so than Android. This attribute reflects much about the platform's health and long-term developer opportunity. According to comScore report "2012 Mobile Future in Focus": "By the end of 2011, iOS was driving 60.1 percent of all connected device traffic in the US from iPads, iPhones and iPod touches. In contrast, the Android OS accounted for only 32.4 percent of traffic".

More remarkable: "A breakdown of tablet traffic by platform indicates that iOS has a substantial lead, driving 90.4 percent of all tablet traffic in December 2011".

Mobile devices are more personal than PCs because of interaction, particularly fingers and touch, and how they're used to interact with people. Apps are part of this. They have caught up to browsers in terms of usage in the United States and five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and United Kingdom), according to comScore's report. On smartphones, apps are third most-popular attribute affecting choice among US users. comScore ranked on a 10-point scale. Mobile network quality: 8.2. Operating system: 8.1. Apps selection: 7.9.

What consumers say they'll do often isn't what they do. Consider Verizon and the perceived network quality advantage of 4G LTE over its legacy CDMA data network. Yet during calendar fourth quarter, Verizon activated 4.3 million iPhones, representing 55.8 percent of smartphones sold. By comparison, Verizon sold 2.3 million 4G LTE devices, which includes mobile hotspots and tablets. At best, LTE devices accounted for 30 percent of smartphone sales.

However, since that number includes other devices, iPhone outsold LTE smartphones by about 2 to 1. At Verizon at least, something about iPhone mattered more than network quality, nor was Android or its available apps compelling enough for the majority of smartphone buyers.
Something else: According to comScore, iPhone was the most-acquired handset in the United States and five European countries. That's for all phones, not just smartphones.

Actually, iPhone was the top-three selling handsets in the United States and top-two in the Euro five. United States, in order: iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS and 4S. Euro 5: iPhone 4 and 3GS. The 4S ranked fifth. Mmmm, by one measure, iPhone is winning the smartphone wars, too, despite my prediction otherwise in October 2009.

These are all signs of Apple's increasingly mobile platform momentum, which hugely accelerated during second half 2011 and the final quarter, particularly. Apple is winning the mobile platform wars. But the market remains volatile. Winning isn't the same as won or splitting the market with another (Android). For now, many more people are putting the "you" or the "me" in mobile by choosing an "i" device.

You will get 'Smoked by Windows Phone'

Posted: February 24th, 2012, 3:36pm MST by Joe Wilcox

If not for the flu, I would have caught this yesterday: Microsoft has launched a digital-only video ad campaign based on its "Smoked by Windows Phone" contest at this year's Consumer Electronics Show. It's another marketing win for Microsoft, and this has become habit -- and strangely so for a company that just a few years ago showed about as much advertising finesse as a dog scratching fleas.

The video here is a long version. The actual Windows Phone clips appearing on popular tech sites are 15 or 30 seconds. I count four of these and another two-minuter. Microsoft reshot the contests at one of its retail shops, rather than use video from CES.

And whoa, unless my perception is whacko, the exterior shot is Microsoft Store here in San Diego. Had I followed Microsoft's Windows Phone blog closely enough, I would have known that Ben Rudolph and company were here smokin' competing handsets on February 15. Well, hell, I didn't know Fashion Valley mall allowed smoking in stores.

Some advice to Microsoft: Don't stop at the web. Cut 60-second commercials for TV. The concept is fabulous.

"This is just the beginning", says Rudolph, the guy doing the smoking in the videos. "Look for more videos and fun stuff soon!"

I should hope so.

Who wins if Android and iPhone lose the smartphone wars?

Posted: February 24th, 2012, 1:22pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Finally, an analyst firm comes clean about the cell phone market's volatility. Gartner and IDC continue to make outrageous predictions -- like Windows Phone as No. 2 smartphone operating system in 2015 -- despite many earlier forecasts being drop-dead wrong. But comScore says pretty much anything can happen and likely will.

That's a stunning assessment, considering Androids' and iPhone's 2011 success, as highlighted in comScore's "2012 Mobile Future in Focus" report. iPhone 4 -- right, not 4S -- was the top-acquired phone in the United States and five combined Euro countries (Germany, France, Italy, Spain and United Kingdom) last year. Android led among smartphone operating systems.

comScore observes and asserts about the US handset market:

If it looks like Android and Apple are positioned to lock up the smartphone market, one would be well-advised to recall the history of this market and how quickly leadership positions can change. If we travel back in time to 2005, Palm was the smartphone market leader at 35 percent, followed by [Research in Motion] and Symbian, each with more than 20 percent of the US market.

By 2006, Microsoft had grabbed the lead, only to be overtaken by RIM in 2008, which would emerge as a strong leader for the next few years. In 2011, Android vaulted into the lead while Apple solidified a strong #2 position.

While the lead has switched hands numerous times over the course of the entire history of the US smartphone market, Apple has never claimed that mantle.

The situation in Europe is more volatile. Android snatched the smartphone OS share lead from Symbian -- 31.2 percent to 29.9 percent -- last year. Android was just 12 percent at end of 2010. Meanwhile, RIM's US share loss wasn't mirrored in Europe, where there were actual gains -- to 9.4 percent. The Windows Phone transition looms large on the Continent. "If Nokia can maintain a similar market share in the OEM market, then Microsoft will establish itself as a very strong third platform in Europe to contend against the likes of iOS and Android", according to comScore's report.

However, for all the potential volatility, the market is larger and more consolidated now than even 12 months ago and certainly more so than 2009, when RIM's US smartphone market share, as measured by operating system, was 41 percent and Android's was just a few percent.

Because:

In North America and the Euro 5 countries, smartphones now outsell feature phones.
Smartphone ownership in United Kingdom and Spain now is more than half of all handsets, and it's expected to pass this threshold in the other countries this year -- 100 million in the United States.
Success of Apple's App Store and Google's Android Market create platform lock-in, as people buy more mobile applications. As investment increases, likelihood of switching decreases.
Similarly, investment in cases and peripherals also decreases likelihood that users will so easily change platforms. This mattered with BlackBerry and Windows Mobile handsets in the past, but there was also smaller number of smartphone owners.

Other mitigating factors suggest a market ready to reach some kind of crescendo in 2012 and for changes among market leaders:

1. RIM has a new CEO and renewed focus that could slow market share losses in the United States and spur continued growth in international markets. According to comScore, 43 percent of BlackBerry customers buying a new smartphone last year stayed with the platform. There are many loyal RIM customers yet.

2. Android laps up lost BlackBerry customers. "Of RIM users who purchased a new smartphone in 2011, 31 percent purchased Android phones", according to comScore.

3. iPhone 4S has renewed Apple's platform in a big way. Partial fourth-quarter sales were so strong, iPhone 4S ranked as the third most acquired phone in the United States and fifth in the five Euro countries, based on comScore data.

4. Nokia's flagship Windows Phone, the Lumia 900, launches in the United States next month, backed by big-dollar marketing campaign. Meanwhile, Microsoft prepares to launch Windows 8, which when available will have strong visual connection to Windows Phone 7.5.

5. Google's Motorola acquisition troubles some Android partners, with major OEM partner Samsung increasing homegrown Bada's importance.

6. ZTE is gaining huge success in its home country China and has started shipping compelling Android smartphones to other markets.

Finally, there is the larger mobile OS context, such as tables, which I'll try to get to this weekend. I'm still down with the flu, or you would be reading that analysis already. The point: There are yet no assured winners in the smartphone wars, despite current Android handset and iPhone leadership.

Got unlocked Xperia? Get Ice Cream Sandwich beta ROM

Posted: February 23rd, 2012, 12:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Handset manufacturers aren't exactly rushing Android 4.0 out the door for recent smartphones. At least Sony has something for the cheery fan set who can't wait but might not want to install a rogue ROM. Today the consumer electronics giant posted an Ice Cream Sandwich beta ROM for 2011 Xperia phones.

The software can be applied to Xperia arc S, neo V and ray running Xperia software 4.0.2.A.0.42. However, the beta ROM isn't recommended for everyone. "Even though a lot of the basic functionality of this ICS beta ROM is working, you should only download and install the beta version if you are an advanced developer", according to Sony's mobile developer blog.

Today's beta follows an alpha build released in December. New features include user interface improvements, enablement of lockscreen and Face Unlock, updated email client and quick call availability. Strangely, most Google mobile apps aren't available in the beta.

"You must unlock your phone using our Unlock boot loader service, and agree to all the legal and warranty conditions that apply", Sony says. That is, if you haven't already, eh?

Sony's installation instructions:

1. Make sure your phone is running the latest software release, which is build number 4.0.2.A.0.42. If you can’t upgrade to this build number, it is not possible to try the Ice Cream Sandwich beta ROM for Xperia™ phones.

2. Go to unlockbootloader.sonymobile.com and unlock the boot loader of your phone. To do this, you must read through and agree to all the legal and warranty conditions that apply.

3. Download the Ice Cream Sandwich beta ROM for Xperia™ arc S, the Ice Cream Sandwich beta ROM for Xperia™ neo V or the Ice Cream Sandwich beta ROM for Xperia™ ray depending on your phone model.

4. Extract the downloaded zip file to your Android Fastboot directory. For example: ..\android-sdk\fastboot\Xperia_arcS_ICS_beta.

5. Open a command prompt and go to your Fastboot directory: ..\android-sdk\fastboot\

6. Flash the three beta ROM files one at a time using Fastboot. Use these three commands (replace the folder name if you are using Xperia™ neo V or Xperia™ ray):

fastboot flash boot ..\Fastboot\Xperia_arcS_ICS_beta\boot.img

fastboot flash userdata ..\Fastboot\Xperia_arcS_ICS_beta\userdata.img

fastboot flash system ..\Fastboot\Xperia_arcS_ICS_beta\system.img

7. Once done, please reboot your phone.

But wait, before you rush to download the ROM, Sony has has a gotcha: "If you unlock the boot loader, you will not be able to download and install the final Ice Cream Sandwich software upgrade for Xperia phones". Huh?

$199 iPad is a bad idea

Posted: February 23rd, 2012, 10:34am MST by Joe Wilcox

Over at eWeek, Don Reisinger presents "A $199 iPad: 10 Reasons Apple Should Discount its Tablet". My retitle: "10 lame-ass reasons why Apple should slash iPad's price to $199".

I don't often go for another reporter's jugular, but Reisinger is the king of top-10 lists and this is among his worst. We post top-10s sparingly at BetaNews, because of their limited news value. But they do generate traffic. Top-10s are the purview of pagevew whores. Well, hell, Google search might filter this post for the "W" word; so much for my pageviews. Frack it. I'm not a traffic slut; I just have a bad reputation.

Not Everyone Else is Doing It

Reisinger's first reason is by far the worst: "Everyone else is doing it". Oh yeah? Everyone else but Apple sells cheap PCs, too, and know-it-alls have called for price cuts for years. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company rightly resisted, drew a line at $999 and has fairly consistently stayed above it. That's MacBook Air's starting price. Higher pricing helped establish Mac as a premium brand and kept PC margins high.

Apple generated $46.33 billion revenue and $13.06 billion profit during calendar fourth quarter. Macs alone generated $6.6 billion revenue. Dell, which is best known for low-cost PCs, announced quarterly results two days ago: About $16 billion in revenue but only $764 million in profit. That's what happens when a company sells products cheap and reaps low margins as a result. Apple rightly resisted going there with Macs and should do so with iPad.

Apple's business model is very much not what everyone else is doing. So what if Amazon and Barnes & Noble sell $199 Android tablets? Why should Apple pee away margins? In the last quarter alone, Apple sold more than 15 million tablets, generating $9.1 billion in revenue. If my math is right -- and I am dog sick with the flu today, so it might not be -- that works out to about $591 per iPad. The tablet sells well, and according to every analyst tracking the market iPad is overwhelmingly the share leader.

It's insane to suggest slashing prices because "everyone else is doing it", when iPad is top of its game and Apple would give away lucrative margins for minimal gains.

Besides, everyone else isn't doing it. Most major brand tablets that compete head-to-head with iPad cost considerably more than $199. For example, Amazon's discounted price for Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 WiFi is $448 for the 16GB model and $480.53 for the 32GB. Heck, even the smaller Tab 7.0 Plus is $346.51 and $380.53 for the 16GB and 32GB models, respectively. Asus Eee Pad Transformer Prime ranges from $546.35 to $717.99. Yeah, everyone sure is doing it.

It Devalues the Brand

I won't rebut all Reisinger's reasons, mainly because I feel too sick but also it's professionally unbecoming. I've energy and inclination for two more, however. Next up: "It doesn’t devalue the brand". Doh, of course $199 iPad devalues the brand. Apple's successfully-proven pricing strategy is simple: Start high and go low only as needed to expand the market of available buyers.

iPod and iPhone are excellent examples. Apple started selling the original iPod, with 5GB storage, in November 2001 for $399. The following summer, Apple introduced new models with lower and higher selling prices: 5GB ($299), 10GB ($399) and 20GB ($499). From there, prices dropped slowly, as Apple introduced smaller, lower-capacity models like iPod mini in early 2004.

Today you can buy an iPod for as little as $49 or as much as $399. Apple carefully lowered prices, while spreading them out across a range, as it sought to reach more buyers and give existing iPod owners reasons to buy another.

iPhone pricing is similar but less so, since it's a product subsidized by wireless carriers. The original iPhone went on sale in June 2007 for $499 and $599, respectively, for 4GB and 8GB capacities (soon after, Apple lowered prices and issued $100 credits to early buyers). Prices dramatically dropped for iPhone 3G to $199 and $299, in July 2008, but subsidized by wireless carriers. Apple collected much more money, averaged exceeding $600 per handset. So the company could lower prices in partnership with carriers without peeing away margins.

iPad isn't iPhone

My continued explanation hits on another of the 10 reasons: "It’s working with the iPhone". Reisinger observes that Apple and carriers are "giving away the iPhone 3GS for free, and the iPhone 4 is being sold for just $99" He asks: "If it works with the iPhone, why wouldn’t it work with the iPad?"

For starters there's no need. Apple only lowered price on older iPhones outfitted with less storage capacity after maximizing sales and margins on higher-priced models. Discounts open the market to buyers wanting or needing to pay less. iPad still sells really well, starting at $499, as aforementioned.

iPhone is a subsidized product, and iPad is not. iPhone 3GS might be free to the customer, but it's not to carriers, which, last I checked, pay Apple $375. What works for iPhone won't for iPad, unsubsidized.

There is only one circumstance that justifies $199 iPad: Carrier subsidies. Because, like with iPhone, Apple would still get the big bucks for iPad from telcos like AT&T or Verizon. But, then, carriers would require monthly data plans, which are optional today. Definitely there are customers who would pay less now and commit to 24-month data contracts.

In this scenario, Apple could hit lower price points and snatch some sales from $199 Amazon Kindle Fire and Barnes & Noble Nook. Customers looking for carrier-free arrangements would pay full price. Apple keeps its higher margins either way.

There remains the question of reducing price on iPad 2, alongside iPad 3. Apple could possibly justify $399 but would sacrifice too much at $299. Considering how much demand there is for iPad 2 and interest in iPad 3, I don't see much reason for Apple to give up margins on older iPad selling for less. Yet.

Google Docs for Android adds real-time collaboration

Posted: February 22nd, 2012, 2:22pm MST by Joe Wilcox

There is some truth to Microsoft's "Googlighting" video -- that somehow every Google product feels like a work unfinished. Good Example: Google Docs for Android, which today got some features that should have been there in the first place. Collaboration is one of Google Docs headline features. But that feature lacked for something on Android phones or tablets. Today's update essentially brings more parity between the desktop and mobile clients.

"We want to give everyone the chance to be productive no matter where they are, so today we’re releasing a new update to the Google Docs app for Android", Vadim Gerasimov, Google software engineer explains. "We've brought the collaborative experience from Google Docs on the desktop to your Android device. You'll see updates in real time as others type on their computers, tablets and phones, and you can just tap the document to join in". Well it's about time.

"We also updated the interface to make it easier to work with your documents on the go", he continues. "For example, you can pinch to zoom and focus on a specific paragraph or see the whole document at a glance. We also added rich text formatting so you can do things like create a quick bullet list, add color to your documents, or just bold something important".

Wow. Apply bold. I'm just so excited.

"Finally, the office suite thhat should have been here since the start", comments Mark at the app's Android Market product page. "Works rather well on my Eee Pad, but it needs keyboard shortcuts -- like Ctrl+I for italics -- in order to be complete. Might aso be nice to have a page setting mode as well".

"Google Docs is close to where it should have been a year or more ago!", writes Angel de Marc, who uses Motorola XOOM.

V. Ellis Wade: "Today's update finally addressed the problem of document editing. Gonna give it a few more days, but this might mean an uninstall for Evernote".

"Better interface and functionality now, but still not enough. Am I the only one who think so?", asks Oscar, another XOOM user.

"This was the update I have been waiting for", writes Vachea, who uses Galaxy Nexus. "It looks so much more professional now. Love it, guys, keep up the good work".

Microsoft: Google and Motorola are losers

Posted: February 22nd, 2012, 1:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Technology is becoming something of a fight club, as competitors (and some partners) beat up one another over intellectual property rights. Apple sues seemingly everyone, while Microsoft collects royalties from most Android licensees. Motorola, holder of 17,000 patents with about 7,000 more pending, joins the foray, too, and Microsoft is big-time pushing back.

In a week where Microsoft accused Google of circumventing Internet Explorer privacy settings and posted the demeaning "Googlighting" video comes another slap down: The software giant filed antitrust complaints in Europe against Motorola and new owner Google.

Microsoft claims that Motorola demands high licensing fees for video patents and seeks to block Windows and Xbox sales without payment. It's allegedly high-stakes extortion, a series of low blows that has Microsoft calling on the referee to step into the fight.

Simply stated: To participate in technology standards, patent holders agree to license on "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms", better known simply as RAND here and FRAND in Europe, adding word "fair". These cover what are typically called "standard essential patents" that are broadly adopted and necessary, meaning certain products require them. Microsoft claims there's nothing fair, reasonable or non-discriminatory about Motorola licensing fees.

FRAND removes monopoly advantage over patents used in industry standards, which is major reason why it can be an antitrust matter when any IP holder demands onerous licensing terms or otherwise interferes with competition.

Microsoft filed the complaint with the European Union's Competition Commission, which also is investigating Samsung for abusing 3G FRAND patents. In separate statements, Google and Motorola said they had not yet seen the complaints.

Fist-Fighting

The underlying issues are more complex than just FRAND. Microsoft and Motorola already were locked in a legal row. In October, Microsoft filed an infringement claim alleging that Motorola violated patents related to Android. In December, the US International Trade Commission found that Motorola had violated one of seven Microsoft patents.

A month earlier, Microsoft filed a lawsuit accusing Motorola of demanding exorbitant licensing fees for FRAND video and WiFi patents. Today's antitrust complaint extends Microsoft's legal fight over them.

The question: What's fair and reasonable? Microsoft has an answer. "Motorola is demanding that Microsoft pay a royalty of $22.50 for its 50 patents on the video standard, called H.264", Dave Heiner, Microsoft deputy general counsel, asserts.

"As it turns out, there are at least 2,300 other patents needed to implement this standard. They are available from a group of 29 companies that came together to offer their H.264 patents to the industry on FRAND terms. Microsoft’s patent royalty to this group on that $1,000 laptop? Two cents".

Heiner gunned for Microsoft's search rival in corporate blog post "Google: Please Don't Kill Video on the Web". I couldn't have written a better title, and BetaNews readers often comment about my baiting headlines.

He continues: "For a $2,000 laptop, Motorola is demanding double the royalty -- $45. Windows is the same on both laptops, and so is the video support in Windows. But the high-end laptop will have a bigger hard drive, more memory, perhaps a titanium case -- and Motorola is demanding a hefty royalty on all of this, even though none of these features implements Motorola’s video patents".

Heiner's post is rich with rhetoric, which I chose not to sample. The tone rings similar to other recent attacks against Google and ignores Microsoft's own aggressive, competitive licensing tactics; there Android licensees stand tall among them. Microsoft now collects patent fees from most manufacturers making Android handsets, with Motorola being major exception.

Under New Management

Detente defines FRAND, or did until the recent patent fighting over mobile devices and Google's acquisition of a large patent horde. In putting up its "change of management" sign, Google's position on standard essential patents and FRAND causes concern everywhere. For example, European and US regulators approved Google's Motorola merger but with caveats.

Earlier this month, the US Justice Department explains its reasons for approving the Google-Motorola merger and sale of other patents to Apple and Microsoft, among others.

"Motorola Mobility has had a long and aggressive history of seeking to capitalize on its intellectual property and has been engaged in extended disputes with Apple, Microsoft and others", the Justice Department's letter explains. "Google’s acquisition of Motorola Mobility is unlikely to materially alter that policy".

In approving three deals, trustbusters looked at possible abuse of standard essential patents. Apple and Microsoft assurances placated Justice Department lawyers, but not Google's.

In a November letter to European competition authorities, Apple assured that: "A party who made a FRAND commitment to license its cellular standards essential patents or otherwise acquired assets/rights from a party who made the FRAND commitment must not seek injunctive relief on such patents. Seeking an injunction would be a violation of the party’s commitment to FRAND licensing".

In a notice posted this month, Microsoft takes a clearer position:

Microsoft’s approach is straight-forward:

1. Microsoft will always adhere to the promises it has made to standards organizations to make its standard essential patents available on fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms.

2. This means that Microsoft will not seek an injunction or exclusion order against any firm on the basis of those essential patents.

3. This also means that Microsoft will make those essential patents available for license to other firms without requiring that those firms license their patents back to Microsoft, except for any patents they have that are essential to the same industry standard.

4. Microsoft will not transfer those standard essential patents to any other firm unless that firm agrees to adhere to the points outlined above.

By comparison, as the Justice Department observes, "Google’s commitments were more ambiguous and do not provide the same direct confirmation of its SEP licensing policies".

Google also didn't preclude seeking injunctions over standard essential licenses. "Google reserves its rights to seek any and all judicial remedies against counterparties that refuse a RAND license or subsequently breach any of their commitments on the terms of any license agreement covering the acquired [Motorola Mobility] Essential Patent Claims or the counterparty's Essential Patent Claims", according to a letter sent to IEEE earlier this month. Additionally, Google plans to seek patent cross-licensing agreements in some cases.

"Google’s statement therefore does not directly provide the same assurance as the other companies’ statements concerning the exercise of its newly acquired patent rights", the Justice Department warns. "Nonetheless, the division determined that the acquisition of the patents by Google did not substantially lessen competition, but how Google may exercise its patents in the future remains a significant concern".

Problem: No company's public position can truly be trusted since all have vested and often conflicting interests in the outcomes and there is so much money at stake. For example, Google has forsworn H.264 for open-source WebM. Onerous license terms could be used to dissuade other companies from licensing the video codec. Meanwhile, Microsoft is unlikely to embrace WebM by choice.

Photo Credit: Nicholas Piccillo/Shutterstock

Windows Phone isn't boring

Posted: February 21st, 2012, 12:15pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Well, that's what many of you say.

Last week I asked: "Are you bored with Windows Phone?" Simple reason: Windows 8 and Windows 8 on ARM share in Metro a similar tile-like user interface, and I had seen some user complaints about being bored with WP 7.5. I asked the question in anticipation of Windows 8 Consumer Preview, which Microsoft promised to release by month's end.

Given the UI similarities, WP users are a good measure for assessing Metro's viability as the new window to Windows. Windows 8 will bring the most fundamental change to the UI since the graphical user interface adopted for version 3.0 and then revamped for Windows 95. Such change comes with risks users will resist, stalling adoption or leading some customers to adopt something else (with Mac OS X near top of list).

Maybe my post rallied the fanboys or represents a broad base of Windows Phone users. Whichever, neither or both, you give a rousing endorsement to the tile-like UI.

"I have a had windows phone for a few months now, and I love it", Jesse Dobson comments. "The simplicity is cool, but I mostly like the phone because of the live tiles, social network integration, Windows Live services integration, the Xbox 360 Companion app, and, most importantly, Zune music pass!!" Many of these same features/benefits are expected with Windows 8's Metro UI.

Jason Kohlhoff loves "Metro, and I can't wait for Windows 8". He and his wife have the HTC Trophy.

Perhaps not meaning to, reader Carlos Ribeiro da Fonseca makes a point that is central to the reason why I posed the "boring" question:

Yup, the tiles look boring. On paper or, well, the Interwebs. But that's because you can't show anything 'live' in a static image. On the actual phone, the tiles change, a lot. In fact, if one isn't careful, they can change too much and the home screen can become quite a mess. If anything, they're the complete opposite of boring.

"Are you mad?" Dinesh Pabbi asks, in all caps, no less. "Metro is so good to use and looks absolutely beautiful".

R Walrond, who develops Windows Phone apps, unsurprisingly isn't bored. "I switched to WP7 because I was bored of my iPhone (plus it was much easier to develop for). I don't understand the complaints about the tiles. They come to life with content all the time at least on my Samsung Focus".

Rodney Jones:

Windows Phone is visually, technically, and intuitively awesome to use everyday, even after a year with the device. The apps have the best aesthetics of any platform, and the live tile system works great, and displays the info I choose instantly. Windows Phone's design concept is perfect, and could never be boring because of its natural disposition. Those who say otherwise simply have not used WP!

"'Boring' is certainly not the word I would use, but 'comfortable' is", Eric King comments. "I've had my WP7 for over a year now, and I can't imagine wanting to switch to either the iPhone or Android interfaces".

"I've had a Samsung Focus since October 2010 and I love it. I did buy my teenage daughter an iPhone 4S and honestly I hated setting it up", David Cornelson writes. "I wouldn't trade my Windows Phone OS for anything and certainly not an iPhone. I have the Lumia 900 on pre-order too".

Nokia announced the Lumia 900 Windows Phone in early January. The smartphone is expected to go on sale in March, and Microsoft started taking preorders about two weeks ago. Most readers responding to our poll plan to buy one.

Carlo Mendoza is "not bored at all". I've had an HTC HD2, but have been running WP7 on it a little more than a year". He's "very excited to get Lumia 900. It's only going to get better with Apollo & Windows 8. I see it from the 'Data/Information first' perspective, which is really what the Metro user experience is about in my opinion".

Frequent BetaNews commenter "woe" isn't giddy with enthusiasm and breaks from the largely favorable comments:

The question should be: "Are you bored with Metro?" My answer is yes. When it came out on the Zune is was pretty cool. Microsoft moves as fast as a glacier, because here we are how many years later and its on everything they own finally.

Metro is boring. It was different and new yes, but plain and boring. It is fast -- because its so simple. Simple colors on a simple single-color background. No 3d effects or raised effects, so it's fast. Smart move in terms of a smartphone, since you don't have to waste CPU/GPU cycles on the fancy GUI features -- but boring. In some places, like the calendar on Windows Phone Metro is boring and ugly.

I have recently seen Windows 8 server screen shots, some of the NIC teaming dialog boxes and they were all Metro -- YUK!!!

Okay, so only most of you say Windows Phone isn't boring. Will you have the same opinion about Windows 8? I'll ask the question again after you have spent some quality time with the Consumer Preview.

Should Microsoft release Office for iPad?

Posted: February 21st, 2012, 9:36am MST by Joe Wilcox

That's my question for you this Tuesday morning, following new rumors about Office for iPad and its imminent release. Over at The Daily, Matt Hickey insists Microsoft has nearly finished development and "the app will soon be submitted to Apple for approval". The software supposedly has capabilities from Excel, OneNote, PowerPoint and Word and inherits characteristics from Windows 8's Metro UI.

Whoa, can this really be a good idea, Office on iPad?

I'm unconvinced that Office for iPad is a good idea from a Windows platform perspective. Reports from numerous analyst firms -- Canalys, Gartner and IDC among them -- are clear: iPad hurts PC sales, which in turn impacts Windows. During fourth quarter (fiscal second for Microsoft), Windows and Windows Live division revenue declined by 6 percent year over year and profits even more; 11 percent. Microsoft blamed a hard drive shortage, but Mac sales rose to record numbers -- 5.2 million, up 26 percent year over year, while the broader PC market declined by 1.4 percent, according to Gartner). The reasons are more complex than Microsoft states, then, and iPad is high among them. So why in hell would Microsoft contribute to its own OS platform's decline?

Most IT mangers tell me the same thing: They make OS platform decisions based on applications. By offering Office on iPad, Microsoft makes adopting iPad an easier decision for many corporations, which also happen to make up Microsoft's core market base. So why give them incentive to deploy iPads that might take away PC sales today and Windows on ARM sales in the future? There are reasons. Among them:

1. Office as platform is another matter. Viewed from revenue and profit, the Business Division is more important to Microsoft than Windows and Windows Live. During calendar fourth quarter, Business division generated $6.28 billion revenue and $4.15 billion profit compared to Windows and Windows Live's $4.74 billion and $2.85 billion, respectively. That's a trend, not a one-off quarter. Office accounts for more than 90 percent of Business division revenues.

Additionally, Office is front end to many back-end Microsoft server products and to cloud services. Trickle down sales are huge.

2. Enterprises use Office and already are adopting iPad. According to a recent IDG Connect study, enterprise business or IT managers with iPads use their laptops less (54 percent) or have replaced notebooks with the tablets (16 percent). Office is the productivity app standard among corporate users, but software not available to them on iPad.

From customer retention and service perspectives, Microsoft should make Office available wherever these customers want to use it. Then there is the additional revenue potential from selling these customers yet another version of Office. Why sell once what you can sell again and again?

3. iPad doesn't really threaten Windows. That's a view common among BetaNews commenters and no doubt at Microsoft, too. The company offers Office for the Mac, which certainly helps Apple computer sales but hasn't (yet) caused Windows any real hurt.

Importance of the first two reasons is greater as well. By the way, I do see iPad taking away Windows PC sales, but what Microsoft managers presumably think matters more.

4. Office for Macintosh is hugely profitable and iPad can be, too. People often ask me why Microsoft offers Office on Mac, given Apple computers compete with Windows PCs. Simple answer: Microsoft makes money and could generate additional revenue on iPad. Apple shipped more than 15 million iPads in fourth quarter -- 55 million to date -- and none with Office, the most successful desktop productivity suite ever.

Why let Apple take all that cash to the bank with iWork apps? Pages, which Apple sells for $9.99, is the third top-grossing iPad app. Do the math. What if Microsoft offers Office on iPad for $39.96 ($9.99 per app) and one-quarter of the iPad install base upgrades? That's nearly $550 million in sales. Too bad Microsoft has to share 30 percent with Apple, eh?

5. Less is more. Microsoft has already announced plans to offer Office with Windows on ARM. Price is uncertain, and possibly free or cost invisible to the customer. Office on iPad would be good way to showcase what users can expect from Office for Windows on ARM -- and more. Surely Microsoft can offer more capabilities and different, if not better, user experience. Microsoft reaps revenue rewards today from iPad while preparing something similar but better for Windows later.

Okay, I've made a case for why Office on iPad could make sense. There remains your answer to the question: Should Microsoft release Office for iPad?

Photo Source: The Daily

You knew this right? Apple buyers are wealthier

Posted: February 20th, 2012, 12:51pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Most Apple products aren't exactly comparably low-priced, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that customers have higher incomes -- considerably more. Still, by how much is about as startling as the sticker shock a Dell Inspiron buyer gets when shopping MacBook Pros. I'm surprised Apple doesn't post a trauma team with security guards (unless perhaps Apple Store employees are registered EMTs) inside its retail shops; surely someone suffers cardiac arrest from the prices.

For some reason NPD and Nielsen issued data within days of one another looking at device buyer demographics -- hence why I'm posting about price at all. Beyond the press release data, which you can read in a few paragraphs, I wondered about Macs and iPads, seeing as analyst firms Canalys and DisplaySearch insist that tablets are PCs. So I asked Stephen Baker, NPD's vice president of industry analysis, about US demographics.

"From an income perspective, about 44 percent of people who bought an Apple product -- that's iPads and MacBooks -- had over a $100,000 income vs 26 percent of the entire market", he says. Wowza. Selling prices are absolutely a factor. iPad starts at $499 and sells for as much as $829. By comparison, Amazon's Kindle Fire is $199. Then there are Mac laptops, which start at $999 and cost as much as $2,499.

Among these same buyers, 24 percent are 55 or older versus 29 percent for non-Apple computers and tablets. "Apple buyers are definitely a little bit younger in that range", Baker observes. "The income is more telling, because younger people can have more money but older people can't be younger".

But ages are closer when singling out tablets. "iPad owners are a little older -- by about a year", Baker says. That's a mean age of 50 vs 49. "Apple way over-indexes in older people. They're more willing to spend for that perceived extra cost of Apple. Everyone thinks that Apple is dominant among young people, and that's just not the case". The income gulf drops a little, with about 42 percent of iPad owners having incomes over $100,000 vs 26 percent for other tablet buyers.

While NPD offers rich data on Apple devices, Nielsen looks at the broader US smartphone market -- without singling out iPhone. Among all age groups, "smartphone penetration" was highest among those making $100,000 or more. That's 75 percent to 80 percent for those ages 18 to 44, with the higher number among 25-to-34 year olds.

Photo Credit: Katherine Welles/Shutterstock

iPhone 4S sure is a slowpoke

Posted: February 20th, 2012, 9:18am MST by Joe Wilcox

The question I have: Why doesn't it matter?

Over the weekend, iPhone 4S and I spent some quality time together. My interest: How does the user experience compare to Galaxy Nexus? There certainly are differences, but the most startling, at least in San Diego, Calif., is data speed. Verizon's LTE network kicks ass, while AT&T's HSPA+ -- on iPhone 4S -- does not. Hey, why walk 30 miles to work when you can drive there?

Apple sold 35.46 million iPhones during calendar fourth quarter, according to Gartner, ending Q4 and 2011 as global smartphone leader. But iPhone 4S has no true 4G, that is LTE, and still outsells every other smartphone by significant margin. Now why is that? According to NPD, at US retail, the top-three selling smartphones are iPhones -- 4S, 4 and 3GS, by order of volume -- and none has the fastest data throughput LTE offers.

The LTE Autoban

iPhone's sales success says much about how consumers perceive the value of real 4G, or perhaps are confused by it; how ineffective are carriers' LTE marketing; and what iPhone benefits matter more to buyers. Lemme tell you, Verizon is not the carrier to buy iPhone from if you're looking for fast data anything. Verizon LTE is the roadrunner and the legacy CDMA network is Wiley E. Coyote.

Yet iPhone accounted for 55.8 percent of Verizon smartphone sales during calendar fourth quarter -- that's 4.3 million units. By comparison, Verizon sold 2.3 million 4G LTE devices, which includes mobile hotspots and tablets. At best, LTE devices accounted for 30 percent of smartphone sales. However, since that number includes other devices, iPhone outsold LTE smartphones by about 2 to 1.

LTE is a game changing feature, if you get it -- and I mean conceptually and literally using it. I've used the SpeedTest app around San Diego to assess just how fast is Verizon LTE on Galaxy Nexus. The screenshot below gives a peak. The fastest throughput came in the business district three blocks from my apartment -- more than 27Mbps downstream, which is 3Mbps faster than my wired Internet (AT&T DSL); iPhone 4S in same location: 4.4Mbps. Last night I pitted iPhone 4S against Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket and Galaxy Nexus from the same location in San Diego's Mission Valley district. Respectively: 5.1Mbps, 12.2Mbps and 22.1Mbps downstream and 2.19Mbps, 3.4Mbps and 10.41Mbps upstream. Consistently, in other tests, Galaxy Nexus over LTE is four to seven times faster than iPhone 4S over AT&T HSPA+.

Galaxy Nexus 4G LTE speed tests around San Diego, Calif.

Tortoise and the Hare

Pulling from the children's folktale, if Galaxy Nexus on Verizon LTE is the hare than iPhone 4S on AT&T HSPA+ is the tortoise. In the kid's story, the slowpoke won the race between them, and same certainly can be said of iPhone 4S versus Galaxy Nexus or all Androids on Verizon's network. Everywhere else, too; but Verizon offers best snapshot because the carrier's CDMA iPhone offers slower top bandwidth throughput than AT&T's HSPA+ model and the nation's No. 1 carrier broadly offers LTE across the United States.

Back in September, I asked: "What if iPhone 5 isn't LTE?" days before Apple announced the 4S instead. But the question is as relevant to the current model, which sells just fine without real 4G, thank you.

If you bought iPhone 4S instead of a LTE Android, I'd like to read why in comments. For now, my own reasons:

1. People are confused about 4G LTE and what are the benefits. A "Saturday Night Live" Verizon parody commercial makes the point.

2. For most buyers, iPhone 3GS, 4 or 4S wireless data is good enough. They don't need faster when weighed against other benefits.

3. There is loads of misinformation about LTE sucking battery life, which absolutely is not my experience using Galaxy Nexus. Battery life is exceptional; I recharge about every 24 hours with heavy use.

4. Size matters. AT&T and Verizon LTE smartphones -- all Androids -- are huge compared to iPhone -- typically screens are 4.3 inches or more to 3.5 inches. Galaxy Nexus display is 4.65 inches! I must say that in using iPhone 4S over the weekend, the smaller size felt better in my hand and against my face, while the display's resolution and brightness offers plenty good enough experience.

5. Intangibles weigh in iPhone's favor, such as Apple brand popularity, aggressive TV advertising, lower iPhone 4 ($99) and 3GS (free) pricing, perceived app benefits and peer group (everyone else has one).

6. Many buyers want Siri. They've seen the TV commercials or someone else using the feature, and they want it, too. Siri's benefits are immediately tangible compared to data speed.

Increasingly, with the holiday sales spike over, people ask me when iPhone 5 will come out. My response is always "Not anytime soon". Why should it? iPhone 4S is the world's top-selling smartphone -- and without LTE! Apple should maximize margins off its current investment before bringing out iPhone 5. If people are satisfied with physical body and screen size, why rush to a larger handset either?

More sensible: An iPhone 4GS first, with LTE. Not that it matters. The tortoise already won the holiday sales race against the hare.

Photo Credit: fivespots/Shutterstock

Windows 8 logo is a disaster

Posted: February 17th, 2012, 3:18pm MST by Joe Wilcox

There's something poetic about Microsoft changing Windows' logo during the centennial anniversary of Titanic's tragic sinking. Many people involved in the great streamliner's design and building -- and surely those buying into publicity about it -- regarded Titanic as unsinkable. There's similar pervasive view about Windows, that nothing can sink its market leadership. Uh-oh, someone only put the watertight doors as high as E deck.

Microsoft's flagship operating system will sail on its maiden voyage, so to speak, with the Consumer Preview coming in less than two weeks (if not sooner). Windows 8 will take a northerly course through ice-infested waters as Microsoft "re-imagines" the platform in ways that will stress customers', developers' and other partners' commitments. Execution will be key, and every detail planning the course matters. That's right down to the logo, which significance is much bigger than Windows.

Bland Branding

Microsoft has no corporate logo. The name is the brand, but it's not brand enough. That's one reason why Microsoft long ago adopted the four-color Windows flag as major identifier and why prominent sub-brands -- Office most notably, even Microsoft Store -- use similar color motif. The new Windows logo washes away the familiar color scheme and any resemblance to earlier variations. It's a rectangle cut vertically and horizontally by two lines. The logo lacks dimension, depth or distinction.

During group chat earlier this afternoon, I opined about the new logo: "From a branding perspective it's questionable" because "Microsoft has no corporate logo. Nothing to identify it with. Closest thing is that four color flag. Essentially, Microsoft has changed its core, corporate brand logo". It's a branding disaster.

I'm not alone in that opinion. To our news story that posted later, Reader Orean Keels comments:

Far too generic. To remove the four-color design from Windows is a really bad brand direction, and in my opinion, so is Metro. But just like always, Microsoft isn't going to listen to the loud voices complaining. They've already set this dud in motion. A year to year and a half from now, we'll be listening to Microsoft apologizing, just like they (indirectly) have with Vista, while Windows 9 will be the version that 8 should have been. They never learn.

Course Correction

The new logo is a mistake and one Microsoft could and should correct before Windows 8 ships in the autumn (well, presumably). Yes, Windows 8 may sell about as well as Vista (meaning not very). But that's to be expected. Microsoft is making major changes to the operating system and how applications are developed for it.

One developer told me recently about hearing 40 percent of the code has changed since the Windows 8 Developer Preview released in September. I find that hard to fathom (or believe) but even 10 percent would be trouble enough for developers trying to nail down a software strategy for Metro.

Timing is sensible for platform reinvention, given that most businesses (Microsoft's core customers) will have just completed or will soon finish Windows 7 deployments from XP about the time v8 ships. They won't be ready for Windows 8, so it's right time to hit them with changes now. Windows 8 is really about what comes next, when core customers are ready to buy again. The point: I wouldn't call Windows Vista-like sales necessarily a disaster.

On the other hand, Microsoft needn't create obstacles where they are unnecessary. There are icebergs enough ahead. Logos are not insignificant. Many top brands are recognized by their logos, which significance increase in making flash impressions as people skip commercials on shows they recorded or breeze past banner ads or road-side billboards. Apple's logo is iconic, and the four-color Windows flag is as close as Microsoft will get. Microsoft's name as brand, unlike, say, Coca-Cola, simply isn't memorable or marketable enough.

Willowed Windows

I can understand some of the rationale behind changing the logo, which looks more like a tile -- the fundamental characteristic of the Metro UI. The new color scheme also matches one prominently used in the UI's tiles. Additionally, fresh logo could evoke fresh approach, something new -- and granted many people will find Windows 8 to be it. But the logo also isn't distinctive, and I don't see how it will stand out stickered to new PCs, tablets and other Windows 8-powered devices.

The logo matters. Everything matters about Windows 8, because so much change comes with it. There's the risk. That unsinkable Windows is anything but. Who would have said in December 2004, when Firefox launched, that Internet Explorer's usage share would fall from more than 90 percent to 52.96 percent in January 2012 (according to Net Applications)? Or that Google would release Chrome in December 2008 and see its usage share rise to 19.11 percent three years later?

IE's mighty fall foreshadows what can happen to Microsoft's OS. Windows PC sales dramatically declined during fourth quarter, while Mac sales rose. Windows and Windows Live revenue fell by 6 percent year over year and profits by 11 percent. Meanwhile, iPad has sapped Windows PC sales for several quarters. Given these circumstances, Microsoft should look to "re-imagine" Windows.

Steering the right course is essential, however. Customers will be confused enough without brand changes. Microsoft, consider this post your iceberg warning. Will you sail ahead like Captain Smith did Titanic or slow down and go around the ice?

Meet Mountain Lion [slideshow]

Posted: February 16th, 2012, 2:49pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Synchronization is the glue binding together many of Mac OS X 10.8's top-line new features. Apple claims 100 million iCloud users, which is surprisingly small considering the iOS install base is about three times larger. As I've often said, sync is the killer app for the connected era, and it's something Apple is baking into all its operating systems.

Gatekeeper may be Mountain Lion's most important and controversial new feature. Apple will take more of a walled-garden, locked down approach to security, by compelling developers to accept assigned IDs and to distribute their wares through Mac App Store. Users are assured signed, safer software but they and developers will give up some freedom for security.

Messages brings to Mac OS X the client in iOS 5. The app is available now, in beta, ahead of Mountain Lion's release. Installation replaces Lion's iChat. The feature relies heavily on sync to keep the message thread going. Start a message on the Mac and resume it on iPad or iPhone. Delivery and read receipts also are available.

We love to share stuff. Human beings are naturally social. Apple will add share buttons throughout OS X 10.8, much like iOS 5 today. Share Sheets connect to other web services, so that users can send photos to Flickr or videos to Vimeo, for example.

China. "Huh?" you ask. "China is a feature?" Apparently it is, so to speak, or important enough for Apple to call out. China is Apple's second-most important market (next to North America) and the company is ready to sync with popular Chinese services, such as Mail, Calendar and Contacts with 126, 163 and QQ. Share Sheets support video sharing from Youku and Tudou, and Baidu is search provider in Safari.

Notes' defining capability is sync. Apple focuses on content creation, bringing together text, photos, images, attachments and more, into one easy-to-create note. But the killer capability is iCloud sync among different devices.

AirPlay Mirroring raises Apple TV's role as device for streaming content to big screens, whether that's watching video from the couch or making a presentation at the office.

Tweet. Tweet. Mountain Lion joins iOS 5 with integrated Twitter, which third-party apps can tap into. The bird is fine, but what about Facebook?

Reminders is another feature relying heavily on sync. Simply stated, this feature is a glorified to-do list.

Game Center brings to Mac OS X capabilities already available to iOS 5 users. Everything hinges on the user's Apple ID, which lets other games know you're online and is identity for purchasing as well as playing games. Will this finally turn the Mac into a gaming platform? Call me skeptical.

Notification Center brings to Mac OS X a feature Apple borrowed from Android for iOS 5. It's an essential capability for tying Macs to iOS devices as communications/social hubs. Next to Gatekeeper, Notifications Center is near the top of most-important new features. This utility will change how many users interact with the operating system.

On February 16, Apple unexpectedly released the OS X 10.8 developer preview and announced the software's availability some time in "late summer". Apple highlights 10 new features in Mountain Lion, the majority of which inherit capabilities from iOS 5 on iPad: AirPlay Mirroring, Game Center, Gatekeeper, iCloud, Messages, Notes, Notification Center, Reminders, Share Sheets and Twitter.

Apple also calls out support for cloud services in China, the company's second-most important market. Sync is among the most-important capabilities, which Apple will greatly extend in Mountain Lion. The company hasn't announced pricing, but Lion sold for $29.99. It's not unreasonable to expect similar pricing for Mountain Lion.

Funny aside that makes me wonder about Apple nomenclature: Gatekeeper. In the surprisingly still technology relevant 1995 thriller "The Net", a program called "Gatekeeper" has a starring role. The security software meant to protect computers from hackers is really a Trojan Horse for letting them in.

Founder of the software's developer, Gregg Microsystems, is really part of a diabolical group known as the Praetorians. The movie's climatic conclusion takes place during a computer show at the Moscone Center, which is where at bygone Macworld Expos Apple announced many new products.

Apple launches OS war against Microsoft

Posted: February 16th, 2012, 10:16am MST by Joe Wilcox

Today, without fanfare, prior notice or even a rumor on the InterWebs, Apple announced OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion's summer availability, released a developer preview and made available, as public beta, Messages, one of the new features. Suddenly, the year's schedule of software releases is a dramatic showdown between Mountain Lion and Windows 8 and Windows on ARM. Can you say cat fight?

Microsoft plans to release Windows 8 Consumer Preview later this month, with an official event planned for February 29 during Mobile World Congress. Many Microsoft watchers presume the venue's choice foreshadows increased emphasis on mobile features, particularly as the Redmond, Wash.-based company seeks to recover momentum against iPad. Apple isn't waiting around, boasting about OS X 10.8 inheriting mobile features from iOS 5 (on iPad) and tightening ties to iCloud. Mountain Lion also will likely release ahead of either Windows 8 or Windows ARM, increasing pressure on Microsoft to ship this year.

First-Strike Capability

Based on its past operating system development, Microsoft likely won't release Windows 8 gold code until around the time Mountain Lion ships, giving Apple a two-month lead to market. Much depends on Apple's definition of "late summer". If that's September, OS X 10.8 and Windows 8 could ship within a month of one another, with Microsoft's RTM coming first.

Apple also laid down another kind of challenge, which is directed as much at Google as Microsoft and brings desktop OS development more in line with mobile. "The developer preview of Mountain Lion comes just seven months after the incredibly successful release of Lion and sets a rapid pace of development for the world’s most advanced personal computer operating system", Phil Schiller, Apple's global marketing chief, says.

Microsoft's Windows development cycle is much longer, now about every three years. Schiller signals a return to the more rapid pace Apple set during the early to mid Noughties and perhaps accelerated to match iOS and to keep pace with (or even jump ahead of) Google's Android and Chrome OS.

Timing is crucial, if for no other reason than first-to-market and mindshare/marketing advantage. Some readers will ask: "So what? Windows has much more market share". True. But...

Most people buying new Macs are Windows users (based on install base), so Microsoft has more to lose.
If Apple can ship soon enough, OS X 10.8 will be ready for late back-to-school buying season, Windows 8 won't.
Mountain Lion will pull away media and potential customer attention from Windows 8, a major OS overhaul.
Windows PC sales were way down in fourth quarter and are expected to remain so for the first half of the year. Mac sales are way up. All that buzz and excitement, and new OS shipping sooner, can further boost Apple computer sales.

Marching Mobile Infantry

The challenge is greater. Microsoft is repositioning Windows for the post-PC era, touting touchscreen capabilities and redesigning the user interface for easier use on tablets. Apple goes the other way with Mountain Lion, touting features the OS will inherit from iPad. Synchronization is the key benefit shared among most of the new capabilities spotlighted today. Among them:

iCloud. Apple touts sync capabilities coming in OS X 10.8. Based on the description I don't see anything not already available on current release Lion. That said, Apple rightly emphasizes the importance of sync and capitalizing on 100 million iCloud users.

Messages. The beta replaces iChat, bringing the messaging client in line with iOS 5. The feature relies heavily on sync to keep the message thread going. Start a message on the Mac and resume it on iPad or iPhone. According to Apple's marketing material: "You can see when your message has been delivered and when someone’s typing a reply. Turn on read receipts, and they’ll see when you’ve read a message".

Gatekeeper. Can you say copycat? One of Windows 8's hallmark new features is the new security architecture, bolstered by app distribution through Windows Store. Apple makes claims, too, giving users more control of app installations, leveraging Mac App Store to curate applications and boasting capability to remotely remove apps (should malware sneak through); Google uses similar remote removal capabilities in Android Market.

China. "Huh?" you ask. "China is a feature?" Apparently it is, so to speak, or important enough for Apple to call out. China is Apple's second-most important market (next to North America).

According to Apple's marketing material:

OS X Mountain Lion brings all-new support for many popular Chinese services. And they’re easy to set up. Mail, Contacts, and Calendar work with QQ, 163, and 126. Baidu, the leading Chinese search provider, is a built-in option in Safari. The video-sharing websites Youku and Tudou are included in the new Share Sheets, so users in China can easily post videos to the web. They can also blog with Sina weibo, the popular microblogging service. And with improved text input, typing in Chinese is easier, faster and more accurate.

Notification Center. Well, the feature borrowed from Android for iOS 5 makes its way to the Mac. It's an essential capability for tying Macs to iOS devices as communications/social hubs.

Reminders. It's an enhanced, synced to-do list.

Notes. Apple looks to make mincement out of Microsoft OneNote for iPad connected to SkyDrive. According to Apple's marketing material: "Notes in OS X Mountain Lion is designed for whatever’s on your mind. Think it up. Jot it down. Make it even more noteworthy with photos, images, and attachments...Notes works with iCloud, so when you create or edit a note on your Mac, it automatically updates on your iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch". That sound lots like OneNote to me, minus the one.

Twitter. Like iOS 5, Mountain Lion users will be able to tweet across the OS and from apps tapping into the API. Oh yeah? What about Facebook?

Share Sheets. We love to share stuff. Human beings are naturally social. Apple will add share buttons throughout OS X 10.8, much like iOS 5 today.

AirPlay Mirroring. This feature extends Mac-to-Apple TV capabilities already available.

Game Center. Is any explanation needed? This popular iOS feature comes to the Mac.

Capturing New Territory

Even Apple's marketing message is a challenge. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Windows and Windows Live president Steven Sinofsky repeatedly have talked about "re-imagining" the operating system. Among Apple's marketing taglines for OS X 10.8: "Inspired by iPad. Re-imagined for the Mac". Make no mistake, this means war.

Apple strikes at a time of unusual opportunity. Microsoft is making major changes to Windows architecture and to the user interface. Businesses are loathe to change IT infrastructure, but a time when they have to is opportunity to evaluate something else, and that could be Mountain Lion as, or more, than Windows 8. Something else: Enterprise already evaluating or deploying iPad suddenly have a safe haven in OS X 10.8.

Today's Apple announcements show how effective is the secrecy machine when outsiders aren't involved. I remember a decade ago when Apple largely kept the lid on new products, something nearly impossible now with the number of bloggers or journalists looking for leaks and the many third-parties in the manufacturing chain -- that's on hardware. Apple is still fairly able to keep secret software news until it's ready.

Something else about being ready: Today's sudden, unexpected announcement would have been a Steve Jobs showcase at an earlier time. Jobs characteristically basked in the limelight unveiling new products like this, a position he increasingly surrendered during the three years before his death four months ago.

Photo Credit: Andre Blais/Shutterstock

Product Shots: Apple

iPhone saves smartphone market

Posted: February 15th, 2012, 4:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

"Smartphone volumes during the quarter rose due to record sales of Apple iPhones". That's a helluva statement -- from Gartner's press release on Q4 2011 handset sales today. Emphasis on sales, which is what the analyst firm measures, not shipments into the channel like its competitors. One hundred-forty nine million smartphones sold globally during the quarter, up 47.3 percent year over year, 35.46 million from Apple.

Last month, Apple claimed 37.04 million iPhone sales, which, of course, really means shipments. Apple's stunning fourth quarter raised its ranking. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company passed LG to take third place in overall handset sales for all 2011 -- not just smartphones -- 5 percent to 4.9 percent share, respectively. In smartphones, Apple claimed top spot for the quarter and all 2011, with 23.8 percent and 19 percent market share, respectively. Apple sold 89.7 million handsets last year.

"Western Europe and North America led most of the smartphone growth for Apple during the fourth quarter of 2011", Roberta Cozza, Gartner principal research analyst, says. "In Western Europe the spike in iPhone sales in the fourth quarter saved the overall smartphone market after two consecutive quarters of slow sales".

Gartner expects strong first-quarter iPhone sales, but sequential decline, presuming pent-up demand for iPhone 4S is largely exhausted. Similarly, Gartner predicts that, as measured by smartphone operating system, iPhone will lose share over the next couple of quarters. This follows a Q4 surge that reversed Android's relentless share growth, with a sequential decline.

Still, Android is unstoppable, reaching 50.9 percent global smartphone share, up from 30.5 percent a year earlier. By comparison, second-ranked iOS share rose to 23.8 percent from 15.8 percent.

Samsung led Android's market share gains, selling 34 million smartphones. So I have to wonder about Gartner giving so much credit to iPhone.

Apple and Samsung Q4 smartphone sales surges contributed to another disastrous quarter for Windows Phone, which share dropped to a pathetic 1.9 percent from 3.4 percent a year earlier. This despite launch of the first Nokia Windows Phone during Q4; sales volumes declined with market share, just 2.6 million, which was less than Samsung's Bada.

More broadly, there were 476.5 million handsets sold globally during fourth quarter, up 5.4 percent year over year. For the year, sales topped 1.8 billion phones, up 11.1 percent.

"Expectations for 2012 are for the overall market to grow by about 7 percent, while smartphone growth is expected to slow to around 39 percent", Annette Zimmermann, Gartner principal research analyst, says.

Are you bored with Windows Phone?

Posted: February 15th, 2012, 1:37pm MST by Joe Wilcox

I have to ask, because Microsoft is prepping Windows 8 Consumer Preview for release later this month and Windows on ARM for more limited testing. Both operating systems will, in Metro, use similar UI motif as that on Windows Phone. Is it really the best choice? Not having used Windows Phone, I have no answer. So I turn to you.

"Boring" is a word I've seen used to describe Windows Phone, here in BetaNews comments and on some mobile device forums -- that user excitement, because of the tile-like user interface's fluidity and simplicity, diminishes over time. In that scenario, Microsoft's "glance-and-go" design philosophy takes on different meaning: People get off the phone because they can't stand using it, rather than being empowered to live life instead of on the device.

In fairness, many BetaNews commenters have described iOS as boring, too, and there I agree. The motif is oh-so 2007, particularly compared to Ice Cream Sandwich or Samsung's TouchWiz UI skin. Android has more fluidity from better, fuller multitasking than iOS, but Apple's software runs smoother, lacking the hesitations and hiccups common to Google's mobile operating system. From that perspective, as a platform for apps, iOS is better choice than Android, IMHO.

But the boring question is more potent for Microsoft than for Apple, because of Windows 8 and Windows on ARM. The last thing Microsoft and its partners should want is people tiring of using Windows. Related: User interface exhaustion would be detrimental because of how tiles present live information and applications; additionally, presumably, visual customization options will be limited compared to earlier Windows versions.

Boring has several nuances:

The tile interface is too plain, lacking dimension. That's actually a somewhat fixable problem by adding more shadows and 3D-like elements that add pizazz. I'm expecting that the fluidity and motion of live content, including video, will make Metro feel lively. Stated differently: I'm hoping it's not boring, then.
Metro will be too limited on PCs without touchscreens. There UI exhaustion is more a problem of limited interaction, users not being able get the full bang from the experience. So they find the UI to be boring over time.

In a month, I could ask the question differently: Are you bored with Windows 8? To my eyes, the operating system demos really well. But I have no experience using Windows 8, either, particularly on a tablet. That's coming, of course.

I'll ask the question two ways then. Are you bored with Windows Phone? Why or why not? Are you bored with Windows 8 Developer Preview? Why or why not? If you're really excited about the user experience on either OS, or both, then why? Comments await your answers.

Photo Credit: Vlue/Shutterstock

Paragon Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite first look

Posted: February 15th, 2012, 12:14pm MST by Joe Wilcox

If you were after a hard disk management package, then Paragon’s Hard Disk Manager 11 Suite was one of the picks of 2011, packed with functionality, and including something to handle all your partitioning, backup, cloning, defrag and system recovery needs.

We weren’t entirely sure how much scope there was for improvement in the upcoming Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite, then. But we were interested to find out, and so when Paragon Software offered us an exclusive first look we eagerly installed and launched a pre-release build.

At first glance the program doesn’t appear to have changed too much. It opens with the same Express Mode, a front-end menu that sensibly organizes its features into six categories (“Partitioning”, “Backup and Recovery”, “Copying and Migration”, “Security and Optimization”, “Virtualization” and “Tools”). And if you need even more power, the Advanced Interface is only a click away (although despite that “Advanced” tag, if you’ve used any similar Paragon package in the past couple of years then you’ll find it familiar and straightforward).

Beneath the surface, though, one of the major improvements in this release is a completely new hard drive management engine. This expands the program’s hard drive support to include all the latest technologies: high-capacity SSDs, Advanced Format Drives, Hybrid Hard Drives and 512e (4k sector size drives which provide 512-byte emulation). And it also supports UEFI installations of operating systems.

Paragon say that the real gain for everyone is in the program’s performance, though. VSS optimizations mean that hot partitioning and hot imaging operations are now faster; the backup engine uses asynchronous read/ writes for better speeds; and the company claim the core partitioning engine is “the fastest currently available”.

We’ll have to wait until the full review to find out just how speedy the program really is. A quick backup test revealed Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite’s performance was broadly comparable with the already fast Macrium Reflect, though, and general partitioning operations feel faster, too -- although that’s just part of what the new build has to offer.

Split Partitions

One of the most significant visible additions to the program is the new Split Partition Wizard. Which not only splits one partition into two, but also moves whatever files and folders you specify into the new partition: a real time-saver.

The process is straightforward, too. Specify a partition to split. Browse an Explorer-type view to decide exactly what you’d like to move into the new partition. Then, a click or two later, Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite will get on with repartitioning the drive and moving the data for you, while you just sit back and watch.

Another new feature this time around is Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite’s ability to migrate a physical disk to a virtual environment. Launch the P2V (Physical to Virtual) Copy Wizard, and it’ll walk you through the process of converting your chosen partition or drive to a virtual hard drive, in Oracle VirtualBox, Virtual PC or VMware Workstation/ Fusion formats.

Other improvements

One smaller tweak elsewhere sees Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite now support encrypting your backups for enhanced security.

And Paragon also report some reliability improvements, in particular the ability to resume operations on virtual volumes if they were interrupted for whatever reason. We weren’t able to test this at this stage, but in theory at least it sounds like a good idea.

Paragon Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite isn’t a game-changer, then: it’s more about building on what’s gone before than anything else.

The improvements on offer here -- in particular the improved performance, wider hardware support, the Split Partition Wizard, and enhanced virtualization support -- are well worth having, though, and so if you’re in the market for this type of tool then Paragon Hard Disk Manager 12 Suite needs to be on your shortlist. A trial version will be available when the program is released towards the end of February, and if you need more information then we’ll be delivering a full review shortly afterwards.

Photo Credit: Balazs Justin/Shutterstock

Apple patent bullying reaches new low

Posted: February 15th, 2012, 10:09am MST by Joe Wilcox

People whining about human rights violations at Apple manufacturing facilities in China should look at business behavior, too, for it reveals much. Companies tend to act fairly consistently, reflecting the personalities of the people running them. If Apple shows disregard for workers making its products, then so should insensitive behavior crop up elsewhere. I see it in the callous patent attacks, which reached a new low yesterday. The company wants to sue bankrupt Kodak.

Apple's asking a bankruptcy court to sue for the patents is like demanding a judge turn over a portion of granddad's estate while he is still on life support. Kodak was the Apple of its day, bringing portable photography to the mass market in ways quite similar to iPod, iPhone and iPad today. Apple and Kodak are two of the greatest innovative American consumer technology companies of the last century, and they share similar attributes about creating compact, trendy and attractive products. On the design front, Apple owes much to Kodak and borrowed much from it. What a helluva way to show gratitude.

Last week, Kodak stopped manufacturing digital cameras, which surely is an eventual death sentence. Digital is the future of photography. Film, once Kodak's high-margin lifeblood, is dead. The Rochester, N.Y.-based company lists assets of $5.1 billion but debt of $6.8 billion in its bankruptcy filing. What's left but the patents? Hey, they generated more than $2 billion in licensing fees over the past three years.

Of course, Kodak's patents are hugely valuable. Perhaps Apple would like to get its grubby hands on them for next to nothing; through court proceedings interrupt their transfer or sale to another party; or obtain some kind of licensing agreement to use them -- potentially for a fraction of their value. Surely Apple can't hope to extract money from bankrupt Kodak. But given Kodak's pending patent claims against Apple, there is leverage.

"Apple requests express authority from this court before it initiates the actions out of an abundance of caution", according to the filing, obtained by Bloomberg.

Shared Legacy

Already Apple borrowed much from Kodak, which is why I'd expect more homage than this. Apple's approach to product design reminds of young Kodak, as does research and development, emphasis on product functional simplicity, manufacturing and distribution operations, reaping high profit margins, commanding huge brand appeal and catering to consumers. Sure Kodak profited big from business sales, but consumers made the brand and kept the volume of high-margin film sales coming.

I won't go into specifics here, for a whole paper could be written, but just say that Kodak is the historical case study for any company looking to sell portable consumer electronics to the mass-market.

Kodak's design approach is the most visible example of what Apple borrowed -- and that's no criticism. Apple learned from its forebear, smartly applying lessons learned from history.

For example: In 1927, Kodak commissioned Walter Dorwin Teague to design a new line of cameras. The company wanted to increase its cameras' appeal to women. Teague presented the diminutive Vest Pocket line in five distinct colors. Nearly 80 years later, Apple chief designer Jony Ive applied the same five-color concept to iPod Mini. Similarly, like Teague presented a smaller camera, Ive designed a smaller music player. Apple has since kept the colors coming, and they're important for broadening product appeal beyond stereotypical male gadget geeks to women and to younger buyers, especially teens.

iPad 2 Smart Covers cleverly extend the approach, using color as a differentiator. The cases add dramatic color, and personality, to iPad 2, broadening its appeal, particularly to younger buyers. What I keep asking myself as iPad 3 rumors rise: Will the next Apple tablet come in five colors? There's too much profit in the covers methinks. But if Apple ever does release the rumored 8-inch iPad, expect colors there as differentiator. That would be consistent with Apple's approach with iPod, which started out white and added black then colors as the music player got smaller.

Kodak deserves more dignity than Apple's patent request gives. One of the greatest American innovators will soon be laid to rest -- and an iconic brand with it. Has Apple no respect for the dying? And if no respect for the dying, then why have any for the living?

My first three digital cameras were Kodaks. My last purchased is from Fuji, Kodak's archenemy during the height, and decline, of the film era. Perhaps my next camera will be some future iPhone. Must Kodak's blood be on it, too?

If only Windows Phone was this popular everywhere...

Posted: February 14th, 2012, 4:32pm MST by Joe Wilcox

I know that BetaNews readers aren't indicative of the general population. You made that clear when answering our October 2011 browser poll you came out big time for Chrome. Google's browser is most popular among you, but really ranks third in global usage share, according to Net Applications.

Respondents to more recent poll "Microsoft Store is taking pre-orders for Nokia Lumia 900. Will you buy this Windows Phone?" answered resoundingly yes. If your responses were the measure of success, Microsoft and Nokia already would be kicking Android and iPhone butt down the hill.

Among the 1,938 responses so far, only 17.54 percent answered no. That's right. Eight out of 10 respondents say they will buy the Lumia 900. Get this: 25.85 percent have already preordered or plan to. Meanwhile, 42.98 percent plan to buy within 3 months of release. That leaves 13.62 percent buying within 6 months or longer. Stated differently: 68.83 percent of respondents will get the phone within 3 months of release or sooner.

Lumia 900 is Nokia's flagship handset running Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango". It's a handsome phone borrowing design characteristics from Symbian-based N8 and Meego-based N9 and features: 1.4GHz Qualcomm APQ8055 processor; 4.3-inch AMOLED display (yes, it's Corning Gorilla Glass), with 800 x 480 resolution; 512MB RAM; 16GB storage: 8-megapixel rear-facing camera with Carl Zeiss lens and dual-LED flash; 1MP front-facing camera; 720p video capture from rear camera and VGA from front camera; GSM 850/900/1800/1900 radio; WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100 radio; 4G LTE; Bluetooth 2.1+EDR; Stereo Bluetooth; WiFi; accelerometer; ambient and proximity sensors; gyroscope; 2 microphones; 1830 mAh battery; Internet Explorer 9 mobile; and Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango" Commercial Release 2.

This phone certainly excites many of you. Eric Raschka has used Windows Phone for 18 months:

WP7 is by far the most stable, smoothest, and most intuitive touch interface of them all. Boost the apps, add more phones/carriers, and you will have a market leader. Just watch. It is a great OS, really fun to use, great Xbox integration, the Zune player kicks ass, easy multitasking, MS Office integration; email is much more robust that iOS, it is fast (doesn't need dual core)...and with the Lumia 900 I won't go back to either the Android Mess or the iPhone limitations. And I am far from a MS fanboy.

"Just for anybody considering the Nokia Lumia 900, or Windows Phone in general, I would just like to say that Windows phone is simply amazing", Rodney Jones writes. "Ask yourself this: Does WP, and the Nokia Lumia, excite you? And, are you ready for the next big thing, or is settling for what everyone else has your thing? Windows Phone is special, and I hope that you think you are too".

Microsoft Store is taking pre-orders for Nokia Lumia 900. Will you buy this Windows Phone?

BetaNews reader milkdud32:

I did order pre-order the Lumia 900, and the price made the case. I am a first time iPhone user, with a 32GB iphone 4. I love the phone, I love the simplicity, but the cost of replacing the same phone...with a iPhone 4s is ridiculous. I only have like 40 apps, and most of those are photo apps...I have AT&T and there is no 4G/LTE premium...I am good with my $30 unlimited plan, so I get the higher speeds at no extra cost...

I'm not a Microsoft fanboy or an Apple Fanboy or an Androidista, I just want a good value for my dollar. Microsoft and Nokia wins this round as far as I am concerned.

What struck me most reading comments was this: People who have lost faith in Microsoft, who want to believe in Lumia 900 and Windows Phone but can't. Stephen Ornelas answers: "No, but I really want to. I just can't bring myself to go back to windows...I really liked the feel, the look, the snappiness of this Lumia phone line; especially the Lumia 900. I want to buy this phone, I just can't, sigh, it's Windows".

I've got a faith problem, too. I want to believe in the poll results -- that somehow Microsoft and Nokia can extract a miracle from Lumia 900 running Windows Phone 7.5 CR2. But my instinct is to disbelieve, given it is an unqualified poll, likely represents a specialized segment of users and suffers the fatal flaw of every buying poll: What people say they want isn't often what they actually buy.

Would you buy 8-inch iPad?

Posted: February 14th, 2012, 10:06am MST by Joe Wilcox

Wall Street Journal claims that Apple is testing a smaller tablet, around 8 inches. The question: Would you buy one, if available?

Who knows, maybe your answer will help Apple, given how super-secretive is the company's product development. You can be the customer research Apple should seek before launching new products, particularly now that Steve Jobs -- master of good taste and guiding voice of one -- is gone. Please answer in comments and take our poll. But first read this perspective on what 8 inches could mean.

Pricing Continuum

Analysts have debated whether or not tablets are PCs. Canalys and DisplaySearch say yes, Gartner and IDC say no. But from Apple's perspective, the answer is meaningless. The company sells a continuum of mobile computing products available to consumers from free to $2,499:

iPhone: free, $99, $199, $299, $399
iPad: $499, $599, $629, $699, $729, $829
MacBook Air/Pro: $999, $1,199, $1,299, $1,499, $1,599, $1,799, $1,999, 2,499

The only meaningful gaps are $1,399, $1,699 and $1,899 -- and up in that range, does it matter? No. At the low end, Apple has pricing covered, and that's ignoring any overlap from iPod nano and touch. Apple doesn't price to compete with other companies so much as to offer a full spectrum of its own stuff. The approach presumes the buyer already thinks "I want to buy Apple" and just needs something that fits his or her needs and budget.

Pricing is an important consideration for anticipating any Apple product strategy because the company is master of the upsell, providing something just a little bit better -- different/additional benefits -- for a little more money. Related: Offering something a little bit less for lower price to attract new buyers. So immediately I ask: Where does 8-inch iPad fit in?

Size Matters

The question is important because Apple also maximizes margins like no other hardware manufacturer selling consumer products. Where would an 8-inch tablet add to overall sales without taking away from (presumably) higher-margin iPad 3? More importantly, does size matter that much as a differentiator?

In the laptop space, Apple shows that size does matter, given the popularity of MacBook Air and Intel's push to get every OEM in the Windows camp to adopt ultrabook. Consumers (and many business users) want something lighter and thinner to carry around; heck, even iPad sales -- 55 million since launch -- is proof point. Additionally, Amazon's success selling 7-inch, $199 Kindle Fire shows there is a market for lower-cost, smaller tablets. The strategy proved most successful with iPod, where size was a huge sales differentiator.

Taking the size conundrum before price, there's question: Does the buyer benefit more from an 8-inch iPad versus 9.7 inches, which is what Apple offers today? iPad 3 is the answer, if rumors about high-resolution display and other features are true.

Apple is rumored to be developing a smaller tablet. Would you buy an 8-inch iPad?

Apple typically doesn't lower prices like many of its competitors. Rather, the company introduces something else, with different features, for less money while adding more value to the product line already available for higher price. From that perspective, 8-inch iPad makes lots of sense. iPad 3 would sell for the same prices as today, while the smaller tablet would cost consumers less, maybe as low as $299 to start. iPad 3 would differentiate from its smaller sibling with extras like higher-resolution display, better camera (maybe none on the 8-incher) and Siri, for example.

Where some readers will disagree: The reason. I don't see Apple responding to competition from Kindle Fire or other, smaller, cheaper tablets so much as conducting business as usual. Apple effectively used this kind of pricing strategy throughout iPod's rise. Lower prices on newer, smaller models -- like the original iPod nano seven years ago -- broadened the customer base of buyers. Same can be said of MacBook Air, which compelling features are size and price. If consumers want more graphics capabilities, larger screens or higher resolution, they pay more for MacBook Pro.

iPhone is an interesting variation on the model. Rather than introduce new, lower-cost smartphones, Apple chose to keep older ones (with less storage capacity) in market selling for less money. The approach is possible because wireless carriers subsidize the phone's price, which keeps Apple's margins still fairly high. Nevertheless, people choosing free iPhone 3GS or $99 iPhone 4 get less than they would with 4S. Apple broadens the iPhone market after initial sales expansion to more buyers. But only after maximizing margins from smartphones selling for more money.

Teach Me

So what about iPad? Is there room in the continuum for a smaller, lower-priced tablet? Yes is the answer based on Apple's historical strategy. The question: Is it too soon, since iPad still sells so well starting at $499? Normally I would answer yes.

But there is another consideration: electronic textbooks. Last month, Apple kicked off a major push into the e-textbook market with iBooks 2, iBooks Author and iTunes U. Seems to me that an 8-inch iPad would be much better suited to reading books than iPad 2 (or presumably its successor).

However, just because Apple might be testing an 8-inch iPad doesn't mean we'll ever see it, or anytime soon. Apple is known for testing lots of products that either never come to market or do so much later as something else. For example, Apple was rumored to be testing a smartphone for years before Jobs announced one in January 2007.

So I regard any rumors of smaller iPad as only being somewhat credible. However if Apple was to release a smaller iPad this year, back-to-school season would make sense, except it would be uncharacteristic for a model so different to release so soon after major update to a flagship product -- in this case the forthcoming iPad 3.

So back to the question, if available, would you buy 8-inch iPad? Again, please answer in comments below and take the poll above.

Googolora receives critical regulatory approval

Posted: February 13th, 2012, 12:56pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Amid rumors the US Justice Department will approve Google's merger with Motorola Mobility this week, the European Union's Competition Commission acted first, clearing the deal.

In a procedural move, the European Commission halted merger review in mid December, after requesting additional information. Today's approval puts Googolora (not any official name, of course) within view. Merger now seems all but inevitable.

"We have approved the acquisition of Motorola Mobility by Google because, upon careful examination, this transaction does not itself raise competition issues", Joaquín Almunia, EC vice president, says. "Of course, the Commission will continue to keep a close eye on the behavior of all market players in the sector, particularly the increasingly strategic use of patents".

In August, Google offered $12.5 billion for Motorola Mobility, in Larry Page's first, big merger since returning as the search and information giant's CEO.

"We’re happy that today the European Commission approved our proposed acquisition of Motorola Mobility", Don Harrison, Google deputy general counsel, says. "This is an important milestone in the approval process and it moves us closer to closing the deal. We are now just waiting for decisions from a few other jurisdictions before we can close this transaction".

He emphasizes: "The combination of Google and Motorola Mobility will help supercharge Android", Harrison claims. "It will also enhance competition and offer consumers faster innovation, greater choice and wonderful user experiences".

Those may not be idle boasts. Moto's huge patent portfolio -- 17,000, and another 7,000 in process -- could help defend Android from relentless Apple patent claims. Motorola's manufacturing and research and development operations should boost Google's ability to crank out reference designs benefiting all Android OEMs. However, channel conflict, stemming from competition with other Android licensees is a potentially big downside.

Samsung, one of the largest Android licensees and the most successful competing with Apple, already is putting more weight behind homegrown Bada development.

Update: Later on Monday, the Justice Department cleared the merger, too.

How far Apple has come to reach $500

Posted: February 13th, 2012, 11:48am MST by Joe Wilcox

I don't own any stock (for conflict-of-interest reasons), but it's hard to ignore Apple pushing above $500 a share today. By three dollars and eighty-three cents. In midday trading shares are still a respectable $499.79. Apple opened at $499.74 today from Friday's close of $493.42.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company has come a long ways to reach this point.

When Steve Jobs returned to Apple in late 1996, the company was months from bankruptcy. But after assuming role of interim CEO, he pruned product lines and introduced the Bondi Blue iMac (in summer 1998), which led to a stunning revival in the brand and sales -- and to Apple's share price. Then disaster struck in the form of the trendy, translucent and tidily high-priced G4 Cube. The Mac sold poorly, in part because of the price but also because of timing. Recession suddenly and unexpectedly stalled global PC sales in autumn 2000, leading Apple, Dell and other manufacturers to issue profit warnings -- even Microsoft.

Apple issued its profit warning in late September, and the share price immediately collapsed. Between Aug. 31 and Dec. 31, 2000, Apple shares plunged more than 75 percent. The fruit-logo company had more inventory on store shelves than it could sell. Following a second profit warning, in December 2000, Apple revealed the size of the problem: 11 weeks of Macs in the channel. Normal: four to six weeks.

Shares remained moribund for years. On the eve of Macworld in January 2003, with Apple shares at $14.85, analyst Michael Hillmeyer reinstated Apple coverage with "sell." Hillmeyer wrote in a note to investors: "Although Apple makes great products, in our view the new product pipeline looks skimpy and we expect continued market share losses. A product differentiation strategy is difficult in a business increasingly commoditizing." Oh, the wicked, humbling perspective that hindsight brings.

Apple shares started a slow, steady recovery that lasted until the next recession, which is the last one looking back from today. Shares topped $200 in late December 2007. But the stock market collapse of 2008, which coincidentally came eight years to the day of Apple's earlier share price plunge, hit all tech companies hard. Apple among them; shares closed at $105.26, down $22.98, or 17.92 percent, on Sept. 29, 2008. Apple's market cap plummeted from $158.84 billion on Aug. 15, 2008 to $88.68 billion on Oct. 2, 2008. However, Apple shares started falling ahead of the greater market collapse, closing at $175.74 on Aug. 15, 2008. Between that day and the end of that year, Apple fell nearly 51 percent.

But Apple's stock recovered faster -- and profits grew higher -- than every other tech company. By the end of 2009, shares had climbed more than 132 percent from January 2 to $210.73.

In late May 2010, Apple's market capitalization topped Microsoft's -- $222.12 billion to $219.18 billion. In August 2011, Apple briefly became the world's most valuable company, with valuation rising about Exxon Mobile -- $337.17 billion to $330.77 billion, respectively. Around 1 pm ET today, Apple's market cap was $464.79 billion and Exxon's $398.98 billion.

But Apple's rising stock only tells part of the story. There's performance with it -- something Apple couldn't claim for much of the second Steve Jobs era, when hype lifted shares more. During fiscal first quarter 2012, Apple generated more revenue than all of fiscal 2009 ($46.33 billion to $42.91 billion). During the quarter, iPhone generated nearly as much revenue as all Apple did in fiscal 2007 ($24.42 billion to $24.58 billion).

Photo Credit: Francesco Dazzi/Shutterstock

What Windows 8 means to Microsoft and to you

Posted: February 12th, 2012, 12:23pm MST by Joe Wilcox

The headline really should be "What Windows 8 and Windows on ARM mean to Microsoft and to you" but that didn't ring right to my ears. But it more aptly describes the train of this analysis.

Simply stated: Windows 8 is the riskiest release ever. Microsoft execs say they are "re-imagining" Windows. Believe them. But it's much more: Reinvention. If successful, Microsoft will be a very different company in five years, and that's as much about the future stock price and company valuation as market position and products. All depends on the risks delivering rewards.

Windows 8 and Windows on ARM are nothing short of re-architecting Microsoft's flagship operating system from kernel to desktop. The Redmond, Wash.-based company will ask much of customers, developers, OEMs and other partners during this difficult transition, and it will be hard on everyone. But the time is now, or never. If Microsoft fails to take the risks now, Windows' luminescence will diminish in a half decade (or even less).

Microsoft needed to make these changes in the mid Noughties, and had it done so Apple likely would not be as successful with iOS devices. But Windows Vista and US antitrust oversight set back the timetable.

Undoing Antitrust Travails

Federal prosecutors, and their attorneys general partners, filed the US antitrust case in May 1998 to prevent Microsoft from stifling innovation in the tech industry. However, government oversight failed to quash the companies' twin monopolies -- Office and Windows. The case accomplished something else: Windows innovation stagnated during the last decade, as Microsoft backed off the so-called middleware categories covered by the consent decree/final judgement and withheld integrating new technologies into the operating system that should have kept the platform vital and created more opportunities for third-party developers.

The Windows 8 and Windows on ARM risks simply would be impossible if Microsoft was still under US antitrust oversight. That ended in May 2011 and almost immediately the winds of change rushed from Washington State. Clearly the company had long planned to bundle more applications and services into Windows and to make demands of software developers and hardware partners realistically impossible before.

For example, trustbusters claimed that Microsoft's efforts to offer a more unified Windows user experience across PCs was anticompetitive. As such, the company gave up control of the Windows start screen and desktop icons and hid access to some OS features, among other concessions. Repeated: Many of the risks Microsoft is taking with Windows 8 and Windows on ARM would be next to impossible under antitrust oversight.

Take Windows Store, for example. For security reasons, among others, Microsoft will largely limit software sales and distribution to the built-in Windows Store. Microsoft competitors could have cried antitrust, anticompetitive foul to government officials a year ago. Now Microsoft is freer to offer a mechanism that eventually will benefit developers (easier sales distribution, less piracy) and better protect Windows users from malware.

As Microsoft's future Windows strategy unfolds, it's hard to see where there wouldn't be trouble if antitrust oversight continued. Microsoft is dictating third-party software and hardware product design in ways not seen in more than a decade. But there's more to it: Microsoft is suddenly empowered to take competitive risks that could doom Windows if they fail.

I can't emphasize how different things are now. Microsoft is itself undergoing a slow but steady process of re-imagining, of reinvention. The company long known for being risk adverse is today taking risks unfathomable five years ago. In December 2009, I called Microsoft's first decade of the new century one of "shattered dreams". A year ago, I highlighted how Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer finally had consolidated his leadership in the post-Bill Gates era. If given continued chance, Ballmer may yet redeem himself and Microsoft for this decade and the next.

Redemption Tale

One of the most prevalent themes in American cinema is redemption -- Jimmy to Stewart as George Bailey, Robert Redford as Roy Hobbs, Clint Eastwood as Frank Horrigan, Russell Crowe as James J. Braddock, Paul Newman as Frank Galvin and many, many more.

We love our heroes fallen and restored.

Steve Jobs' second coming at Apple is one of the best, real-life redemption tales of the computing age. Apple was months from bankruptcy when he returned to the company in late 1996 and became interim CEO in mid 1997. In the 2011 quarter Jobs died, Apple reported $13 billion in income, and the iPhone alone generated more revenue than all of Microsoft. It's a helluva redemption story and one few writers could have scripted as fiction.

Ballmer's redemption story, and that for Microsoft, unfolds right now. It's a story in progress that shares similarities to Apple's. In 2001, during economic crisis, Apple made four strategic investments that are core foundation of its current success -- in order: iTunes, Mac OS X, Apple Store and iPod. On the software side, everything depends on Mac OS X (from which iOS derives) and it was a tough transition executed at a seemingly bad time.

Apple reinvented Mac OS in early 2001, with new architecture and user interface. Timing was hugely risky. Microsoft owned the PC operating system market and prepared to release Windows XP (in October). So just as the majority of developers prepped for the new Windows, Apple asked them to adopt new development tools, port older Mac OS apps and code native software. Apple couldn't get developers' attention, with major partners. Adobe and Quark among them, taking years to fully support OS X. Strangely, Microsoft supported Apple's new operating system first among the big Mac developers with new version of Office in autumn 2001.

Microsoft's situation is strangely similar today. The PC era is waning, as smaller, more mobile computing devices increase in popularity. There Apple has had huge success with iOS devices, which are pulling away sales from Windows PCs. Just in the last quarter, Apple shipped 37 million iPhones (generating more than $24 billion in revenue) -- 55 million iPads since the tablet's launch nearly two years ago. During a critical transition, when non-PC devices slop up Windows sales, Microsoft is re-architecting the operating system.

To support the new architecture, Microsoft will demand much from customers, developers and other partners -- particularly Windows on ARM. Microsoft's long-standing development priority has been this: Provide existing users backwards compatibility. Problem: The priority hampers new OS development and adoption of newer Windows editions. The company isn't fully abandoning this philosophy, but absolutely diminishing its role. Windows 8 will provide a lifeline to existing apps and the desktop motif, but the new Metro UI is priority, as are apps written for it, their distribution (through the Windows Store) and emphasis on developers writing for native code.

Windows on ARM leaps ahead, leaving little legacy behind. System-on-a-chip fundamentally changes how everyone -- customers, developers and other partners -- relate to Windows. More significantly, Microsoft is taking control over the Windows development and user experiences in a way not seen before 2000, when US District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ordered the company's breakup (an order later overturned by an appellate court).

Time is Now, or Never

From the perspective of non-PC competition -- mobile devices connected to the cloud -- Microsoft's timing is seemingly disastrous. The company and its partners are sure to lose sales during the transition. However, from another perspective, timing couldn't be better. Businesses remain Microsoft's core market and most will have finished or be close to completing migrations from XP to Windows 7. So the majority of customers will have recently upgraded. If Microsoft is going to "re-imagine" Windows, a time when core customers are least likely to upgrade is opportune. Windows 8 and, more importantly, Windows on ARM are about preparing the ecosystem of customers, developers and others for Windows 9.

If the strategy works -- and that includes unification of the user interface across devices (ideally the codebase, too) -- Windows will be a different, more flexible, more (cloud) connected operating system by the time v8's first service pack releases than it is today; and beyond. Like Apple laid a difficult new OS foundation with Mac OS X, Microsoft is on track to do something similar, actually much better, today. Because so far, Microsoft is executing the early phases much better than Apple did more than a decade ago.

During his final Consumer Electronics Show keynote, Ballmer proclaimed: "There's nothing more important at Microsoft than Windows". Believe it, despite holiday quarter 2011 doldrums, when the division's revenue fell by 6 percent year over year and profits by 11 percent.

If Microsoft's Windows re-imagining strategy works, in a few years the stock price, which has struggled to top $30 for about 12 years, could dramatically change. Apple is example again. (Disclosure: I do not invest in Apple, Microsoft or any other company -- to avoid conflict of interest.)

On the eve of Macworld in January 2003, with Apple shares at $14.85, analyst Michael Hillmeyer reinstated Apple coverage with "sell." Hillmeyer wrote in a note to investors: "Although Apple makes great products, in our view the new product pipeline looks skimpy and we expect continued market share losses. A product differentiation strategy is difficult in a business increasingly commoditizing."

In nine years, Apple's fortune dramatically changed. There is the aforementioned blow-away fourth quarter. Then there are the shares. Apple reached a new 52-week high on Friday, $497.62. It's not difficult math to see the difference from $14.85.

There's no reason why if Microsoft's Windows risks deliver rewards, the share price can't dramatically rise by Windows 9's release. But that's a redemption story not yet written. Is Ballmer now on the CEO's version of the "Hero's Journey"? We shall see.

Why will Windows on ARM devices come with Office 15?

Posted: February 10th, 2012, 2:04pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Because Microsoft can do it. The software giant wouldn't have dared on x86 PCs.

Steven Sinofsky's nearly 9,000-word Windows on ARM manifesto packs lots of surprises. Among the biggest: "WOA includes desktop versions of the new Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote". Say what? Now why is that? Four reasons stand out: Litigation, protection, competition and adoption.

Before diving into those reasons, there still remains a tad uncertainty about how Office 15 will come with Windows on ARM PCs or devices. Sinofsky, president of Microsoft's Windows and Windows Live division, writes:

Within the Windows desktop, WOA includes desktop versions of the new Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote, codenamed 'Office 15'. WOA will be a no-compromise product for people who want to have the full benefits of familiar Office productivity software and compatibility, an industry-leading hardware-accelerated web browser, apps from Microsoft, and access to apps in the Windows Store.

That statement could be interpreted to apply to the Windows on ARM preview, and possibly limited to the test build(s). However, "a low volume of test PCs specifically designed for WOA will be made available starting around the next Windows 8 milestone", Sinfosky explains. "These devices are for developers and hardware partners". The point: Seems to me he refers to shipping Windows-on-ARM devices, with respect to Office 15 inclusion.

I asked Microsoft PR for clarification and got none. The response: "Unfortunately, we have nothing further to share beyond what’s included in the blog post". Well, hells bells. Mmmm, I should be grateful for any kind of response. Apple PR wouldn't even have done that much.

No Monopoly Here

The first reason supersedes any others. Microsoft's US antitrust case narrowly defined the Windows monopoly as "Intel-based" -- meaning x86 -- PCs. Windows on ARM will allow Microsoft to do all kinds of bundling, not just Office, that otherwise would be strictly or implicitly prohibited by the antitrust case.

What scrutiny? Microsoft antitrust oversight ended last May, technically freeing the company from government scrutiny. However, Office was a sore topic during the trial's later stages. Prosecutors accused Microsoft of establishing, through the Office-Windows duopoly, the "applications barrier to entry" for competing products. It's why the US District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's remedy, later overturned, was breakup of Microsoft into separate applications and operating systems companies.

Microsoft is better off not testing the Office-bundling-on-x86-waters for antitrust sharks (the closest Microsoft ever came to those waters is Office 2010 Starter, with reduced-function, ad-supported Excel and Word). ARM is safe swimming, because there is no antitrust case to make. Windows on ARM is a new product and separate from its predecessors even though some code is shared with forthcoming v8. Office 15 is but one of the major Microsoft applications or services that will come with or be tightly bound to WOA.

Mine, Not Yours

Four Office 15 apps -- Excel, OneNote, PowerPoint and Word -- come with Windows on ARM and will run in the rather restricted Desktop mode. Microsoft will offer the only real value on the desktop, since legacy apps can't be installed or ported. Sinofsky is clear: "WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps. Code that uses only system or OS services from WinRT can be used within an app and distributed through the Windows Store for both WOA and x86/64".

The restriction is part of Microsoft's approach to security. Windows on ARM is a walled garden, where no unauthorized code runs. Applications are distributed through the Windows Store. These apps must use native code and will be available via the Metro user interface. However, the desktop is Microsoft's sacred ground, where Office resides along with a few carry-over built-in Windows apps and pretty much nothing else.

I expect Microsoft would be less likely to bundle Office if not for the end of antitrust oversight and Windows running on a chip architecture other than x86. The walled garden security approach doesn't depend on Office 15; it's the other way around.

Rotten Apples

Competition is another good reason for Microsoft to bundle Office 15 and other homegrown apps or services. Apple offers many of its own apps with iOS or Mac OS X, such as iLife. Apple has reaped the bundling harvest for years, while Microsoft wiled away sidelined by antitrust oversight.

Apple's three main productivity apps -- Keynote, Numbers and Pages -- sell for $19.99 each from the Mac App Store. By comparison, Microsoft's cheapest Office version, Home and Student, retails for $149.99. So, even where Apple doesn't directly bundle, it has some benefits from the bundled Mac App Store and lower pricing. Apple also offers iOS versions of the productivity apps.

Considering how well Macs are now selling and, by volume, iPad even better, Microsoft should want to leverage every advantage when making a particularly major OS architectural change. Windows on ARM will compete directly with iPad at least, and on the laptop-side Apple's MacBook Air and its successors. That's from a starting point of zero, rather than hundreds of millions of users. On ARM, Microsoft is David and Apple is Goliath.

App Advantage

Adoption is the final reason. Microsoft will ask lots of customers, particularly businesses, to make the Windows-on-ARM switch. Most IT managers tell me the same thing: They make PC and architecture decisions based on applications, not operating systems. It's one major reason why Linux is a corporate non-starter -- there's no Microsoft Office. WOA is DOA without Office, and presented in the manner many businesses and their employees are used to, via the desktop. Shipping Office with ARM assures potential business customers that they'll get the most important app.

Something else: WOA's browser doesn't support plug-ins, for which there is some security justification. That makes Office all the more an important user interface for accessing back-end processes, applications or the cloud. Not that there's Outlook bundled, but mail is better suited to Metro anyway than the desktop, if you ask me. Still, even without plugins, a standards-based Internet Explorer supporting HTML should prove quite capable on the front-end.

Sinofsky hasn't offered much clarity on what the Office 15 bundling practically means (and I got no clarification from my request). I raise this since some people will ask how Microsoft will make money giving Office 15 away. The company hasn't announced Office 15 SKUs yet. One option: Fold the productivity suite's cost into Windows on ARM pricing (which would be invisible to the buyer since the OS will come on new hardware only). Another: Offer higher-value SKUs that businesses or consumers pay for.

Regardless, Windows on ARM is a new beast, and Microsoft needs to bring out the carrots to woo businesses to bite. None is sweeter and more appealing than Office.

Windows on ARM is the future

Posted: February 10th, 2012, 10:30am MST by Joe Wilcox

In September, about a month before Apple's cofounder died, I asserted that "Steven Sinofksy is the new Steve Jobs". Jobs' on-stage presentations, and the "reality distortion field" with them, are legendary. But chatter and buzz can fill the InterWebs, without seemingly magical Apple events. Sinofsky's blog post, "Building Windows for the ARM processor architecture", while hardly a compelling title, is Microsoft's manifesto for this decade. People are talking, chatting, buzzing -- and they should be.

Microsoft is in the process of rebuilding Windows for the post-PC era, by stepping back from its core roots -- Intel processors -- and embracing ARM. Windows will still run on x86 processors, but there's now little doubt that, without major chip changes from AMD or Intel, Wintel is legacy and ARM is the future. The architectural change opens up mobile device categories, even Windows 8 on smartphones, that the OS can't effectively reach today. Essentially, Microsoft is betting the flagship operating system's future on ARM. Sinofsky made a big statement in a small way -- nothing more than one of the longest blog posts you'll read ever (It's more than 8,000 words, closer to 9,000 really, which is enough to publish as a Kindle Single).

ARM-twisting x86

"With Windows 8, we have reimagined Windows from the chipset to the experience -- and bringing this reimagined Windows to the ARM processor architecture is a significant part of this innovation", Sinofsky explains. "Expanding the view of the PC to cover a much wider range of form factors and designs than some think of today is an important part of these efforts".

Sinofsky maintains Microsoft's commitment to x86: "We have had a deeper level of collaboration with Intel and AMD on the full breadth of PC offerings than in any past release". But the core context is about the PC, such as ultrabooks, and not the new category of mobile devices, which include media tablets, where ARM is so successful today and where Windows has little presence.

As such, he concedes: "We created WOA to enable a new class of PC with unique capabilities and form factors, supported by a new set of partners that expand the ecosystem of which Windows is part". In other words: Beyond the PC as businesses and consumers think today. He repeatedly describes the new operating system as "reimagined Windows", which says much about Microsoft's vision.

That vision means more choices, and likely more confusion with it, for customers, developers and other partners. Microsoft announced Windows support for ARM processors during Consumer Electronics Show 2011 and expanded on the vision during September's BUILD developer conference. All along it seemed like there would be one Windows for both processors, as Microsoft put so much emphasis on x86 backward compatibility. But Sinofsky, who is president of the Windows & Windows Live division clarifies: Windows on ARM is a separate edition. While not disclosing actual SKUs, Sinofsky is clear about WOA being its own product.

Who Needs Windows 8?

The reasons for this aren't just strategic or logistical. They're legal, too. US courts narrowly defined Microsoft's Windows monopoly as being on "Intel-based" PCs. ARM moves Windows out of the antitrust crosshairs and allows Microsoft to do some quite unexpected things (which I'll explain in my next post). It's another reason why ARM is the future of Windows -- or the beginning of it -- when, or perhaps soon after, v8 ships later this year.

Unless, I misunderstand, the separation is finer still. Windows on ARM is not Windows 8. Sinofsky references them separately several times in his manifesto. For example, describing benefits of the new Metro UI over the desktop motif: "WOA (as with Windows 8) is designed so that customers focused on Metro-style apps don’t need to spend time in the desktop". Microsoft isn't doing away with the desktop, just diminishing its relevance.

That's all part of prepping Windows for new device classes. It's vitally important to understand what this means, because Sinofsky waffles in his explanation -- perhaps to calm customers or partners clinging to the Windows, applications, processes and hardware they've got. But the undercurrent is clear, Windows on ARM changes everything for customers and partners that let it.

For example, "One of the new aspects of WOA you will notice is that you don’t turn off a WOA PC", Sinofsky presents. "WOA PCs will not have the traditional hibernate and sleep options with which we are familiar. Instead, WOA PCs always operate in the newly designed Connected Standby power mode, similar to the way you use a mobile phone today". It's a brave new world, baby. Embrace it.

Developers, Developers, Developers

Suddenly the Windows 8 Developer Preview distributed in September takes on new significance looking at WOA and preparing for the renewed emphasis on native code. Sinofsky writes:

WOA has all the WinRT capabilities present in the Windows Developer Preview, and all the tools and techniques that you can use to build new Metro style apps for x86/64 are available to developers to also target WOA. Developers can use our tools to create native C/C++ code for maximal performance and flexibility, in addition to the C#, XAML, VB, and HTML5 based tools, to target apps for WOA, so long as their code targets the WinRT API set.

Additionally, developers with existing code, whether in C, C++, C#, Visual Basic, or JavaScript, are free to incorporate that code into their apps, so long as it targets the WinRT API set for Windows services. The Windows Store can carry, distribute, and service both the ARM and x86/64 implementations of apps (should there be native code in the app requiring two distributions).

Additionally, Windows on ARM will demand much more of all Microsoft partners. Actually, the undertaking is enormous. Because of ARM architecture and strategic and logistical choices Microsoft makes, WOA devices will be more like integrated end-to-end hardware, software and services projects than are PCs today -- and that applies to computers as (and in some ways more) smaller devices.

"Because of the necessarily tight connection between SoC [System on a Chip], peripherals, firmware, and the OS, WOA PCs should be thought of as joint engineering that goes well beyond industry partners merely collaborating", Sinofsky explains. "A WOA PC will feel like a consumer electronics device in terms of how it is used and managed".

PC as CE

The point: Windows on ARM will require tight integration along the hardware and software stack, something Apple succeeds at by controlling everything and something Microsoft hopes to achieve by working with partners. Android is model for success. Google controls the operating system, around which mobile manufacturers create smartphones and tablets running on ARM processors. They're CE devices, not PCs.

However, Google works with partners experienced in producing consumer electronics or CE-like devices on ARM. This will be mostly new to Microsoft's core Windows PC partners. Can they adapt? Will new CE partners make ARM PCs? Those are questions to be answered in the future, and they will determine whether or not Windows on ARM tablets, for example, can make inroads against iPad.

Keeping to the consumer electronics approach, "WOA will not be available as a software-only distribution", Sinofsky emphasizes. That's right, Windows on ARM will come on new devices and will not be separately sold in stores.

There, Microsoft will imitate Apple. "WOA PCs will be serviced only through Windows or Microsoft Update, and consumer apps will only come from the Windows Store, so you never have to worry if a program will run because you are not downloading or installing from a DVD outside of the store experience", Sinofsky writes.

Make no mistake, Windows on ARM opens up a different path for the PC and the devices that augment or replace it. For Microsoft, and eventually its customers and partners, Windows on ARM is the future.

Apple protesters make me really mad

Posted: February 9th, 2012, 10:40am MST by Joe Wilcox

About four months ago, thousands of people held vigil outside Apple stores, honoring deceased cofounder Steve Jobs and joining a sudden canonization -- deification, really -- process that raised him above mere mortals. Today, crowds return to those same shops in anger, protesting workers' treatment at Apple factories in China. Whoa, how brands, and emotions about them, suddenly change.

I'm simply appalled, not by Apple, but by the protesters. This is no Arab Spring, people.

Foxconn, the Chinese manufacturer producing iPhone and other Apple gadgets, is a hot topic following New York Times and "This American Life" exposés last month. Reporters found questionable working conditions -- by supposed American standards. People rushed to the InterWebs to criticize and defend Apple; I purposely wrote nothing, disgusted by bloggers and journalists looking to profit from the scandal -- riding the buzz to fame (in some cases infamy) and higher pageviews.

Media Mayhem

Many of these writers change positions depending which way opinions blow, while others are Apple apologist turncoats that are seemingly credible but really don't want to be on the wrong side of popular sentiment. Well, what they perceive it to be. Bloggers, journalists or anyone else looking to benefit from Apple's Foxconn problems are bad or worse, for they stand on the backs of the same Chinese workers they claim to defend. (I debated linking to some of these posts, but decided not to single out any writers.)

If critics were sincere, rather than capitalizing on topic of the moment, they would have gone after Apple in early 2010, ahead of iPhone 4's launch, when a rash of suicides at Foxconn factories made big headlines -- and they would have kept up the public pressure, even after Apple publicly worked with Foxconn to make changes to improve working conditions. The Foxconn furor died down as iPhone 4-crazed hipsters, many of them seemingly the same people attacking Apple today, snatched up the smartphone -- and iPad, too.

The recent furor really started in early January with "This American Life" segment "Mr. Daisey and the Apple Factory" and two Times stories: "How the US Lost Out on iPhone Work" and "In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad". I applaud the reporters and their outstanding investigative work. It's the pundits and protesters who followed them that bug me -- the ones pretending Foxconn factory problems are suddenly new, that Apple has done nothing to improve working conditions or that products for other high-tech firms aren't produced there. All the blame is Apple's.

Idiot Wind

I can understand this position from the non-bloggers and non-journalists, meaning those not riding the wave of perceived popular sentiment. Apple hipsters who use little or no other vendors' tech might be blind to all others outsourcing manufacturing to Foxconn facilities. They might feel blood on their hands, too, for buying Apple products produced in China; their guilt relief is to accuse Apple. I say, look to yourself. You paid for the over-priced gadget. You empowered Apple manufacturing in China by your purchases.

Something else: Apple is now the largest tech company -- actually biggest of all by market valuation -- and that makes it a target. I remember when during the 1990s, Microsoft's size and success brought all kinds of accusations with it. Apple was cuddly and lovable when the feisty upstart, but it no longer flies the pirate's flag (as it did during the first Steve Jobs era). Apple is the establishment -- the man! Who do people protest? Or hold most accountable?

I'm not here to defend or criticize Apple's, or any other vendor's, responsibility to Chinese workers sweating over tech products. I will say this: For American protesters, there are plenty of injustices here at home to worry about. A parade of down-and-out or homeless folks go through our recycle and trash bins every day. We help who we can. There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of homeless students here in the San Diego school system. Where's the humanity in that, and what are you willing to do about it? People can easily protest -- walk up to an Apple Store and hand in a petition -- when asked nothing more.

Gutless Guilt

Our family cat disappeared nearly a month ago, and we're now fairly confident that a coyote got him. But we go every other day to the San Diego animal shelter and the adjacent Humane Society. I was stunned to see the luxury the cats live in at the Human Society. Some rooms, where one cat waits for adoption, are larger than my bedroom. Meanwhile, people live on the streets -- and some of them with jobs -- while these animals are coddled. Who's protesting for the street people?

I say this to Apple protesters: Shareholders have a right to make demands of Apple. You do not. They own the company. If you're a protester and not an Apple shareholder, you have no real right to tell Apple what to do. Exercise your real power. Show your support for Chinese workers with your wallet. Don't buy Apple products. By protesting, what you want from Apple is a guilt-free purchase -- to have your cake and eat it, too, as the saying goes. That's not justice or better working conditions in China, but really about you and your feelings about Apple and buying its products.

As today's planned protests approached, several petitions appeared online, such as this one at Change.org, which has about 200,000 signatures. To Apple protesters, I say: It's easy to demand change when you don't have to make any. I would take more sincerely a petition where signers agreed to pay XX dollars more per iPad or iPhone -- hell, let's just say $50 -- to improve working conditions at the factories producing the tech. Now that is meaningful. Anything else is more about purging signers' guilt for buying Apple products than committing to substantive change.

You're either part of the problem or the solution. If you buy Apple products and protest for change, you're not part of the solution. You're part of the problem.

Photo Credit: 1000 Words / Shutterstock

What? You think Windows 8 Leap Day is coincidence?

Posted: February 8th, 2012, 3:20pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Good marketing is all about subtly and communicating a complex message simply. But in the era of tech events, particularly Apple's during the second Steve Jobs era, their announcement is something of an artform. Microsoft's Windows 8 Consumer Preview event announcement is rich in subtly and foreshadowing, simply by a date. February 29.

Leap Day comes once but every four years. It's a special day that seems to have been specially chosen: Microsoft will hold the Windows 8 event in Barcelona, Spain, during Mobile World Congress (Feb. 27 to March 1). Not on Day One or Two, which customarily are when vendors make their big announcements (as is Day 0), but on Day 3 -- and that's typically when people already bug out of the show. February 29 isn't random then.

Windows 8 is a big product for Microsoft -- and its hardware, software and channel partners. Windows PC sales are way down, even as Mac sales soar and iPad chips away new computer purchases. Meanwhile, the new operating system marks Windows' support for ARM processors, re-emphasis on native code development, major user interface changes (Metro, Ribbon and even Kinect) and push to reclaim tablets from Android and iOS.

Leap Day's subtle message is leap ahead -- that Microsoft plans to leap ahead with Windows 8. I see something else: Customers and partners (developers, particularly) making a leap of faith. Windows 8 will bring much change, which many customers will see as increased risk. Many don't want to leap anywhere. They want to stay where they are.

But the date isn't the only subtle message here, veiled in foreshadowing. So is the name. Microsoft isn't calling the public test software "Beta" or "Beta 1" but "Windows 8 Consumer Preview". There's meaning to that choice. In January 2009, Microsoft made Windows 7 Beta publicly available, then skipped Beta 2 and went right to Release Candidate. The use of "Preview" foreshadows similar timeline, and as I explained last week, timing along such a path assures gold code release to manufacturing by August and so official launch by late October.

There is other meaning behind the name. "Preview" is the new "beta". All of Microsoft's major, recent public testing releases -- what once would have been betas -- were previews. Look back, Preview was the darling of 2010 betas. What proceeded this month's big consumer test OS? Windows 8 Developer Preview. It's forebear and subset: Internet Explorer Platform Preview. Perhaps you remember Office 2010 Technical Preview, back in 2009, among many other like-named betas.

Preview has a nice ring to it, don't you think? Beta is loaded with baggage connotations from a by-gone era. Preview's connotations are forward-looking, getting a sneak peak of something special. Developers got their sneak peak in September, consumers will get theirs, too.

Preview also removes barriers to download. Beta's connotations are too much testing, which will put off some people. Preview entices more than does beta. Microsoft wants as many people as possible who are willing to download Windows 8's pre-release code. There are lots of changes to evaluate from usability and technical perspectives before RTM.

Then there is the huge marketing potential, of widely distributing Windows 8 ahead of its launch (and likely converting many Previewers to buyers) and generating lots of ongoing buzz to drown out persistent clamoring about the next Apple thing. You know, that compact 9.7-inch iPad 4 with 4,000 ppi display that folds out into 110-inch flexible-screen TV and syncs content with iFridge, iCar and iBaby Stroller.

Huh, and you thought Microsoft lacked subtly.

Google releases Chrome 17 -- get it now!

Posted: February 8th, 2012, 1:29pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Chrome 17 entered the "stable" channel today, 33 days after going beta. Not coincidentally, the stable build follows Chrome for Android by one day. You'll want the one to get the full sync benefits of the other.

Google promises security improvements with the new release and something else: Faster page loading, as you type and in some cases barely before you start typing the address. Chrome essentially pre-renders websites, extending the search page pre-rendering already available. The feature is disturbing in practice -- a little too prescient, like mind reading, when it works.

On the security side, Google has long used a number of features, such as tab sandboxing, to diminish malware risks. Chrome 17 improves security by enhancing the Safe Browsing mechanism. Google's Niels Provos and Ian Fette explain last week:

To provide better protection, Safe Browsing has two additional mechanisms that can detect phishing attacks and harmful downloads the system has never encountered before.

Phishing attacks are often only active for a few short hours, so it’s especially important to detect new attacks as they happen. Chrome now analyzes properties of each page you visit to determine the likelihood of it being a phishing page. This is done locally on your computer, and doesn’t share the websites you visit with Google. Only if the page looks sufficiently suspicious will Chrome send the URL of that page back to Google for further analysis, and show a warning as appropriate.

Malicious downloads are especially tricky to detect since they’re often posted on rapidly changing URLs and are even “re-packed” to fool anti-virus programs. Chrome helps counter this behavior by checking executable downloads against a list of known good files and publishers. If a file isn’t from a known source, Chrome sends the URL and IP of the host and other meta data, such as the file’s hash and binary size, to Google. The file is automatically classified using machine learning analysis and the reputation and trustworthiness of files previously seen from the same publisher and website. Google then sends the results back to Chrome, which warns you if you’re at risk.

Google is taking an even more proactive approach to browser security than it already does. While I would never dissuade anyone from using anti-malware software, I do wonder if the changes -- added to existing capabilities -- diminish the value of security apps offering safe search capabilities.

Many other changes are cosmetic, as Google continues to clear clutter from Chrome and give it a more modern, streamlined look. A full list of changes is available from the Google Chrome Releases blog.

Something else: If you've got Ice Cream Sandwich running on Google Galaxy Nexus, Motorola XOOM, Samsung Nexus S or other smartphone or tablet and Chrome for Android, do get the new stable desktop build. For me, Chrome for Android wouldn't sync right with Chrome desktop until after I upgraded. Now it's smooth as silk syncing.

Chrome 17 is available for Mac OS X, Windows and Linux. Follow the links to BetaNews FileForum to download.

Would you pay $10,000 for pizza and a bride?

Posted: February 8th, 2012, 12:49pm MST by Joe Wilcox

I don't know what's stranger, Pizza Hut's Valentine's Day marketing gimmick or one of our editors finding it on Facebook. BetaNews FileForum managing editor Eddie Elmore consistently drops interesting links into group chat. The link to the Pizza Hut promo churned up so much discussion among the staff, I had to post.

If you're willing to pay Pizza Hut $10,000 and another 10 bucks for a Dinner Box, the restauranteur will help you propose marriage. Besides the food, you get a ruby ring, limo service, flowers (hey, it's Valentine's Day), photographer, videographer and your own fireworks show. My question: What if he or she says no. You want to be damn sure of the answer beforehand.

Pizza Hut has only 10 of these things to give away. There's an option to "buy" on the proposal promo page, which means right away online, I guess. In this era of Apple-loving, whole-grain hipsters, I can think of few things more juxtaposed than pizza and proposals. "Yes, let's start off our marriage right, with starch and tomato paste".

What does this have to do with tech? Social media for one and the bride (or groom) to be, of course. C`mon geeks, wouldn't you feel better about the relationship's future if this was a $10,000 package from Best Buy or Fry's? Do you really want to skulk around and hide future gadget purchases from you know who?

Now I got to ask: Are you proposing this Valentine's Day and by what creative means?

You can lose money selling iPhone, just ask Sprint

Posted: February 8th, 2012, 9:08am MST by Joe Wilcox

Be careful what you wish for, because you might get it -- as the old adage goes. Sprint wanted iPhone and got it, and paid dearly during the first quarter of sales.

This morning, before the opening bell, the nation's third-largest carrier announced holiday quarter results and another big operating loss. There, iPhone heavily contributed. The carrier reported a $1.3 billion loss, or 43 cents per diluted share, on revenue of $8.7 billion. Profit margins plummeted to 9.5 percent from 16 percent a year earlier, and iPhone largely accounted for the decline. Sprint loses would actually have been more, but the carrier gained fewer new subscribers than Wall Street expected.

Sprint's cost of wireless equipment rose to $1.7 billion from $1.2 billion in fourth quarter 2010. The carrier paid out $2.6 billion, offset by $910 million in revenue from equipment sales.

"The quarterly year-over-year and sequential increase in net subsidy is primarily due to the launch of the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S, which on average carry a higher subsidy rate per handset as compared to other handsets", according to the company. In other words, Sprint finally got iPhone and paid more to get it.

That $199 you pay for 16GB iPhone 4S, for example, isn't what carriers do. To get a sense of how much, either calculate the tax on your new mobile or look to Apple Store's unlocked price -- $649.

Sprint sold 1.8 million iPhones during Q4 -- 40 percent of them to new customers. That pull can largely be attributed to what Sprint offers that AT&T and Verizon don't: unlimited data.

"Our strong fourth quarter performance illustrates the power of matching iconic devices like the iPhone with our simple, unlimited plans and industry-leading customer experience", says Sprint CEO Dan Hess.

Wall Street reacted poorly to the quarter's results, with shares down 6.5 percent in early trading to $2.29. Shares somewhat recovered by late morning -- down 2.86 percent around 11 am ET.

OneNote for Android is here -- get it now or live with regret

Posted: February 7th, 2012, 6:41pm MST by Joe Wilcox

For years, OneNote seemed like a promise without purpose. Microsoft developed a fresh, flexible application capable of pulling together content from many sources and in a way that made creative sense. Sure the Office family member imitated note-taking software already available for the Mac, but with surprising approachability for Microsoft-developed Windows software. But who really used OneNote?

Then during the Office 2007 release cycle, Microsoft swapped out Outlook for OneNote in the low-cost consumer edition and millions of users discovered the promise. But not the purpose. Microsoft would later imbue that quality quite unexpectedly by connecting OneNote to SkyDrive. Sync is the software's killer capability -- that gives purpose to promise behind great usability and remarkable flexibility. Where OneNote and SkyDrive really, well, sync is on mobile devices. Windows Phone, then iPhone, iPad and, today, Android. Yeah, if you use OneNote on the PC and are a two-timing Android user, grab the phone. Microsoft has got a treat for you.

From 50 to 500

OneNote is available immediately for download from Android Market. Microsoft takes crap for lots of things, but distribution is something the company often gets right. OneNote is available in more than 50 countries:

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

The app is free to use for creating up to 500 notes, then you're creativity ends without paying a one-time fee of $4.99. The price is reasonable, so is the free trial. Who let's you use an app essentially 500 times before paying for it? Microsoft calls the one version "free" and the other "unlimited".

If you choose not to upgrade to the unlimited version, you can still view, sync, and delete any of your existing notes even after you've reached the 500 notes limit. However, you will no longer be able to edit your notes or create new ones on your Android phone. For unlimited use pricing outside of the United States, please visit the Android Market in your region (see below for a complete list of supported countries and markets).

Reviewers' Remark

What's that adage? Kids say the darndest things. Grups with new toys are like kids, and they, too, say the darndest things. Mark, a Galaxy S owner, writes in a brief review of OneNote for Android: "Glory hallelujah. Thank you Microsoft. I'm buying your stock now and selling Apple :) Five stars when we have more formatting and other capabilities!" He gives the app four stars.

David, who has Galaxy Tab 10.1, writes:

Almost perfect. Having tried MobileNoter with all of its limitations I was really surprised and pleased at how well integrated and functional this app is. Syncing is quick (both to and from SkyDrive) and I can edit and create new notes with numbered, bullet points and check-boxes.

Finally I can ditch Evernote and go back to OneNote! My only complaint is that, yet again, this is not a tablet optimized app. Screen real estate and time is wasted by navigating between note books and pages when a nice tab/window on the left could have made much quicker. Fingers crossed for a tablet optimized version soon.

I had forgotten about Evernote. It's a great app and companions like Skitch are damn fun. But OneNote is backed by Microsoft, the app is now available on all major mobile platforms and its real kick comes from SkyDrive. As I've often expressed: Sync is the killer app for the connected world.

So, hey, Microsoft where's the rest of Office -- for Android and iOS -- with SkyDrive mopping Apple and Google off the floor?

What's behind Google's Charles Dickens doodle?

Posted: February 7th, 2012, 2:35pm MST by Joe Wilcox

One of England's most celebrated authors was born 200 years ago today. Google is commemorating Charles Dickens with a little (Oliver) Twist. There's a doodle, as would be expected, but behind it links to free ebooks from the search and information giant's own bookstore. Eh, what's up with that? Is it favoritism?

That's a question I've heard often asked recently about Google, as the amount of cross-product, cross-service integration increases. The practice jumped quite dramatically after Larry Page returned as Google CEO in April 2011, and it's not abating. Favoritism should be a concern, given that impartiality -- and with it trust -- is crucial to Google's core product (search) and profit center (search ads and keywords). What the Dickens is going on here?

Over at Search Engine Land, Jonathan Allen claims this is the "first time that [Google] has used their logo change to specifically promote a product or service". I dunno about that; seems to me a matter of definition. It's customary for Google doodles to link somewhere, providing more information about the topic, event or person represented. That's not new. Something else: Google isn't selling anything here, but offering easy access to books that are available in the public domain. That said, they are from Google Books.

Is that favoritism? It's true that Google now has an ebookstore, but these links go to Google's older service of scanned, public domain print titles. The search service predates the recent rush, led by Amazon, to ebook sales and distribution. "Oliver Twist" is example. However, there is a link to get a free ebook of Dickens' titles. Google presents several options for obtaining the book. Clicking "EPUB" downloads "OLiver Twist" to your computer. Clicking "PDF" opens the ebook in Google Docs in Chrome and downloads it in other browsers.

The other options are a Google affair, using the search provider's ebook service to make delivery -- not that distribution is restrictive, given the broad number of devices supported. Google also provides links to popular online stores, Amazon among them, for purchasing Dickens' titles in print.

I don't see real favoritism here but Google doing what it's suppose to -- get information to people quickly and in a manner consistent with past presentation. The doodle-linked Google Books pages are similar to others, for example, Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn".

If anything, the Dickens links promote the openness of information and the spirit of public domain. You can buy Dickens' titles from Google's ebook service ("Oliver Twist" for $4.99 is example). But those titles aren't the ones highly promoted in the links page from the doodle. Free is the key word here.

Unquestionably, Google Books receives some visible promotion from the doodle linkage. But the context is more about Google providing quick and easy access to useful information (its core service) and promoting the reading of one of the best Western writers of the last two centuries and one of the smartest men in recorded history (Dickens' IQ was 180-185, depending on source).

That said, Google undeniably has dramatically increased cross-service integration, particularly since the Google+ limited launch last summer. Just look at how much the Google search page has changed -- the company's other services are far more visible. There is heated controversy about some of the integration, such as "Search Plus Your World". The question to ask, once again: Is it favoritism? Or is Google improving the quality of search and ancillary services by connecting them together? I see the answers more case by case and in this instance: "No". My reaction would be different if Google used the doodle to sell Dickens' novels from its own ebookstore.

By the way, overnight, Ariel Levine, Google ebooks associate, explains how the doodle was created. It's a fun short-read for that train or bus ride home from the office.

Will you buy Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone? [poll]

Posted: February 6th, 2012, 2:54pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Today, Microsoft Store started taking pre-orders for the Lumia 900, Nokia's flagship Windows Phone. There's a $25 reservere for the handset, which, according to my local shop will be available some time in March. Microsoft Store had no official launch date to give.

My question: Will you buy the Lumia 900? Nobody is saying how much the smartphone will cost. That $25 is blind faith the final price will be reasonable enough. Who knows? Given Microsoft's and its partners' marketing commitment, the faithful might see a serious discount for their leap to pre-order. Will you be among them? You can answer the question(s) and give your reasons why or why not in comments below and answer the poll below. Lumia 900 will be available in the United States on AT&T.

What will you get for your 25 bucks plus additional unnamed amount: 1.4GHz Qualcomm APQ8055 processor; 4.3-inch AMOLED display (yes, it's Corning Gorilla Glass), with 800 x 480 resolution; 512MB RAM; 16GB storage: 8-megapixel rear-facing camera with Carl Zeiss lens and dual-LED flash; 1MP front-facing camera; 720p video capture from rear camera and VGA from front camera; GSM 850/900/1800/1900 radio; WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100 radio; 4G LTE; Bluetooth 2.1+EDR; Stereo Bluetooth; WiFi; accelerometer; ambient and proximity sensors; gyroscope; 2 microphones; 1830 mAh battery; Internet Explorer 9 mobile; and Windows Phone 7.5 "Mango" Commercial Release 2.

Any device only needs as much hardware as necessary for your needs and to give operating system and applications ample performance. I say that in qualification before observing how much more is available on many Androids and even iPhone 4S. The Androids are bitchin': All LTE phones currently available from AT&T or Verizon have dual-core processors, more RAM and typically better screen resolution or video capture than Nokia Lumia 900. What they don't have is Windows Phone 7.5 CR2.

A suggestion to Microsoft and Nokia: As part of your launch promotion kitty, put aside some money to pay the carrier subsidy. In other words, make every person who wants Lumia 900 eligible to get one, regardless of where they are in their contract, during, say, the first 30 days of availability. Hey, it's just a suggestion.

Is this the Windows Phone you have been waiting for? Scratch that. Is this the smartphone you've been waiting for?

Microsoft Store is taking pre-orders for Nokia Lumia 900. Will you buy this Windows Phone?

Windows Phone can't save Nokia

Posted: February 6th, 2012, 2:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

All those analysts predicting Windows Phone as No. 2 smartphone OS in 2015, lifted by Nokia magic, need a reality check. Put away the crystal balls and peer into the present. Today, IDC released fourth-quarter smartphone shipment data, whoa, is the data chart scary.

Shocker is Nokia's smartphone death spiral, which no Windows Phone has yet lifted. The once mighty Finnish handset maker ended the quarter with 12.4 percent market share, down from 27.6 percent, and plunging from first place a year earlier to fourth at end of 2011. This is the same quarter Nokia launched its first Windows Phones, the Lumia 710 and 800. Right now, looks like Windows Phone can't save Nokia, which cuts the other way, too: Nokia can't save Windows Phone.

Apple and Samsung were the big beneficiaries of Nokia's nose dive. IDC's data affirms Strategy Analytics findings from late last month: Apple and Samsung ended fourth quarter in near smartphone shipments photo finish. iPhone did better -- 37 million units to Samsung's 36 million. Both vendors saw huge year-over-year gains.

Samsung's shipments rose 275 percent year over year, going from fourth to second ranking -- market share rise from 9.4 percent to 22.8 percent. That's better than Apple, which was no slouch. Shipments grew 128.4 percent, with share rising to 23.5 percent from 15.9 percent. By comparison, Nokia's share fell 30.6 percent -- or nearly three times the other laggard. Research in Motion share fell 11 percent to 8.2 percent from 14.3 percent.

Apple and Samsung largely split the smartphone market's largest portion, shipping 73 million of the quarter's 157.8 million units.

"The launch of Apple's iPhone 4S played a key role in smartphone growth to capture pent-up demand, and smartphone launches from other vendors also provided a broad selection to meet varying preferences and budgets", Ramon Llamas, IDC senior research analyst, says. The majority of "launches from other vendors" were Androids.

"So-called 'hero' devices, such as Samsung's Galaxy Nexus and Apple's iPhone 4S, garner the bulk of the attention heaped on the device type", Kevin Restivo, IDC senior research analyst, says. "But a growing number of sub-$250 device offerings, based on the Android operating system, have allowed Google's hardware partners to grow smartphone volumes and expand the market concurrently". No Android partner benefitted more than the aforementioned Samsung.

Fourth-quarter smartphone shipments exceeded IDC's growth forecast of 40 percent, rising 54.7 percent year over year. "By the end of the quarter, one out of every three mobiles phones shipped worldwide was a smartphone", Llamas says.

For all 2011, smartphone shipments rose 61.3 percent to 491.4 million units from 304.7 million than a year earlier. While growth exceeded IDC's forecast (54.7 percent), it fell below 2010's year-over-year growth (75.7 percent).

While the smartphone market grows gangbusters, Nokia is the biggest loser -- and Windows Phone along with it. If Lumia's launch quarter is any indication, the road back, if there is one for manufacturer or operating system, will be long and arduous. One year ago this week, Microsoft and Nokia announced a sweeping distribution deal where Windows Phone replaces Symbian as primary operating system. So far, the Windows Phone transition is killing Nokia, not that it had a workable smartphone strategy before.

Microsoft has committed $1 billion annually in payments to Nokia, as part of the agreement. The return on that investment is what? Coincidentally, today, Microsoft Store started taking pre-orders for the Nokia Lumia 900; there's a $25 reserve. That handset's success or failure may answer the question, or at least foreshadow it.

Hangout at the Google+ developer page

Posted: February 6th, 2012, 11:38am MST by Joe Wilcox

Well, it took long enough. Google waited until passing 100 million G+ users before opening a platform developer page. What? You think only Facebook has a social network platform agenda? Google has ambitions, too.

Perhaps the big thing will be the weekly Hangouts, where Google+ developers can get the lowdown. It's nothing on the scale of Microsoft's Channel 9 (Say didn't Vic Gundotra have a hand in both Nine and G+?). Channel 9 is more about broadcasting developer information, while Hangouts are live and more interactive.

Hangouts are one of the best Google+ features -- video chat with a bunch of people, whether they're actively or passively participating. (If it's so good, why haven't I, ah Hungout? Got to fix that one.)

"Our team will host regular Hangouts to talk about the +Platform, your experiences with it, and share tips and tricks with the community. Our weekly office hours hangouts take place every Wednesday at 11:30am - 12:15pm PDT, and can be accessed from our Google+ Developers page", Chris Chabot, Google+ developer relations team lead, explains. "The +Platform team will also share Google+ developer events, conferences and hackathons, as well as photos and videos of the events. In addition, we’ll announce and discuss our +Platform launches on our page".

What are the three top-selling US smartphones? iPhone

Posted: February 6th, 2012, 9:38am MST by Joe Wilcox

In fourth quarter, that would be iPhone 4S, 4 and 3GS, in order from one to three, according to NPD. But before the Apple Fanclub does high-fives, Android share among first-time buyers outpaced iPhone, as measured by smartphone operating system, contradicting some other analyst data.

"iPhone 4S outsold the iPhone 4 by 75 percent, and outsold the iPhone 3GS, available for free on AT&T, five to one", Ross Rubin, NPD executive director, says. Well, so much for my theory older, discounted iPhones was a brilliant Apple strategy. Which again raises questions about the power of brand, considering iPhone isn't LTE, while AT&T and Verizon offer real 4G smartphones -- all Androids.

"Android has been criticized for offering a more complex user experience than its competitors, but the company’s wide carrier support and large app selection is appealing to new smartphone customers", Rubin says. "Android’s support of LTE at Verizon has also made it the exclusive choice for customers who want to take advantage of that carrier’s fastest network".

So perhaps LTE matters after all, at least to new buyers -- 57 percent chose Androids and 34 percent iPhone. The math is scary, by the way. NPD didn't publicly release new buyer share for other platforms, but Bada, BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile split up just 9 percent share. Well, we know what Americans aren't buying.

Additionally, iOS/iPhone closed the distance on Android, capturing 43 percent share to 48 percent share. The numbers are significant for another reason -- NPD tracks actual sales to end users rather than shipments into the channel.

More broadly, smartphone sales considerably outpaced feature phones. Smartphones accounted for 68 percent of sales during fourth quarter, up 18 percent year over year.

Now let me explain something about contradictory analyst reports. There are many out there right now, which makes them all suspect. Last week comScore reported dramatically different share numbers, putting Android way ahead of iOS/iPhone -- 47.3 percent to 29.6 percent, respectively. comScore measures US cellular subscribers ages 13 and above, which is different data methodology than NPD. The one uses a survey (of more than 30,000 Americans) and the other looks at sales.

Then there is Nielsen, which data seemingly directly contradicts NPD's. Android share, as measured in smartphone operating systems among new purchasers, plummeted from 61.6 percent in October to 46.9 percent in December. Meanwhile, iPhone rose from 25.1 percent share to 44.5 percent.

So whose data can you trust? No one's solely, nor any of the New York Post-style headlines trumpeting iPhone over Android, or visa versa. The clearest picture of US smartphone sales may come when Sprint announces holiday quarter earnings later this week. Assuming Sprint reveals iPhone sales, or activations, combined with AT&T and Verizon there will be clearer but not exact sense of what really occurred in the US market. I say "not exact" because iPhone activations don't necessarily mean on new handsets.

The 'Thing Called Love' is Samsung, not Apple [video]

Posted: February 5th, 2012, 7:51pm MST by Joe Wilcox

It's fourth quarter of the Super Bowl, and Samsung has a surprise -- a 90-second commercial for the Galaxy Note, which is available for order today. I got to the game late, so can't say if this spot aired earlier. Oh, but it's a goodie.

"Freedom!" yells one of the people waiting to buy iPhone, raising his arms and running from outside the Apple Store. Earlier, while still in line (and missing the big game), he mumbles: "This feels like detention". Next to him another waiter asks someone else: "Wanna see a picture of my cat?" "No!" And we don't want to see it either, Bud.

Stunned yet by another Samsung, a woman remarks: "I don't know what I believe in anymore". Standing by her a guy using Galaxy Note for the first time answers: "I know what I believe in".

It's a celebration in the streets, as the iPhone elite discovers -- get this -- a stylus! Yeah, Steve Jobs would roll over in his grave. But it's fun marketing. Okay, so the commercial calls it a pen. But a stylus by any other name is a stylus.

Galaxy Note is different. A friend of mine back East ordered one today, after seeing it at Best Buy. He'll give up Galaxy Nexus for Note, which is nutso decision to me. But, hey, he's a phone geek.

The commercial is fun, but the last laugh belongs not to the funnier marketer but to the one taking the most money to the bank. That's Apple, baby.

Apple claims smartphone crown from Nokia, Samsung

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 10:57am MST by Joe Wilcox

iPhone's remarkable fourth-quarter surge -- 37 million units -- lifted the handset ahead of the two previous smartphone leaders, according to Canalys. For full year 2011, Apple shipped 93.1 million smartphones, compared to Samsung's 91.9 million and Nokia's 77.3 million. Nokia, the company that invented the smartphone, has bled share since iPhone launched nearly 5 years ago, but artery versus vein since announcing the switch to Windows Phone from Symbian in February 2011.

Apple's climb to the top followed October's iPhone 4S launch and availability of older 3GS and 4 models for free and $99, respectively. Samsung shipped 35.3 million smartphones in Q4, behind Apple, while Nokia shipped 19.6 million -- a stunning 31 percent decline. By comparison, iPhone shipments surged 128.1 percent for the quarter and 96 percent for the year.

However, Android shipments outpaced iPhone/iOS by considerable degrees, up 148.7 percent for the quarter and 244.1 percent for the year. Nearly 82 million Androids shipped during fourth quarter and 237.8 million for the year. Android captured 51.6 percent global smartphone share for the quarter and 48.8 percent for all 2011.

The quarter's biggest loser -- and big isn't, well, big enough -- was Windows Phone. Despite shipment of the first Nokia Windows Phones and release of v7.5 during the quarter, market share plunged a stunning 43.3 percent. Windows Phone ended the quarter with a puny 1.4 percent share. For perspective, that's below Samsung's Bada, which launched in mid 2010. Bada shipments grew 183.1 percent year over year, granted from a small base, to 2.7 percent share.

More broadly, 158.5 million smartphones shipped in Q4, up 57 percent year over year. For all 2011: 487.7 million, up 63 percent.

"Smartphones have grown from being a niche product segment at the high-end of the mobile phone market to becoming a truly mass-market proposition", Chris Jones, Canalys principal analyst, says. "The greater availability of smartphones at lower price points has helped tremendously, but there has been a driving trend of increasing consumer appetite for Internet browsing, content consumption and engaging with apps and services on mobile devices".

So much for iPhone catching Android

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 8:26am MST by Joe Wilcox

Just weeks ago the Apple Fanclub of bloggers and journalists giddily posted about how iPhone had reversed Androids' gains. But new data from comScore shows that, in the United States at least, Android is doing just fine, despite iPhone's remarkable fourth-quarter sales surge (more than 37 million units).

As measured by smartphone OS among cellular subscribers 13 and older, Android share grew to 47.3 percent at the end of December from 44.8 percent three months earlier. During the same time period, iPhone/iOS rose 2.2 points to 29.6 percent share. More broadly, for all handsets, Apple was the only manufacturer to gain share during fourth quarter -- up 2.2 points to 12.4 percent, or twice free-falling Research in Motion. Samsung firmly held its lead, 25.3 percent, which is the same as end of September.

At the end of December, 234 million people owned cell phones -- a number that hasn't changed in more than a year. However, the number who own smartphones -- 97.9 million, or 40 percent -- continues to rise.

But the gains aren't evenly distributed. While Android and iPhone/iOS benefit from growing smartphone adoption, BlackBerry and Windows Mobile/Phone continue to lose share. Windows Phone fell nearly 1 point during the three months to 4.7 percent share. That despite a big fourth quarter launch of Windows Phone 7.5.

comScore's data is among the most revealing. The analyst firm surveys 30,000 cellular subscribers, meaning the sample size is large and represents actual install base. Other analyst firms typically measure sales to customers, buying intentions or shipments into the channel. Based on shipments, earlier this week IDC put Apple as No. 3 for all handsets, not just smartphones, for 2011. Sales or install base more accurately reflects meaningful trends.

Avid Studio for iPad debuts, but, hurry, the low price won't last

Posted: February 2nd, 2012, 1:05pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Move over, iMovie, some serious competition moved on to iPad, today. Avid Studio for iPad is now available -- $4.99 for a limited time. Avid was the big name in filmmaking, long before Apple stormed the market with its pro and amateur products. Apple reigns king on iPad and the Mac. Can Avid provide some needed tablet competition?

By the specs and feature list, Avid Studio for iPad appeals. The app can directly capture video, use multiple content sources on the tablet (e.g., audio, photos and video), generate motion titles and graphics, precisely trim content, create picture-in-picture effects and much more. That's all while taking advantage of iPad's touchscreen. For people using Avid's PC software, there's an app exporter available, too.

"More and more users are relying on mobile devices for media content creation, viewing and sharing, and we’re proud to deliver a feature-rich new app that takes powerful Avid technology and adapts it specifically for the iPad", Tanguy Leborgne, Avid vice president, says. "Editing enthusiasts can now use a mobile application that has our industry-leading video editing technology built into it—with the interactive capabilities of iOS—to help them make incredible movies at home or on the go".

How incredible? That answer depends largely on your success using the software. I don't have an iPad and so can't test the app, but early Avid Studio for iPad buyers express remorse about crashes (their reviews are available on the App Store product page on the web but, strangely, not yet in iTunes).

Picnicmetoo writes:

Luckily my plans are to buy iPad 3. In the meantime, with a 64GB WiFi iPad 1 with 40-percent free it crashes repeatedly and it would not render even the small size of a small test video. I suspect the iPad 1 is just not capable of dealing with the video. I did a soft reset but that did not help--its just not a good choice for iPad 1. What I was able to do with it in just a quick test looked good, easy, and I look forward to using it with my iPad 3.

I had to give it a one star based on not being able to use with Ipad 1 and not being warned in the specs. I imagine I will be able to give it a 4 or 5 star with the iPad 3.

Salah Baker also gives the app one star: "So far it does crash quiet a bit doing titles and rendering. Needs to watch memory consumption on iPad 1. Good thing iPad 3 is coming out. Not iPad 1 friendly so far".

Strangely, Avid's system requirements list both iPad models as being acceptable. Granted, iPad 2 has a dual-core processor.

My question: Have you downloaded and used Avid Studio for iPad? Which iPad? How is your user experience?

Here's how Apple fixes its China problem [video]

Posted: February 2nd, 2012, 12:20pm MST by Joe Wilcox

"Conan" offers yet another timely spoof, here about Apple's problem with working conditions at factories in China. People have called for boycotts, others claim Apple is no worse than other high-tech companies using the same facilities. Seems like everyone has an opinion about what's really an old story.

Satire is a dish best served cold, and Team Coco packs on the ice.

Apple jumps from fifth to third place in global phone shipments

Posted: February 2nd, 2012, 10:18am MST by Joe Wilcox

Manufacturers shipped 1.546 billion cell phones last year, up 11.1 percent from 2010. Apple posted the strongest gains for the quarter and year -- 128.4 percent and 96.2 percent, respectively. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company ended both time periods in third place. No other vendor came even close. Samsung was up nearly 21 percent for the quarter and ZTE 30.9 percent for the year. IDC compiled the data, which represents shipments into the channel, rather than sales to end users.

Apple's strong showing comes from a huge fourth-quarter finish -- 37 million handsets, all smartphones. By comparison, Nokia and Samsung sold many more feature phones, which still overwhelmingly account for the number of handsets shipped globally. "Feature phones accounted for a majority of shipments from four of the five market leaders during the quarter", Ramon Llamas, IDC senior research analyst, says. "Even though their proportion is eroding, feature phones maintain their appeal on the basis of price and ease of use".

For fourth quarter, manufacturers shipped 427.4 million handsets, up 6.1 percent year over year and ahead of IDC's 4.4 percent growth forecast. Still, the market is slowing.

"The mobile phone market exhibited unusually low growth last quarter, which shows it is not immune to weaker macroeconomic conditions worldwide", Kevin Restivo, IDC senior research analyst, says. "The introduction of high-growth products such as the iPhone 4S, which shipped in the fourth quarter, bolstered smartphone growth. Yet overall market growth fell to its lowest point since 3Q09 when the global economic recession was in full bloom".

Recession isn't the problem now, but more saturation, particularly among feature phones. Then there is the Nokia transition. The world's largest handset maker is moving from Symbian to Windows Phone, making its existing handsets somewhat less attractive to new buyers in markets where Nokia overwhelmingly is market share leader. India is one example. More broadly, feature phone shipments declined in the country, as well as China and Indonesia.

More than any other manufacturer, Nokia upscaled feature phones with smartphone-like capabilities. This effort and that from other vendors is proving effective. "To meet the challenge, feature phones are becoming more like smartphones, incorporating mobile Internet and third-party applications", Llamas says. "While this may not stem the smartphone tide, it should slow down the rate at which smartphones are selected over feature phones".

Samsung continued closing on Nokia, topping 90 million phones for the first time during any single quarter and nearly 330 million for the year. Nokia's lead trembles, but by no means is close to falling. Yet. Meanwhile, LG is in free-fall, with shipments plummeting at extraordinary pace -- 42.2 percent for the quarter and 24.5 percent for the year. LG failed to update feature phones with compelling smartphone-like features while not offering appealing higher-end handsets.

Fourth-quarter belonged to Apple as the up-and-comer. The question now: Is iPhone's momentum sustainable? That's a question another quarter of sales will answer. Apple's gains largely come from an exceptional Q4, which was iPhone 4S launch quarter. But it's also when cofounder Steve Jobs died. With positive media attention waning from Jobs' death and negative vibes increasing following a New York Times investigation of Apple's Chinese manufacturing operations, Q1 will greatly foreshadow iPhone in 2012. If iPhone rises still, surely others will fall.

Expect Windows 8 in October, or not at all this year

Posted: February 2nd, 2012, 8:56am MST by Joe Wilcox

This should be obvious, but something needs to be stated by somebody: Based on previous development cycles, Microsoft's plans for public beta and the PC market's desperate need for a new OS this year, Windows 8 is tracking for October launch. Actually, the public beta coming this month is the last milestone for hitting October, otherwise Microsoft might be forced to repeat history and, like Windows Vista, miss the holidays. That's unthinkable.

By measure of Windows 7, its successor is actually trailing behind development track for October. Microsoft released Windows 7 Beta 1 in early January 2009. Windows 8 public beta is expected six weeks or more later. Typically, Microsoft would have offered a second Windows 7 beta but went right to release candidate. Windows 8 would need similar accelerated track to be ready for the holidays. Just one snag: The new OS is much more ambitious. There's new Metro UI, ARM processor support and architectural changes that hugely impact developers. Oh, yeah. Microsoft is launching a software store, too. End-of-February to October launch is a stretch.

Be sure that Windows & Windows Live division president Steven Sinofsky and team have a good idea where they are and where they need to be to ship Windows 8 this year. February is the key milestone month, the last beta launch window to hit holiday 2012. Case in point: Windows Vista. Microsoft couldn't get out a beta by the end of February 2006. In late March, the company stunned techdom by announcing Windows Vista wouldn't ship for the holidays. My God! How do you miss Christmas!

Windows 7 released to manufacturing in late July 2009 and launched in late October of that year. There was a full 12 weeks in between, and Windows 7 didn't require much more from developers or OEMs than Vista. Windows 8 demands much more from both groups -- and business customers, too.

Windows 8 won't be a big business launch. It's all consumer this time. The majority of enterprises will have just completed or soon will finish Windows 7 deployments by autumn. Then there are the changes under the hood and user interface, including Metro and Ribbon, that give IT managers and developers the willies. Sure, massive enterprise adoption is inevitable, but not right away. Well, somebody corporate will want Windows 8 tablets sooner than later.

Successful consumer launch is essential, and that means Microsoft must make the holidays -- or face another Windows Vista disaster. Consumer PC sales are down, based on data from Gartner, IDC and Microsoft -- that's for all 2011 and projected for at least first half of this year. Correction: Windows PC sales are way down. Macs are selling just fine, thank you.

That makes holiday 2012 all the more important and the next six months absolutely crucial for Microsoft and its partners. Given the timetable's tightness compared to Windows 7 and how it tracks against Windows Vista's delay, I could post something radically predicting that 8 will be late. But I have confidence in Sinofsky and team based on how they turned around Windows 7 after Vista's failure to launch (or to be widely adopted). Additionally, Microsoft plans to launch the Windows Store concurrent with the public beta, which foreshadows that OS development is far along.

Still, I must conclude that to broadly make holiday 2012, Windows 8 must RTM in August (sooner would be better) and launch in October. Fall-back scenario would push gold code to September and limited availability for the holidays. Worst case: Windows Vista-like delay.

How fast has Facebook grown?

Posted: February 1st, 2012, 12:15pm MST by Joe Wilcox

That's a question many people will ask today following Facebook's IPO filing. In March 2007, less than a year after opening to the public, the social network had 30 million users. The number is more than 800 million today. But neither number truly reveals Facebook's global impact.

Last summer, Pew Internet found that 92 percent of social network users are on Facebook -- just 17 percent on Twitter. Today, comScore released data on Facebook penetration across the globe, as measured as percentage of total Internet audience.

"Globally, Facebook reached 12 percent of the internet audience in December 2007 and as of December 2011 the social network reached over half of the internet audience, 55 percent (43 percentage point rise)", according to comScore.

Reach is greatest in Latin America (84.1 percent), followed by North America (82.9 percent). For more, see the chart above, which is fairly self explanatory.

Google+ tops 100 million users

Posted: February 1st, 2012, 11:25am MST by Joe Wilcox

That will be the number by end of today, according to FamilyLink founder and unofficial Google+ statistician Paul Allen. The number has grown from 90 million since Google CEO Larry Page's official statement just two weeks ago.

Allen's announcement comes as rival Facebook announces its public offering, and quite possibly the largest one ever. Not since Netscape's IPO at the dawn of the World Wide Web era has a tech company generated so much interest going public. But Facebook has a new rival that's growing fast and leveraging hard existing Google assets. By year's end, Google+ could have half as many users as Facebook does today.

"Google+ membership has grown more than 10 percent since January 19th when Larry Page announced 90 million users", Allen explains. "I have them at 100.8 million users by the end of the day".

Allen puts growth at 750,000 new users per day since January 19. He analyzes different surnames to calculate number of users. "If that rate holds steady, Google+ will end the year with 345 million users. But as I have said before, Google has many dials and levers to use this year to increase signups and usage, including its Android 4.0 rollout. I stand by my prediction of at least 400 million users by the end of 2012".

That's a big number likely to get a big boost just over the next few weeks. Last week, Google made two changes sure to open the floodgate of users: Allowing teens (rather than those 18 years or older) to join the service and permitting use of nicknames. Meanwhile, Google is connecting the social network to more of its services, including the new "Google Plus Your World".

Google kills Chrome usage growth

Posted: February 1st, 2012, 8:41am MST by Joe Wilcox

Chrome's browser usage share fell in January, according to Net Applications, after 14 months of consecutive, solid growth. Competition didn't kill Chrome growth, Google did, with its decision to reduce the browser's search page rank. Which browser benefitted most? Internet Explorer, of course.

It's a stunning turnabout for Chrome, which likely will see continued trend during February. On January 3, Google announced a temporary downgrading of Chrome's page rank -- how high it appears in searches -- following a minor scandal with a third-party ad agency. The marketer paid bloggers to write about Chrome, which violates Google policies on sponsored links. The search and information giant treated itself like other advertisers, perhaps more harshly, and lowered Chrome's search ranking for 60 days.

Between November 2010 and December 2011, Chrome usage share rose from 9.57 percent to 19.11 percent. In January, share fell to 18.94 percent. Meanwhile, Internet Explore got a big boost, gaining 1.1 points month on month for 52.96 percent share. That's down from 60.35 percent in November 2010.

Firefox is the more disturbing trend. Usage share fell nearly 1 point month on month to 20.88 percent. Firefox 10 desktop and mobile released yesterday. The question to ask (and please feel free to answer in comments): Is Mozilla's rapid-pace release schedule hurting Firefox adoption. The development cycle means a new browser version about every six weeks, which makes enterprise adoption harder. The current version might be obsolete even before being fully tested for deployment among larger businesses.

Safari continued its downward trend also, falling to 4.9 percent usage share in January from 4.97 percent in December.

Chrome's loss demonstrates the value of Google search and foreshadows benefits of connected services, like Google+ or Gmail. How Google benefits Chrome:

Leverage from search (Google share is tops in most geographies)
Web applications that run in the browser, from the cloud rather than desktop
Marketing -- Google is aggressively advertising Chrome, now in TV commercials
Rapid-fire development cycle delivering new features (Chrome 10-16 released last year)
Little legacy -- Google doesn't need worry about supporting business users or years of plugins

Despite Chrome's decline, v16 held on to the usage share ranking of its predecessor. Chrome 16 was second to Internet Explorer 8 in January, with 15.9 percent to 27.45 percent usage share. IE9 was third, followed by Firefox 9, with 11.64 percent and 8.57 percent share, respectively.

IE6 continues to live, despite fervent Microsoft efforts to kill it. The browser ranked fifth, with 7.93 percent usage share. I've got to ask. Do you still use Internet Explorer 6? Are you willing to admit it in comments?

Got Android? Get Firefox 10

Posted: January 31st, 2012, 11:45am MST by Joe Wilcox

Hey, Firefox fans, don't settle for just the desktop browser that popped up on Mozilla servers overnight. Firefox 10 mobile is also available at the Android Market. While the big browser offers significantly improved plug-in support, it's still DOA on the small one. That means no Adobe Flash for you, Bud.

New features include anti-aliasing for WebGL and accelerated layer-support via OpenGL ES. Firefox 10 mobile improves sync and HTML5 capabilities, as well. Among the fixes: "Extremely rare case where the browser may become unable to load web pages or close tabs".

The mobile browser requires Android 2.0 and above. I installed and ran it just fine on Verizon Galaxy Nexus with Ice Cream Sandwich. However, I find Firefox 10 mobile to stutter compared to Android's built-in browser and lacking Flash to be annoying. Even with the extra burden of Flash, Android's browser feels smoother.

So if you're a big Firefox fan looking for Flash, plug-in support and smooth, fast mobile browsing, 10 isn't your lucky number.

Hey, broadcasters, filmmakers, is Final Cut Pro X finally good enough?

Posted: January 31st, 2012, 10:08am MST by Joe Wilcox

That's the question, following big updates available today. How big? So big Apple even issued a press release. I ask the question because of professionals' negative reactions to the software soon after its late-June 2011 release. The uproar was loud enough that "Conan" did a skit about it. In September, responding to customer requests, Apple brought back older version Final Cut Studio 3 on a limited basis. That was then, this is now. Is Final Cut Pro X finally good enough for you?

Many pros complained that Final Cut Pro X was too iMovie-like, while stripping away features they depend on for editing broadcast or film videos. Others complained Apple abandoned core customers to make Final Cut easier for non-pros to use. The software offered more to amateurs and less -- actually took features away -- for professionals. Today's update (v 10.0.3) adds some surprising pro features, and they're not the first. This is the third update since the software's launch.

Among the new features:

Improved third-party plug-in support
Sync for up to 64 angles of video and photos
Layered PSD support without leaving Final Cut Pro X
Broadcast monitoring (in beta) via Thunderbolt ports

Multicam support is by far the big new feature, by giving back a capability taken away with Final Cut Pro X and extending it with the 64 angles of view, improved time-stamping, photo support and ability to mix together stills and videos of virtually any resolution. The latter two capabilities finally embrace advanced dSLRs, like Canon's EOS 5D Mark II; micro four-thirds digicams, like my daughter's Olympus PEN E-P2; and cell phones, like Apple's iPhone (and maybe even lowly Androids). The point: Final Cut Pro X is now primed to use video (and photos) from just about any source. Can you say mashup?

Update: Macworld offers a pro's look at the new features and why they matter.

But are these new features and others good enough for you? Please answer in comments.

Final Cut Pro X 10.0.3 is available from the Mac App Store for $299.99 -- that's for new users. Existing users get the update for free. Anyone else can download a 30-day free trial from Apple.

Microsoft reinvents Office for the post-PC era

Posted: January 30th, 2012, 4:14pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Not since Office 2003 has Microsoft taken such an "ambitious undertaking" to reinvent the productivity suite. Today, PJ Hough, CVP of development for Microsoft's Office division, announced the "technical preview" for the suite's next version and then rudely announced it's "already full". Oh yeah? Why the frak tell us about it then?

It's that ambitious undertaking thing: "First time ever, we will simultaneously update our cloud services, servers, and mobile and PC clients for Office, Office 365, Exchange, SharePoint, Lync, Project and Visio", Hough claims. There's more to that boast than marketing. Microsoft is prepping Office for the cloud-connected, post-PC era. Suddenly Office 15 is going to be a big release.

Office System grows Up

Closest comparison is Office 2003, when Microsoft rebranded the suite as a "System" that included more back-end server software and collaboration features. That release reinvented Office as the top of Microsoft's server stack and gateway to back-end business processes of all kinds. Released around the same time, 2003 versions: Exchange, InfoPath, SharePoint and Windows Server, among others.

Microsoft is lining up many of the same supporting server software for simultaneous release and in the case of Windows Server 8 sooner. What's different now: Office 365 and hosted off- or on-premise versions of server products, expansion of cloud capabilities and inclusion of mobile products. Yes, this is where you can wonder if Office 15 will be available for iPad (more on that in the last paragraph).

During the 2003 release cycle, Microsoft put less emphasis on individual applications and product features and more emphasis on what people could do with Office System. Expect reaffirmation of that approach as Office 15 development proceeds. Microsoft wants to blur the difference between individual functions and features with end-user and broader corporate benefits. That's across devices -- from smartphone, to tablet, to laptop to, well, whatever. Expect Office 15 to be squarely focused on anytime, anywhere computing on anything. Like Microsoft started with Office 2003 and continued with the next two releases, there will be greater emphasis placed on data and how to maximize it -- wherever it is or needs to be -- rather than product features. Think continuum.

The original Office System strategy proved hugely successful because of dependencies. To get the full benefits of Office, businesses typically had to buy more software, particularly on the server. The strategy also transformed how businesses buy Office. Today, about 60 percent of Microsoft Business Division revenues come from volume-licensing contracts. By comparison, 75 percent of Windows sales come from OEMs or one-off sales to businesses or consumers.

There are lots of similarities between cloud computing subscriptions and software volume licensing contracts. They're booked differently but essentially mean the same thing to customers, who agree to pay Microsoft X dollars for Y time period. Licensees typically, but not always, retain rights to software after their contractual period expires. Subscriber rights end when payments stop. Several times, Microsoft unsuccessfully tried to move Office to a subscription model (there is some limited availability, however, for select segments). But the cloud changes everything. Expect Microsoft to begin talking about much more blended licensing and subscription options as Office 15 System's release approaches. This fits into the continuum approach, where Microsoft seeks to blur definitions between products other than companies need A, B, C and D to do W, X, Y and Z.

Think of Office 15 to the cloud what v2003 was to the server. Microsoft extended its applications stack vertically, with increasing cross-feature integration between the productivity suite and server software. Office 15 will accelerate Microsoft's push to the data center, taking the server stack even higher. Expect many more cross-dependent features, but this time requiring some cloud component, too. That means businesses should expect to pay more this next release cycle, as they did with Office System nine years ago -- with those already on Software Assurance getting some break, and quite possibly substantial. Additionally, Microsoft will seek to push more business customers into annuity and subscription contracts, with cross-feature dependencies driving them.

What Office 15 Means for PCs

The post-PC era isn't necessarily the end of the personal computer but its reinvention and extension to the cloud and to mobile devices. Windows 8 enters public beta late next month, which, based on recent releases means October launch. That's the milestone path followed by Windows 7 and one planned for Vista. Microsoft informed everyone that Vista wouldn't ship for holiday 2006 after missing the crucial February milestone necessary to release gold code for October launch. The point: Office 15 will follow Windows 8, which makes touch a priority, adds support for ARM processors and introduces the new Metro user interface. Windows 8 also marks Microsoft's more fervent push into new device categories, where it would want to bring Office System and cloud services.

To get there, the productivity suite needs a major makeover:

For starters, it's long past time for a true, 64-bit version
Office 15 will need to support ARM processors
Metro is a must and ideally should displace the "Ribbon"
Finally, truly touch-enabled Office must come forth

That's all without looking at the cloud and Microsoft ideally taking a more modular design approach to Office, as it does with Windows today. That one I'm guessing at; I just see it as what Microsoft should do. Since Office System 2003, Microsoft has tried to reposition the productivity suite and its supporting software as a development platform. It's time to lift upward to the cloud and datacenter.

One way to get there is modularizing the code base such that all Office versions start from the same core but offer different functionality based on device. That's not where Microsoft is today with, say, desktop and mobile Office versions -- or even Macintosh, which code is completely separate. Modular Office, as cornerstone of the broader development platform, makes sense and also fits in with broader efforts to support ARM and touchscreen tablets.

So what about iPad? There are loads of rumors Microsoft will release Office for Apple's tablet. Should it? I wouldn't. If iPad is making enterprise inroads and if the tablet supplants or replaces PCs, the last thing Microsoft should do is hurt its own applications stack. The company gains more by making Office well-suited for Windows 8 and touchscreen tablets running the software. It's one thing to be part of the post-PC era by promoting mobile devices that extend your platform's relevance and another to feed the devices of your demise. Microsoft should redefine the PC's role around mobility rather than let Apple define it with devices like iPad. Surely, this isn't rocket science.

Photo Credit: Tom Wang/Shutterstock

Suddenly 37M iPhones isn't so many

Posted: January 27th, 2012, 11:36am MST by Joe Wilcox

My reaction mirrored many others this week. Apple's big iPhone holiday quarter seemed simply unbelievable -- 37 million, up 128 percent year over year. But Samsung was close. Real close: 36.5 million smartphones, according to Strategy Analytics. Together, the two companies accounted for 47 percent of fourth-quarter smartphone shipments.

The horse race between the companies sours Apple apologist arguments about iPhone vs Android. Staunch iPhone defenders blow off Android competition as one against many. But on the one-to-one comparison, Apple isn't so high and mighty. Samsung is keeping pace just fine. Apple was market leader for the quarter -- 23.9 percent share to the South Korean company's 23.5 percent. But Samsung took the year -- 19.9 percent share to its American rival's 19 percent. Both companies had exceptionally good fourth quarters.

"With global smartphone shipments nearing half a billion units in 2011, Samsung is now well positioned alongside Apple in a two-horse race at the forefront of one of the world’s largest and most valuable consumer electronics markets", Neil Mawston, Strategy Analytics executive director, says.

"Smartphone specialist Apple shipped 93 million handsets worldwide in 2011, nearly doubling the previous year’s volumes", Tom Kang, Strategy Analytics director, says. "Apple is on track to ship well over 100 million units during 2012. China is becoming a key market for Apple this year, and we expect Apple’s share to grow rapidly in 2012".

Last week, I asserted that Apple's fourth-quarter sales surge was more about distribution rather than iPhone 4S. Apple's handset is available more places and, importantly, $99 iPhone 4 and free 3GS open up sales to more people. Supporting that theory, Alex Spektor, Strategy Analytics associate director, attributes the surge to "distribution of the iPhone family expanded across numerous countries, dozens of operators and multiple price points". I remain convinced that the latter reason is most important.

Samsung announced fourth-quarter earnings results today and unsurprisingly the telecommunications business outperformed other segments. Revenue rose to 17.82 trillion won from 11.75 trillion won a year earlier, with operating profit of 2.64 trillion won. The division's operating profit rose 90 percent in 2011 year over year.

Samsung says that its smartphone shipments rose 30 percent quarter-on-quarter; Apple says iPhone shipments rose 117 percent between quarters. Unlike Apple, which has a single operating system with iOS, Samsung offers three: Android, Bada (its own product) and Windows Phone. Android overwhelmingly accounts for the majority of Samsung smartphone shipments.

More broadly, manufacturers shipped 155 million smartphones during fourth quarter and 488.6 million for the year. Shipments for all handsets in 2011: 1.6 billion.

Sync multiple Google calendars to Windows Phone 7.5

Posted: January 27th, 2012, 7:56am MST by Joe Wilcox

I don't really use Google Calendar and don't have Windows Phone (sigh, on the latter). If you do, here's a tip. Google has enabled multiple-calendar sync with Windows Phone 7.5. It's now possible to select among the calendars and sync up to 25 of them. Gasp, who has two dozen plus one?

"Just navigate to m.google.com/sync on your phone’s browser and configure the calendars you would like to see", Li Yin, with the Google Sync Team, posts to Google+. "From that page, you can also configure which addresses you send mail as if you have custom addresses in Gmail. We’ve also improved search to look beyond the conversations that are stored locally on your device so that you are able to find more of your conversations, faster".

As I have expressed many times over the last five years, synchronization is the killer app for the connected age. Its importance increases as businesses and consumers use more mobile devices connected to the cloud.

Features available on Windows 7.5:

With Google Sync enabled, you can do the following actions in Google Calendar using the Calendar app:

Create events and edit event details.

Respond to meeting requests and update your attendee status.

Change your Alert Reminder Time, e.g. "30 minutes before".

See your list of pending invitations.

When you’re invited to an event, it shows up with a dotted line on the left side of the event in your calendar. If you choose Accept or Maybe, it changes to solid, and if you Decline, the event is removed.

When viewing meeting invitations in your inbox, the calendar icon at the bottom lets you update your attendee status.

Multiple-calendar sync is also available to Google Apps users.

If you find Google's setup instructions to be lacking, Microsoft offers more.

iPad share plunges as Android tablets make dramatic gains

Posted: January 26th, 2012, 11:18am MST by Joe Wilcox

Do I have your attention yet? Apple fans needn't worry, iPad has considerable lead over Android tablets. iPad global market share, as measured by mobile operating system, fell to 57.6 percent in fourth quarter from 68.2 percent a year earlier, according to Strategy Analytics. Meanwhile, Android tablets rose to 39.1 percent from 29 percent. Something else: Windows climbed from zero to 1.5 percent, and that's without tablet-optimized Windows 8.

Despite popular convention that people only want iPad, clearly somebody is buying Android. Strategy Analytics doesn't break down the numbers by vendor, but there's reason to ask about one. Amazon. For months there has been oft-asked question: Would $199 Kindle Fire cut into iPad sales? Last month, Amazon said that it sold over 4 million Kindles in December, but wouldn't specify how many were tablets. "Apple shrugged off the much-hyped threat from entry-level Android models this quarter", Peter King, Strategy Analytics director, says. Perhaps that's answer enough.

"Global tablet shipments reached an all-time high of 26.8 million units in Q4 2011, surging 150 percent from 10.7 million in Q4 2010", King says. "Demand for tablets among consumer, business and education users remains strong". Apple shipped 15.4 million tablets, bringing the total since launch to 55 million.

"Global Android tablet shipments tripled annually to 10.5 million units", Neil Mawston, Strategy Analytics executive director, says. "Dozens of Android models distributed across multiple countries by numerous brands such as Amazon, Samsung, Asus and others have been driving volumes".

Androids got a boost from new models or discounts during fourth quarter. For example, Amazon started selling Kindle Fire near the start of holiday seasonal sales. Verizon cut Motorola XOOM LTE pricing to $199.99 over Black Friday weekend before introducing new XYBOARD models.

"Android is so far proving relatively popular with tablet manufacturers despite nagging concerns about fragmentation of Android’s operating system, user-interface and app store ecosystem", Mawston says. To watch now: Whether Android 4.0 -- aka Ice Cream Sandwich -- churns up more Android tablet interest.

For the year, manufacturers shipped 66.9 million tablets, up from 18.6 million -- a 260 percent increase. Strategy Analytics sees tablets cannibalizing netbook sales, and even low-cost notebooks.

Important note: Like most of its competitors, Strategy Analytics track sales into the channel, rather than out to customers. Product shipped doesn't mean product sold.

Investors to Netflix CEO Reed Hastings: 'We forgive you' a little

Posted: January 26th, 2012, 9:12am MST by Joe Wilcox

All is forgiven when there's money to be made. That's the message investors delivered Netflix CEO Reed Hastings today. Shares rallied after yesterday's earnings report, which partly validated summer's controversial streaming and DVD rental strategies that sent the stock plunging several times and led to calls for Hastings' removal or resignation. That was oh-so six months ago, which is a lifetime in the memory of an investor.

Shares rose more than 23 percent in early trading -- to $117.12. Netflix closed at $95 yesterday and opened at $114. The price reached $118.78 soon after the opening bell. As I write, shares are bobbing -- now only up 22 percent. Shareholder forgiveness doesn't vanquish Hastings' sins, however. Netflix peaked at $304 on July 13, the day after notifying subscribers of price increases. There remains tremendous share value yet to recover, which is unlikely to come from today's rally.

Following the price increases, Netflix stock started a steady plunge, exacerbated by several events, including the loss of Starz and failed attempt to split the company in two. Shares hit bottom, $62.37 the last day of November.

Investors reacted to several key metrics from Netflix's earnings report. The video streaming and rental service gained more than 600,000 subscribers during the quarter for a total of 24.4 million. By comparison, Netlfix lost 800,000 subscribers during third quarter -- less than the expected 1 million -- related to price increases.

Something else: Yesterday, Hastings made absolutely clear to investors the importance of streaming to Netflix's future: "We expect DVD subscribers to decline steadily for every quarter, forever". Given rising mailing and other costs associated with physical media, the statement encouraged investors about Netflix's future, or so it seems.

But there is still much to forgive, given where Netflix shares were in mid summer.

AT&T and Verizon account for nearly one-third of iPhone sales

Posted: January 26th, 2012, 8:12am MST by Joe Wilcox

This morning, before the opening bell, AT&T announced calendar fourth-quarter earnings and record iPhone sales -- 7.6 million. Combined with Verizon's number that works out to 32 percent of iPhones sold during the quarter. Sprint will announce earnings results on February 2, conceivably pushing the number close to 40 percent. Apple CEO Tim Cook has called China Apple's second-most important market. Want to guess which is first?

For AT&T, iPhone was huge during fourth quarter. The carrier sold 9.4 million smartphones, and 80.5 percent of them were iPhones. The number was smaller, but still substantial, for Verizon: 54.4 percent. While Android sales paled by comparison, AT&T doubled them year over year -- not surprising with Samsung's aggressive marketing campaign for Galaxy S II and mid-quarter's introduction of LTE models HTC Vivid and Galaxy S II Skyrocket.

Globally, Apple and its partners sold 37.04 million iPhones during fourth-quarter -- generating more than $24 billion in revenue, which is more than all Microsoft's $20.89 billion.

Feature phones are out at AT&T, which reported smartphones accounting for 82 percent of post-paid sales. More than half -- 56.8 percent -- of 69.3 million postpaid subscribers own smartphones. At Verizon: 44 percent. The difference says something about AT&T exclusive US iPhone distribution deal with Apple -- from June 2007 to February 2011 -- and what smartphones Americans are buying. iPhone is in some ways an American icon, like iPod before it. Verizon offers some of the best Android smartphones available anywhere -- soon a dozen 4G LTE models -- yet iPhone stands tallest among them. Sprint, which only got iPhone in October, will answer how tall in its earnings report.

Earlier this week, AT&T raised prices on its data plans, causing the usual uproar on forums, blogs and social networks. Many people asked why? My answer: Because it can. Among the nuggets from today's earnings report: 56 percent of all AT&T smartphone users have tiered data plans -- that's 22 percent -- and about 70 percent "have chosen the higher-tier plans". AT&T requires data plans for iPhones. Customers now pay $20 and $30 a month for data, with which AT&T raised data caps -- from 200MB to 300MB and 2GB to 3GB, respectively.

By the way, the quarter is yet another rebuttal the wild and ridiculous predictions that Verizon getting iPhone would lead to massive AT&T customer defections (as much as half; cough, cough). Nearly a year later, that has been proven false every single quarter, with holiday 2011 being the most important litmus test. According to AT&T: "Despite record smartphone sales and the first holiday sales period since the loss of AT&T's iPhone exclusivity, postpaid churn was up only slightly at 1.21 percent, compared to 1.15 percent in both the year-ago fourth quarter and in the third quarter of 2011".

Why do smartphone owners buy tablets?

Posted: January 25th, 2012, 7:54pm MST by Joe Wilcox

For a company which business depends on collecting data, Google sure was slow tabulating its report on smartphone usage. The study is available today, but the data is already outdated given strong holiday e-book reader and tablet sales and global impact of 37 million iPhones sold during fourth quarter -- the startling number Apple released yesterday. Still there are some fascinating trends here that likely will prove true had Google collected data in December or January rather than September-October.

What I find perplexing: 17 percent of US smartphone owners also have tablets -- 11 percent in Japan, 10 percent in United Kingdom and 8 percent each in France and Germany. Note: This data, as the rest, is for smartphones privately used. The percentages likely would be higher when including business use, and the trend is accelerating, says Google. My question, and this is really for you to answer: Why buy a tablet if you have a smartphone? Remember, Google isn't tracking PC owners who buy a tablet, but smartphones users who do.

A tablet's functionally lies somewhere between a smartphone and small laptop, and much of it overlaps. Then there is cost to consider. Let's be honest. Apple's iPad is the overwhelming market leader, so we're really talking smartphone and iPad. That puts the starting price at $499 for WiFi-only and $629 when adding 3G (iPad doesn't pack a 4G LTE radio). Why pay for 3G twice on phone and tablet?

There's sense to replacing or displacing a laptop for tablet, and this is a well-documented trend. The most startling recent report, from IDG Connect, shows the trend accelerating among business and IT decision makers -- it's no longer a consumer phenomenon. Sixteen percent have replaced their laptop with an iPad and 54 percent supplement it.

Using myself as example, in December I bought Motorola XOOM LTE from Verizon; yes, I'm a smartphone owner. I bought the tablet not to replace the smartphone but my laptop on the go. Over Black Friday weekend, Verizon offered XOOM for $199.99, a shocking price for a 10.1-inch dual-core tablet with 32GB storage and LTE. Now I take XOOM on to go, when I need a bigger screen to work or play but don't want to lug around the laptop, which doesn't have LTE radio. Even then, only the tablet's low price justified taking on the second data plan. XOOM in no way replaces or displaces my smartphone.

That's the no-relationship theory. The tablet buyer happens to own a smartphone and PC and is buying the tablet to supplement the computer. So the smartphone is then incidental to the tablet.

Another reason to consider: Perhaps the smartphone isn't good enough. That's a point colleague Mark Wilson makes today in his mini-review of Kingsoft Office 4.3 -- there's inadequate screen space on a smartphone but room enough on a tablet. This could be particularly true for iPhone, with its 3.5-inch screen. So people wanting a portable connected device buy an iPad, too.

Here's another: iOS envy. Jack or Jane consumer has an Android device and contractual commitment but wants iOS. Buy iPad, increase screen real estate, get access to different apps and join the Apple Fanclub.

Nineteen percent of Americans owned a tablet at the end of December, according to Pew Internet. Google's smartphone data is nowhere near as fresh, but still trend worthy. The search and information giant compared data sets from January-February and September-October. Smartphone ownership in the United Kingdom soared from 30 percent to 45 percent -- 31 percent to 38 percent in the United States. By the way, Nielsen says that at the end of December, 46 percent of Americans had smartphones.

Wrapping up, do you own a smartphone and tablet for personal use? Why?

iPhone generates more revenue than all Microsoft

Posted: January 24th, 2012, 9:05pm MST by Joe Wilcox

In case you missed it, and I certainly would have if not for someone asking a question, Apple's fiscal 2012 first quarter earnings report has a jaw dropper. iPhone generated $24.42 billion revenue. During the same quarter, all of Microsoft: $20.89 billion. More broadly, Apple revenue ($46.33 billion) was more than twice Microsoft's, and net income nearly was ($13.06 billion versus $6.62 billion, respectively). But it's that iPhone figure that really stands out. One product's revenues against an entire company's. Microsoft's margins are better, but who wouldn't want more money in the bank?

Nearly five years ago, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer dismissed iPhone, in a USA Today interview: "There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance. It's a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I'd prefer to have our software in 60 percent or 70 percent or 80 percent of them, than I would to have 2 percent or 3 percent, which is what Apple might get". How's that for the mother of wrong predictions?

Thing is, now Microsoft's software is down there in the low single-digit market share doldrums, while iPhone share rises. At end of fourth quarter, for example, Windows Phone share among US subscribers was 1.4 percent, according to Nielsen. iOS: 37 percent, up 7 points in two months. That's all while making "a lot of money". Ballmer's licensing strategy failed, with Android and iOS stealing share from Windows Mobile and Phone 7. Okay, so maybe Microsoft collects $30 a license -- hey, let's be generous and call it fifty -- compared to Apple's $600 bucks per phone -- and many more units. Which amount would your business rather take in?

But it's not just iPhone. Apple did something remarkable during fourth quarter -- Mac sales grew during three months when PC shipments were their worst in a decade, according to IDC. Apple sold 5.2 million Macs, generating $6.6 billion -- or more revenue than any single Microsoft division. Closest: Office at $6.28 billion.

In the United States, fourth-quarter PC shipments fell for every vendor in the top five but Apple, according to Gartner. HP shipments plummeted by more than 26 percent -- meanwhile Apple's grew by 20.7 percent. IDC put HP's decline at 25.3 percent and Apple's gain at 18 percent. The Mac maker solidified its No. 3 ranking, with market share rising to 11.6 percent from 9 percent year over year according to Gartner and to 10.92 percent from 8.63 percent by IDC's reckoning.

Revenues for Microsoft's Windows division fell by 6 percent to $4.74 billion, while income plummeted 11 percent to $2.85 billion. For comparison, Apple portables generated $4.66 billion revenue, up 26 percent year over year, or nearly as much. Microsoft blamed slow PC sales on the hard drive shortage caused by flooding in Thailand. During today's earnings conference call, Apple CEO Tim Cook said the hard drive shortage had no "material impact" on Mac sales and he doesn't expect any for fiscal second quarter. However, Apple does expect to pay more for drives.

These numbers were unheard of even just a few years ago. During fiscal quarter 2010 -- yeah, just two years ago -- Apple reported $15.68 billion revenue and net profits of $3.38 billion. Two years later, Apple nearly tripled revenue and almost quadrupled earnings. During the same quarter two years ago, Microsoft generated more revenue and net income than Apple -- $19.95 billion and $6.64 billion, respectively. My how fortunes change.

Apple Q1 2012 by the numbers: $13B profit, 37M iPhones sold

Posted: January 24th, 2012, 2:44pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Today, after the closing bell, Apple answered the question analysts have asked for weeks: How many iPhones sold during the holiday quarter? The answer: A colossal number -- 37.04 million.

Apple also shipped 5.2 million Macs and 15.43 million iPads during fiscal 2012 first quarter. Analyst consensus was around 5 million and 14 million, respectively, and 32.5 million iPhones. During today's earnings conference call, Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer revealed 315 million cumulative iOS device sales. Apple's App Store has 550,000 applications -- 150,000 for iPad. Developers will have earned $4 billion cumulatively by the end of the month, he said.

For fiscal Q1, Apple reported $46.33 billion revenue and net profits of $13.06 billion, or $13.87 a share. A year earlier, the company reported revenue of $26.74 billion and $6 billion net quarterly profit, or $6.43 per share.

Three months ago, Apple forecast $37 billion in revenue for fiscal 2012 first quarter, with earnings per share of $9.30. Analyst average estimates were higher than Apple guidance: $38.85 billion revenue and $10.08 earnings per share.

"We’re thrilled with our outstanding results and record-breaking sales of iPhones, iPads and Macs", Tim Cook, Apple CEO, says. "Apple’s momentum is incredibly strong, and we have some amazing new products in the pipeline".

Gross margin was 44.7 percent up from 38.5 percent a year earlier. Fifty-eight percent of revenues came from international sales.

Looking ahead, Apple forecasts $32.5 billion in revenue for fiscal 2012 second quarter, with earnings per share of $8.50.

Q1 2012 Revenue by Product

Desktops: $1.94 billion, up 12 percent from $1.73 billion a year earlier.
Portables: $4.66 billion, up 26 percent from $3.7 billion a year earlier.
iPod: $2.53 billion, down 26 percent from $3.43 billion a year earlier.
Music: $2.03 billion, up 42 percent from $1.43 billion a year earlier.
iPhone: $24.42 billion, up 133 percent from $10.5 billion a year earlier.
iPad: $9.15 billion, up 99 percent from $4.6 billion a year earlier.
Peripherals: $766 million, up 29 percent from $593 million a year earlier.
Software & Services: $844 million, up 7 percent from $786 million a year earlier.

iPhone. Apple shipped 37.04 million iPhones worldwide during fiscal first quarter, up from 16.24 million iPhones a year earlier. That's a 128 percent increase, year over year. Wall Street analyst average estimate was about 32.5 million units. Apple counts shipments into the channel, typically making them several million units higher than numbers released by Gartner, which measures actual sales.

iPhone 4S is available in 90 countries. "Demand there is staggering" Cook said of sales to China, during today's conference call. Apple ended the quarter with about 6 million iPhones in inventory, which is below the targeted 4 to 6 weeks.

If US numbers are any indication, iPhone's quarter was exceptional. Android share, as measured in smartphone operating systems among new purchasers, plummeted from 61.6 percent in October to 46.9 percent in December, according to Nielsen. Meanwhile, iPhone rose from 25.1 percent share to 44.5 percent. By NPD's reckoning, in October to November, Android's US fell share from 60 percent to 47 percent, while iOS rose from 29 percent to 43 percent.

Earlier today, Verizon released fourth calendar quarter results, with startling data: iPhone accounted for about 55 percent of smartphone sales and outsold 4G LTE models by 2 to 1. None of Apple's handsets support LTE.

The strong quarter is more than about iPhone 4S, which launched in mid October. During November and December, 43 percent of recent purchasers chose iPhone 3GS or 4 -- that's US phone subscribers, according to Nielsen. Concurrent with iPhone 4S launch, Apple reduced its predecessor's price to $99 and 3Gs to free.

Q1 2012 Unit Shipments by Product

Desktops: 1.5 million units, up 21 percent from 1.23 million units a year earlier.
Portables: 3.72 million units, up 28 percent from 2.9 million units a year earlier.
iPod: 15.4 million units, down 21 percent from 19.44 million units a year earlier.
iPhone: 37.04 million units, up 128 percent from 16.24 million units a year earlier.
iPad: 15.43 million units, up 111 percent from 7.33 million units a year earlier.

iPad. Apple shipped 15.43 million iPads globally during the quarter -- that's up from 7.33 million -- a 111 percent -- a year earlier. Sell-through to customers outpaced sell-in to the channel by about 200,000; Apple ended the quarter with 4 to 6 weeks of inventory. Through the end of the quarter, Apple has sold 55 million iPads.

Cook doesn't see lower-cost tablets, such as Amazon Kindle Fire, affecting iPad sales. He described iPad as a class unto itself and called 2011 "year of the iPad" despite predictions it would be year of the tablet. "People that want an iPad won't settle for a limited-function [tablet]".

The media tablet is one of the most successful new products ever. Apple is a major player in the two most disruptive technologies affecting PCs today -- media tablets and smartphones. "By 2015, mobile application development projects targeting smartphones and tablets will outnumber PC projects by 4 to 1", Hung LeHong, Gartner research vice president, says. "The PC is no longer king". Gartner predicts that media tablet sales will reach 900 million by 2016.

Consumers are no longer leading the push to iPad alone. According to an IDG Connect study released last week: "Fully 51 percent of IT and business decision-makers say they always use their iPad at work" -- and, of course, that's the number who actually own the tablet. Sixteen percent have replaced their laptop with an iPad and 54 percent supplement it. Remember, these numbers are for people responsible for corporate computing. As the wind shifts in their sails -- or should that be sales -- so does it eventually across the computing infrastructure. The data suggests that iPads are significantly starting to cannibalize PC sales -- and not just among consumers -- and it's consistent with recent global PC buying trends (see next section).

Q1 2012 Revenue by Geography

Americas: $17.71 billion, up 92 percent from $9.22 billion a year earlier.
Europe: $11.3 billion, up 55 percent from $7.23 billion a year earlier.
Japan: $3.56 billion, down 148 percent from $1.43 billion a year earlier.
Asia Pacific: $7.7 billion, up 54 percent from $4.99 million a year earlier.
Retail: $6.12 billion, up 59 percent from $3.85 billion a year earlier.

Computers. Mac shipments soared during fiscal Q1 quarter. Apple sold -- what company executives really mean by shipped -- 5.2 million Macs during the quarter, up from 4.13 million units during fiscal Q1 2011; growth was 26 percent year over year. Wall Street consensus was about 4.2 million units worldwide. Mac sales to Asia rose 58 percent year over year. Apple ended to quarter with 2 to 3 weeks of inventory.

Two weeks ago, Gartner and IDC released calendar fourth quarter 2011 preliminary PC shipments. In the United States, fourth-quarter PC shipments fell for every vendor in the top five but Apple, according to Gartner. HP shipments plummeted by more than 26 percent, while Apple's grew by 20.7 percent. IDC put HP's decline at 25.3 percent and Apple's gain at 18 percent. The Mac maker solidified its No. 3 ranking, with market share rising to 11.6 percent from 9 percent year over year according to Gartner and to 10.92 percent from 8.63 percent by IDC's reckoning.

IDC described the quarter as the worst since 2001, but really should have applied that to Windows PCs, given robust Mac shipments. During the same quarter, Microsoft reported a 6 percent decline in Windows division revenues and stunning 11 percent fall in profits.

Gartner and IDC blamed some of the quarter's hardships to a short-term hard drive crisis, but that's only partial explanation. Consumers, in particular, bought other tech, with smartphones and tablets soaking dollars that might have been spent on PCs.

"There will come a time, in units, when the tablet market will be bigger than the PC market", Cook said during today's earnings call.

The Mac is big windfall benefactor of the PC shipment/sales crisis, because:

Apple's brand is sizzling hot right now.
Most people use Windows, which is old to them if upgrading, while the Mac is fresh.
iPad cannibalize Windows PC sales, as businesses and consumers buy the tablet as upgrade companion or even replacement.
Apple is more insulated from the hard drive shortage, in part because of how it sources components compared to most other computer makers.

During today's conference call, Cook said the hard drive shortage had no "material impact" on Mac sales and he doesn't expect any for fiscal second quarter. However, Apple does expect to pay more for drives.

Q1 2012 Unit Shipments by Geography

Americas: 1.61 million units, up 19 percent from 1.36 million units a year earlier.
Europe: 1.5 million units, up 19 percent from 1.25 million units a year earlier.
Japan: 184,000 units, up 14 percent from 162,000 units a year earlier.
Asia Pacific: 814,000 units, up 58 percent from 516,000 units a year earlier.
Retail: 1.1 million units, up 30 percent from 851,000 units a year earlier.

iPod. Apple shipped 15.4 million iPods during fiscal first quarter, down from 19.4 million a year earlier -- a 21 percent decline. The quarter ended with 4 to 6 weeks of inventory.

iTunes Music Store generated $1.7 billion in revenue during the quarter.

Retail. Revenue from Apple Store rose 59 percent year over year to $6.12 billion. Unit Mac sales increased 30 percent -- to 1.1 million from 851,00 a year earlier. Apple opened four new stores during the quarter. With an average 358 stores open for the quarter average revenue was $17.1 million, up 43 percent year over year from $12 million. Number of visitors rose 45 percent from 76 million to 110 million.

Photo Credit: 1000 Words / Shutterstock

Don't cry for me Las Vegas, Microsoft cancels MIX!

Posted: January 24th, 2012, 12:10pm MST by Joe Wilcox

In December, Microsoft pulled out of the Consumer Electronics Show starting with next year's event. The rationale: Smaller, Microsoft events are more beneficial to everyone -- the company, attendees and customers for starters. Hey, that makes sense to me. So then, why is the software giant suddenly pulling one of its most-important developer events of the year? Without fanfare, or even a proper burial, MIX is over. Not just MIX 2012, but the entire event. Poof! Gone! Outta here!

Tim O’Brien, Developer & Platform Evangelism general manager, broke the news on the Official Microsoft Blog early this afternoon. Considering how hot and heavy Microsoft is about the Cloud right now and release this year of Internet Explorer 10 and Windows 8, timeing sure seems strange.

"We have decided to merge MIX, our spring web conference for developers and designers, into our next major developer conference, which we will host sometime in the coming year", O'Brien explains. Sometime in the coming year?. "I know a number of folks were wondering about MIX, given the time of year, so we wanted to make sure there’s no ambiguity, and be very clear: there will be no MIX 2012".

O'Brien gives some background:

The idea to create MIX was conceived in the fall of 2005, literally as the PDC05 main stage was being disassembled after the final keynote. While we reflected on that PDC, there was a lot of discussion around our engagement with the web community, and how we needed a more focused effort around our upcoming plans for Internet Explorer, the roadmap for our web platform, the work we were starting on web standards (we were shipping IE6 at the time), and so on. MIX06 was held about four months later in Las Vegas.

So the question I've got to ask: Given Internet Explorer's receding usage share, Microsoft's efforts to support web standards and HTML 5 coding's role in Windows 8's Metro design, isn't there even more reason to engage the web community now than ever?

"The notion that the 'web community' is somehow separate and distinct from the community of developers we care about no longer makes any sense", O`Brien writes. "Some had even called out the existence of a separate web event as proof that we don’t get the web. It’s a fair point".

Right, but if people say Microsoft doesn't "get the web" with a web developer's conference, what will they say without one?

Bottom line: There's more event pullback going on then just CES. O`Brien explains: "We got a lot of feedback. Developers were confused, and asking us about which event to go to. Reporters, analysts and tech bloggers were trying to manage 'event fatigue', and asked us the same question".

Perhaps, but if there is any year when people would flock to another major Microsoft developer event, wouldn't it be the same one when a major new Windows version ships? And Internet Explorer, too?

You answer. Does it matter to you that MIX is cancelled? Not only cancelled, but gone as a separate, web developer event?

iPhone represents more than half of Verizon smartphone sales

Posted: January 24th, 2012, 8:19am MST by Joe Wilcox

This morning before the opening bell, Verizon Wireless announced fourth-quarter results. The carrier sold 7.7 million smartphones. Earlier this month, the nation's largest carrier disclosed 4.2 million iPhone activations during the same time period. Divide it up, and iPhone accounted for 54.5 percent of Verizon smartphone sales. (Update: Revised 4.3 million number released today puts it at 55.8 percent.) By comparison, Verizon sold 2.3 million 4G LTE devices, which includes mobile hotspots and tablets. At best, LTE devices accounted for 30 percent of smartphone sales. However, since that number includes other devices, iPhone outsold LTE smartphones by about 2 to 1.

In September I asked: "What if there is no iPhone 5 LTE?", before Apple announced 4S instead. Today, Verizon answered that question. As of Monday, the nation's largest 4G network reached 200 million in 195 US markets. Verizon currently offers 20 LTE devices, 10 of them smartphones -- 11, if counting 16GB and 32GB Droid Razrs. How much does LTE matter? Clearly not enough.

Verizon released four new LTE smartphones during fourth quarter -- Google Galaxy Nexus, HTC Rezound, Motorola Droid Razr and Samsung Stratosphere. Galaxy Nexus and Droid Razr are considered best-of-class Androids. Three new LTE models are coming within weeks.

Forty-four percent of post-paid customers had smartphones at end of fourth quarter, up from 39 percent three months earlier. But, again, iPhone contributed more to those gains than all other smartphones combined. Smartphones accounted for 70 percent of post-paid sales.

Verizon released its earnings report ahead of Apple's, which is expected after market close today. Some analysts predict that Apple sold as many as 35 million iPhones, a stunning number, during fourth quarter. If so, Verizon accounted for 12 percent of them. Remember: The carrier didn't offer iPhone a year ago. Apple also added Sprint and some regional carriers during the quarter.

For all 2011, Verizon activated 10.8 million iPhones and 15 million Androids. But the carrier didn't offer iPhone for all the year, and the revealing surge was fourth quarter, when 4S shipped and the price for 4 dropped to $99.

'This is our generation's Woodstock'

Posted: January 23rd, 2012, 8:32pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Samsung's newest "The Next Big Thing is Already Here" TV commercial is the riskiest, but by far the snarkiest for anyone closely following the marketing campaign. The jokes are all inside and require some familiarity with previous installments. The risk: Everyone else won't get it. The snark: The iPhone hipster putdowns are mean -- really mean.

During the very first commercial, one Apple hipster waiting in line for iPhone could never get a Samsung because he's "creative". The guy next to him snipes: "Dude, you're a barista". Both men are back in the new commercial, with the barista serving coffee to the snarky companion -- who is carrying Galaxy S II! He's done with the iPhone hipset and makes it known: "It's nice latte art, my man. I see you're still creative". He's with a woman who had the same Samsung smartphone during the first commercial in the series. The Barista: "You two look happy, with your phone".

Soon two guys come in talking about camping, but not in the woods. They're headed to the Apple Store and presumably the next iPhone -- not the one seen in earlier commercials. But there's something missing: The long lines of hipsters. People bought Samsungs. It's funny advertising, if you get the inside jokes -- not as much for anyone else.

There's a sense of finality to the commercial, which Samsung posted to YouTube today, like it's the last one. But there's another, also available today. In this TV spot, one of the people waiting in the cold to buy iPhone goes into a store looking for "gloves without the thumbs" so he can text. There are only regular gloves. "How can I text?" The store clerk demonstrates voice to text on Galaxy S II. No hands required.

Tomorrow Apple announces calendar fourth-quarter earnings, with analysts predicting record iPhone sales -- perhaps 35 million units. Samsung S2 sales don't even come close. But in the battle of marketing campaigns, the South Korean electronics giant has Apple beat. Whatever their sales value might or might not be, the ads are priceless cultural commentaries about stereotypical Apple hipsters. The meaner the ads get, the funnier they are.

Google+ names policy goes just far enough

Posted: January 23rd, 2012, 7:06pm MST by Joe Wilcox

There are lots of places where you can be anonymous online. Google+ isn't one of them. Late today, Google announced a revision to the G+ names policy that doesn't change this, but it does allow people to use nicknames and established pseudonyms. If anonymity is your thing, go somewhere else. I don't want you on Google+. You can bully pulpit somewhere else. As for those folks whose lives might be at risk for using real names, please be safe someplace else -- Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, Tumblr or WordPress, for example. Those services have proven they can protect your identity.

But, of course, the griping will continue from the Internet rabble determined to hide their identities everywhere. They want more from Google than just nicknames. What are you afraid of? I use my real name everywhere, as I have always done. I see that as being in the very spirit of the open -- and transparent -- Internet. Be who you are, not someone else. And if that comment --- or other online interaction -- requires you to hide your identity, shut the frak up. Vent somewhere else. For everyone else, and this includes people who have built up alternative identities, Google+ welcomes you.

Bradley Horowitz, Google vice president, Plused the changes: "Starting today we’re updating our policies and processes to broaden support for established pseudonyms, from +trench coat to +Madonna".

Pseudonymity isn't anonymity. A pseudonym is another form of identity, just not one using your real name. Google embraces the one by, so far, resisting the other. Horowitz writes:

Over the next week, we’ll be adding support for alternate names – be they nicknames, maiden names, or names in another script -- alongside your common name. This name will show up on your Google+ profile and in the hovercards which appear over your name. In the next few weeks, we’ll be displaying it more broadly as part of your name in other areas of Google+ as well. So if you’re Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Jane Doe (Smith), or सौरभ शर्मा (Saurabh Sharma), you can now communicate your identity the way you want to.

Key verbiage: "alongside your common name". He continues: "To add an alternate name, go to your Google+ profile, click Edit Profile, select your name and click on 'More options'...It’s important to remember that when you change your name in Google+, you’re changing it across all services that require a Google Profile".

Google's name policy is here.

Anonymity is Bad Policy

I applaud today's changes for sticking to real identities, while letting people have established nicknames or pseudonyms as personal brands. Anonymity is bad policy and one Google should vehemently resist. Some reasons:

1. Security. Google has plenty of bad experiences with anonymous accounts. Cybercriminals have long used anonymous Blogger accounts as part of phishing nets. Google+ could be similarly used and perhaps be more dangerous because of its design. People follow you to start with -- they're not approved as friends first. Twitter is lesson there -- where spammers use the service by following people and tweeting offers or even links to phishing or malware sites.

If for no other reason than preventing Google+ from becoming a platform for cybercriminals, there should be no anonymous users on the service.

2. Community. Google+ is clearly designed to be a better social network, one where users have more control over their interactions -- and in a manner more like how they engage people in the real world. Relationships are all about identity. You see the person, and can identify them again by their appearance if by nothing else. Even if someone is new to you and gives a false name, you still have seen them. That's not the case online, where anyone can pretend to be anyone. If the service really is supposed to be more like real world interactions, people should be identified. Such an approach also will build trust, which should foster communities -- eh, Circles -- of people to spread out.

3. Google+ Pages. Late last year, Google opened brand pages for businesses. C`mon, they want identity, for numerous reasons. Identity is good for targeting products to new customers and better serving existing ones. Then there are issues of trust and security. Internet trolls can tarnish brands, and what business wants to risk plunking down on the same Net neighborhood as cybercriminals?

4. Trolls. There is a minority of Internet trolls that spoil community experience for everyone. Look how anonymous commenters often pollute the dialog. Google shouldn't enable trolls to harass and demean others while hiding behind the cloak of anonymity.

Last week, Google CEO Larry Page said that G+ has 90 million users. Will the new policy bring in more people? Time will tell.

One in four Americans own an e-book reader or tablet

Posted: January 23rd, 2012, 12:44pm MST by Joe Wilcox

That's a dramatic change from just a few months ago and, perhaps not coincidentally, before new Nooks and Kindles lowered price of entry for both categories. Between December and January, the number of Americans owning one of the devices rose to 29 percent from 18 percent. During the same time period, the number owning a tablet rose to 19 percent from 10 percent, which is the same rise for e-book readers.

Pew Internet released the data earlier today, based on surveys conducted in mid December and early January. "These findings are striking because they come after a period from mid-2011 into the autumn in which there was not much change in the ownership of tablets and e-book readers", according to the report. "However, as the holiday gift-giving season approached, the marketplace for both devices dramatically shifted". As recently as August 9 percent of Americans owned e-book readers and 10 percent tablets.

Pew noted the holiday impact of Amazon and Barnes & Noble e-reader price cuts to below $100. During the same time period, Amazon released Kindle Fire, a $199 7-inch tablet. However, tablets typically cost considerably more, such as the popular iPad 2 -- between $499 and $829. As such, households with greater incomes were most likely to buy the devices. According to Pew:

The surge in ownership of tablet computers was especially notable among those with higher levels of education and those living in households earning more than $75,000. More than a third of those living in households earning more than $75,000 (36 percent) now own a tablet computer. And almost a third of those with college educations or higher (31 percent) own the devices. Additionally, those under age 50 saw a particularly significant leap in tablet ownership.

By comparison, e-readers skewed lower, Pew says:

The story with the growth in e-book readers was somewhat different from the story with tablet computers. Ownership of e-readers among women grew more than among men. Those with more education and higher incomes also lead the pack when it comes to e-book ownership, but the gap between them and others isn’t as dramatic. For instance, 19 percent of those in households earning $30,000-$50,000 have e-book readers. They are 12 percentage points behind those in households earning $75,000 or more in e-book reader ownership. The gap between those income levels on tablet ownership is 20 percentage points.

Did you buy or receive an e-book reader or tablet during the holidays?

RIM's co-CEOs are out, Thorsten Heins is new chief executive

Posted: January 22nd, 2012, 9:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

The phrase two heads are better than one didn't prove true for Research in Motion, which late today pushed aside its co-CEOs and replaced them with a single chief executive. It's a major shakeup that analysts called for more than a year ago. Out: Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie. In: Thorsten Heins, who assumes his new responsibilities starting tomorrow. RIM has scheduled an 8 am ET conference call.

The question: Will the new leadership be a head-and-a-half? Lazaridis will serve as Vice Chair and lead RIM board's new Innovation Committee, working closely with Heins. Innovation was something surely missing from the BlackBerry maker under Lazaridis' co-leadership. Balsillie isn't completely out, as he will serve on RIM's board.

"With BlackBerry 7 now out, PlayBook 2.0 shipping in February and BlackBerry 10 expected to ship later this year, the company is entering a new phase, and we felt it was time for a new leader to take it through that phase and beyond", Lazaridis says. "Jim, the Board and I all agreed that leader should be Thorsten Heins".

"Mike created a whole new way of communicating and I look forward to continuing our close collaboration", says Heins, who joined RIM four years ago last month and has served as COO of Product and Sales since August.

Heins expresses resound confidence in RIM's future, an opinion many outsiders don't share. "Mike and Jim took a bold step 18 months ago when RIM purchased QNX to shepherd the transformation of the BlackBerry platform for the next decade. We are more confident than ever that was the right path. It is Mike and Jim’s continued unwillingness to sacrifice long-term value for short-term gain which has made RIM the great company that it is today. I share that philosophy and am very excited about the company’s future".

These so-called bold steps have led BlackBerry from market leadership to plummeting smartphone sales share and eroding brand equity. For example, BlackBerry share, as measured by smartphone OS among recent US handset purchasers, fell from 7.7 percent to 4.5 percent between October and December 2011, according to Nielsen. How the mighty has fallen. In June 2010, BlackBerry led Android and iOS, with 35 percent share among recent purchasers.

In June 2011, RIM said it was evaluating the role of its co-CEOs. Meanwhile, investors have punished RIM, with September's sell-off being particularly nasty. Last month, RIM took another investor beating after taking a $485 million write-down for unsold PlayBooks. Earlier this month, in a seemingly bizarre pricing strategy, RIM reduced all PlayBooks to $299, regardless of capacity. So the 16GB and 64GB models sell for the same price.

From that perspective, Heins' "I share that philosophy" may not generate investor confidence. We'll know more after tomorrow's conference call.

The new CEO contends that RIM's fundamentals are sound: "We have a strong balance sheet with approximately $1.5 billion in cash at the end of the last quarter and negligible debt. We reported revenue of $5.2 billion in our last quarter, up 24 percent from the prior quarter, and a 35 percent year-to-year increase in the BlackBerry subscriber base, which is now over 75 million".

Apple's iBooks Author EULA is more and less evil than you think

Posted: January 22nd, 2012, 12:00pm MST by Joe Wilcox

There's a strange concept in marketing that no publicity is really bad. If people talk about you, it broadly raises brand awareness. People eventually forget the bad news but not the brand. Who remembers last year's furor over Apple's onerous publisher subscription terms? That's the eventual outcome from Apple's iBooks Author end-user license agreement, which has shocked many. Simply stated: If you publish ebooks using iBooks Author, no other publisher but Apple can profit. Distribution anywhere else must be for free. The Internet is outraged, even Apple apologists.

For all the negative outpouring -- and there is plenty -- Apple's EULA isn't as outrageous as critics claim -- it's more and less. The licensing agreement enforces Apple proprietary e-publishing file formats. On the less side, Apple's approach isn't far removed from what print publishers do today, and US copyright law likely supersedes Apple's EULA (but not necessarily any separate agreement).

Unprecedented Audacity

Apple's software startles by offering several warnings about rights and distribution, which is best summed up in Section 2 of the EULA:

B. Distribution of your Work. As a condition of this License and provided you are in compliance with its terms, your Work may be distributed as follows:

(i) if your Work is provided for free (at no charge), you may distribute the Work by any available means;

(ii) if your Work is provided for a fee (including as part of any subscription-based product or service), you may only distribute the Work through Apple and such distribution is subject to the following limitations and conditions: (a) you will be required to enter into a separate written agreement with Apple (or an Apple affiliate or subsidiary) before any commercial distribution of your Work may take place; and (b) Apple may determine for any reason and in its sole discretion not to select your Work for distribution.

Software developer Dan Wineman set the Internet afire with January 19 post "Unprecedented Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA" and FAQ follow-up "Common Misconceptions about What I Wrote Yesterday". These are by far the current, authoritative looks at iBooks Author EULA and what they mean; do read them. He explains:

This is a software EULA which for the first time attempts to restrict what I can do with the output of the app, rather than with the app itself. No consumer EULA I've ever seen goes this far. Would you be happy if Garage Band required you to sell your music through the iTunes Store, or if iPhoto had license terms that kept you from posting your own photos online? It’s a step backward for computing freedom and we should resist it...

Restricting use is what EULAs have traditionally done. This one does something different: it restricts what you can do with the output of the software after the software is closed and put away. If you make a document using iBooks Author, you aren't allowed to sell that document except through Apple, ever, for the rest of your life.

Like apps, Apple collects a 30-percent cut from ebooks. So authors outputting anything -- not just in the proprietary format -- would be prohibited from distributing the work anywhere else for a fee. Apple collects, and no other publisher.

Apologists Answer

My favorite responses about the EULA come from two diametrically opposed apologists -- Apple bully-pulpiteer John Gruber and Microsoft PR chief Frank Shaw.

"This is Apple at its worst", Gruber writes. Wow, the EULA must be really bad for Apple apologist extraordinaire to use the "W" word, right? That's not what got me chuckling. Gruber goes on: "Let’s hope this is just the work of an overzealous lawyer, and not their actual intention". He still apologizes for Apple! John, John, John, what kind of Kool-Aid are you drinking to think that Apple top execs don't know what terms are in their licensing agreements? Apple is micro-management central, where no detail is overlooked.

Shaw took to Twitter, showing just how effective that 140-character limit really can be. Three tweets:

"1. If you write a novel in Word, we promise not to take a 30% cut zd.net/zVXyuC"
"2. Likewise, if you deliver a speech in PowerPoint, we promise not to take 30% of your speaking fees bit.ly/ycGugt"
"3. If you manage your finances in Excel, we promise not to take 30% of your income bit.ly/yvAyay"

I ask: Is this any worse than SOPA?

More Evil

Let's now get to the real evil behind the iBooks Author EULA: It seeks to enforce proprietary Apple e-publishing formats to a nascent market trying to standardize around EPUB.

Daniel Glazman, co-chairman of the W3C CSS Working Group, took a look at the file formats produced by Apple's authoring software. He writes about the iBooks format: "It looks like an EPUB3 format. It smells like an EPUB3 format. But it's not at all an EPUB3 format".

Proprietary extensions is one reason why. Apple's approach offers richer formatting, something Microsoft likewise does with Word authoring .docx documents. Microsoft claims open-standard format but true richness comes from using proprietary software. Difference: Microsoft provides zip utility for reading raw content in XML format.

Glazman writes:

Because of these extensions, editing or browsing the HTML documents with a regular WYSISYG editor (BlueGriffon or DreamWeaver for instance) or a browser (Firefox, Chrome or even Safari) shows a total mess on screen. It's not readable, it's not usable, it's not editable. Just forget it, Apple (re-)invented the Web totally incompatible with the Web. All in all, Apple has worked entirely behind the curtains here. If someone tells you that iBooks format is EPUB3, don't believe it. It's not EPUB3, it's only based on EPUB3...With iBooks Author, Apple is trying even more to lock their formats and the market.

Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates understood the importance of controlling file formats. In the early 1980s, Gates put Charles Simonyi in charge of productivity applications development. Early work done by the father of Microsoft Office achieved two important goals by the mid 1990s:

1. Established format standards that resolved problems sharing documents created by disparate products.

2. Ensured that Microsoft file formats would become the adopted desktop productivity standards.

Format lock-in helped drive Office sales throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s -- and Windows along with it. But even as Microsoft standards drove sales, a new standards threat had developed.

In May 1995, Gates penned the "Internet Tidal Wave" memo that warned about the extended network's threats to Microsoft. In the memo, he specifically identified HTML, HTTP and TCP/IP. "Browsing the Web, you find almost no Microsoft file formats," Gates wrote. He observed not seeing a single Microsoft file format "after 10 hours of browsing", but plenty of Apple QuickTime videos and Adobe PDF documents.

Microsoft's visionary founder warned: "The Internet is the most important single development to come along since the IBM PC was introduced in 1981. It is even more important than the arrival of the graphical user interface (GUI)".

E-publishing is still a nascent and potentially hugely profitable market. Apple is in process of creating its own digital publishing platform, backed by proprietary file formats and force of legal agreements.

Less Evil

It's a stretch to call anything about the onerous licensing terms as less evil, but I see two things worth calling out:

1. Apple applies to digital publishing semi-exclusivity already standard in the print world. If I write a book for (fictitious) publisher Crankpants Books, the company will ask me to sign an agreement that lets it exclusively publish my copyrighted work. This is standard publishing business today. The publisher also can restrict -- and many do -- electronic distribution rights, such as limiting the work to one reader's account rather than allowing terms for sharing. Digital Rights Management technology enforces this licensing distribution term.

What publishers typically won't do: Allow authors to freely distribute their work, as Apple does. One could argue that Apple's terms are similar to print publishers and more generous. That said, digital distribution allows authors to self-publish using platforms like iBookstore or Amazon's Kindle Store. Apple's EULA restricts that behavior. Apple often is praised for innovation, for going places where others haven't. Here, the company truly innovates new ways to exclusively profit from others' works.

2. The EULA may not be enforceable. Qualifying that I'm not a lawyer, I know a few things about copyrights, as someone who writes for a living and who has reported on software copyrights and EULAs for 18 years. For example, software sidesteps typical US copyright terms allowing copying by being licensed, not sold. Developers like Adobe and Microsoft would be helpless against people copying software for personal use if not for laws supporting licensing. You pay for the application, but the developer retains all rights; technically you didn't buy anything, and the developer can retract your use of the software at any time.

Content produced by software like Word is typically sold, not licensed, which is one of many, many reasons why Microsoft couldn't restrict distribution of the writer's works like Apple tries to. It's also major reason why Wineman's calling the EULA "unprecedented" is gross understatement. Apple is trying to extend its rights over yours and doing so attempting to establish a dangerous precedent about which copyright supersedes the other -- yours as the content producer and Apple's as software developer and content distributor. I simplify complex copyright laws here, to make the point.

What matters more is something I haven't yet seen: The secondary agreement Apple requires, which could be more akin to the contract authors sign with print publishers when giving them exclusive distribution rights. That could be enforceable, depending on terms and how voluntarily the author agrees to them. Apologies, for this report, I don't have an answer and wouldn't want to give it anyway. That's topic requiring input from copyright legal experts.

For myself, I would never self-publish using Apple's software if for no other reason than principle. Apple's long-standing "our way or the highway" approach has really gotten out of control.

Top Photo Credit: Fotonium/Shutterstock

'We just got Samsunged'

Posted: January 20th, 2012, 12:45pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Since buying Galaxy Nexus last month, I haven't paid as much attention to Samsung's stunningly clever "The Next Big Thing is Already Here" advertising campaign that slaps around the iPhone hipster set. There's a new TV commercial that begins with a group of iPhone want-to-haves camped out, literally, by an Apple Store.

"Ah that looks like last year's phone" is the killer line, says a guy rising from his sleeping bag to look at an unboxing video of, presumably, iPhone 4S. Samsung snark already has soured perceptions of iPhone and boosted those of Samsung brands, according to YouGov BrandIndex. The attack ads, which never specifically mention iPhone, marks one of the most iconic marketing campaigns since Apple's "Get a Mac".

The evocative moment: When the Apple hipster rises from his sleeping bag, looks up at another guy holding Samsung Galaxy S II and grabs the bars of the street barrier. The subliminal message: Prison bars. He's imprisoned by his iPhone obsession, while the S2 owner is a free man.

It's helluva entertaining marketing campaign, and I wish most movies were edited as well or communicated so much story (in so little time) as do these TV spots.

Not that iPhone is hurting for sales. As measured in smartphone operating systems among new US purchasers, Android plummeted from 61.6 percent share in October to 46.9 percent in December, according to Nielsen. Meanwhile, iPhone rose from 25.1 percent share to 44.5 percent. Earlier in the week I asserted that broadened distribution, such as offering low-cost iPhone 4 and 3GS for free, as major factors driving iPhone's sales surge. According to Nielsen, these older handsets accounted 43 percent share among new purchasers.

Another reason I've resisted raising, because of the over-sensitivity of the Apple mob crowd: Steve Jobs' death, which brought lots of attention to Apple just as iPhone 4S launched. If there is an afterglow from the publicity, it will show up within just a few months as the sales surge resides.

For now, Samsung should keep the TV commercials coming. Whatever their sales value might or might not be, the ads are priceless cultural commentaries about stereotypical Apple hipsters.

Investors punish Google for weak ad revenues

Posted: January 20th, 2012, 8:17am MST by Joe Wilcox

Google shares took a beating overnight, following fourth-quarter's earnings report. The information and search giant was down 7.7 percent in pre-market trading -- $49.25 to $590.32. Still, that's an improvement. Yesterday, Google closed at $639.57, and shares fell more than 10 percent during after-market trading. Google opened at $590.90 this morning and fell to $588.03 within the first 30 minutes of trading -- that's $51.54 off yesterday's close. By 10:17 am ET, Google shares closed on their pre-market decrease -- 7.78 percent, or down $49.77 per share.

Google's problem is one more of expectation than performance. Wall Street expected strong ad revenues for the holiday quarter, particularly with increase in online sales and therefore supporting search-related advertising. But ad prices fell instead, overshadowing other metrics. While paid clicks rose 34 percent, the amount paid for them fell by 8 percent, contributing to Google missing Wall Street consensus -- that despite solid revenue and earnings growth.

During fourth quarter, Google revenue rose 25 percent year over year, to $10.58 billion, while net income climbed 6 percent to $2.71 billion, or $8.22 share. Net revenue, meaning without network acquisition costs, was $8.13 billion and adjusted, non-GAAP earnings $9.50 a share. However, Wall Street expected more, with net revenue consensus $8.41 billion and non-GAAP earnings of $10.49 per share. Google delivered good growth, just not as much as analysts anticipated.

Fifty-three percent of Google revenue comes from international markets, where the debt crisis in Europe greatly contributed to ad rates -- that and search technology changes, which boosted clicks but not amount paid for them.

Fourth quarter was a rare miss for Google.

Anonymous launches SOPA strike, takes down Justice Dept.

Posted: January 19th, 2012, 5:10pm MST by Joe Wilcox

"The Site is under maintenance. Please expect it to be back shortly". That's the message I found at Universal Music moments ago. The US Justice Department site isn't accessible at all. You can thank hacktavist group Anonymous, which claims responsibility for these and other SOPA blackouts today in response to the Feds shutting down Megaupload.

There's a certain irony to this evening's attacks. Yesterday, tens of thousands of sites supported a voluntary blackout protesting two bills snaking through Congress -- Stop Online Piracy (SOPA) and PIPA (PROTECT IP Act). Anonymous' attacks, presumably denial-of-service, blacked out sites that either support the legislation or would be responsible for enforcing it. We've gone from voluntary blackout protests yesterday to involuntary ones today. As I write, Recording Industry Association of America is down, too.

About two hours ago the Anonymous @YourAnonNews account tweeted: "Megaupload was taken down w/out SOPA being law. Now imagine what will happen if it passes. The Internet as we know it will end. FIGHT BACK"; after tweeting: "The government takes down #Megaupload? 15 minutes later #Anonymous takes down government & record label sites. #ExpectUs".

Earlier, the Justice Department accused Megaupload.com of a conspiracy to traffic pirated movies, music, television programs, ebooks, and software -- for the last five years on massive, global scale and causing damages exceeding $500 million to copyright holders.

The Feds couldn't have struck at a worse time, considering the negative response to SOPA and PIPA. Either bill would give the government broad powers to take down websites, seize domains and compel search engines from indexing these properties. Little more than a request from copyright holders is necessary. It's essentially guilty-until-proven-innocent legislation that would punish the many for the sins of the few, while disrupting the fundamental attributes that made the Internet so successful and empowered so many individuals or businesses to accomplish so much. (Review the bills: PIPA. SOPA.)

Wired UK's "SOPA 101" guide is one of the best primers posted in recent days, if those bills are too long (and wordy) for you. Google offers excellent recap, too. Appropriate for today's blackouts is yet another primer of links from the @YourAnonNews Tumblr.

@YourAnonNews tweeted around 7:20 pm ET: "You cannot censor the internet. You cannot subpoena a hashtag. You cannot arrest an idea. You CAN expect us #OpMegaupload".

Anonymous' assault continues as I write updates to the post. Warner Music is now down (7:35 pm ET).

About two hours ago, Anonymous tweeted: "Let's just say, for #SOPA supporters their #SOPAblackout is today. #Anonymous".

The group claims to have taken out other sites, including the US Copyright Office and Motion Pictures Association of America. But the sites are loading fine for me, which doesn't mean they weren't down earlier.

Microsoft Q2 2012 by the numbers: Windows revenue falls 6%

Posted: January 19th, 2012, 2:15pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Late this afternoon, Microsoft answered a question oft-asked by investors this month: What about Windows? Near the end of his Consumer Electronics Show keynote last week, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer boomed: "There's nothing more important at Microsoft than Windows". But at the same event, Tami Reller, Windows & Windows Live CFO, warned that the division's fourth-quarter results could fall below analysts' estimates, because of weak PC sales. Today's fiscal second quarter 2012 earnings results answered by just how much.

For Q2, ended December 31, Microsoft revenue was $20.89 billion, up 5 percent year over year. Operating income: $7.99 billion, a 2 percent decrease. Net income was $6.62 billion, or 78 cents a share. Both were flat year over year.

Average analyst consensus was $20.93 billion revenue and 76 cents earnings per share, for the quarter. Revenue estimates ranged from $20.20 billion to $21.35 billion, with estimated year-over-year growth of 4.9 percent -- modest for a holiday quarter.

"We delivered solid financial results, even as we prepare for a launch year that will accelerate many of our key products and services", Ballmer contends. "Coming out of the Consumer Electronics Show, we’re seeing very positive reviews for our new phones and PCs, and a strong response to our new Metro style design that will unify consumer experiences across our phones, PCs, tablets and television in 2012".

Microsoft's PC Problem

Because Windows is so important to Microsoft -- it's not just Ballmer boasting -- slowing PC sales's effects reach far beyond the operating system. But nowhere are they more apparent than the Windows & Windows Live division, which dragged down Microsoft operating and net profits. The division's revenue fell 6 percent year over year.

Last week, Gartner and IDC released preliminary calendar fourth-quarter and all-2011 PC shipments; growth was tepid globally and retracted in the United States. IDC called 2011 the "second worst year in history" for US PC shipments - with 2001 claiming the unwanted crown. Despite a global, temporary hard drive shortage, Gartner and IDC say the declines they observed -- 1.4 percent and 0.2 percent globally, respectively -- were in line with their forecasts. US declines were substantially greater, 5.9 percent by Gartner's reckoning and 6.71 percent by IDC's.

Besides the hard drive shortage, several troubling trends have emerged. Simply put: Consumers aren't buying Windows PCs like they used to. Their spending goes to other stuff, with tablets -- and that really means iPad -- ripping away sales. We just finished the holiday quarter, one of the two seasons of typically strong sales (back to school is the other). "Continuously low consumer PC demand resulted in weak holiday PC shipments", Mikako Kitagawa, Gartner principal analyst, says.

This consumer infection -- infatuation with iPad, some other tablets and smartphones -- is spreading. According to an IDG Connect study released this week, IT and business professionals are rapidly adopting iPads as partial or complement laptop replacements; remember these people make technology purchase decisions for entire corporations -- Microsoft's core market. Sixteen percent have replaced their laptop with an iPad and 54 percent supplement it. The data suggests that iPads are significantly starting to cannibalize PC sales -- and not just among consumers -- and it's consistent with recent global PC buying trends.

Earth to Windows & Windows Live president Steven Sinofksy: You can't ship Windows 8 soon enough. The new operating system, which runs on ARM as well as x86 processors, is optimized for tablets as well as PCs. Microsoft can fill an important niche in the PC sales-cannibalizing tablet marketing -- offer a truly desktop operating system that runs the same applications and supports enterprise services as those on PCs. Windows 8 public beta is currently slated to be available late next month, which, based on previous versions, puts public availability around October.

Q2 2012 Revenue by Division

Windows & Windows Live: $4.74 billion, down 6 percent from $5.06 billion a year earlier.
Server & Tools: $4.77 billion, up 11 percent from $4.29 billion a year earlier.
Business: $6.28 billion, up 3 percent from $6.11 billion a year earlier.
Online Services Business: $784 million, up 10 percent from $713 million a year earlier.
Entertainment & Devices: $4.24 billion, up 15 percent from $3.7 billion a year earlier.

Q2 2012 Income by Division

Windows & Windows Live: $2.85 billion, down 11 percent from $3.21 billion a year earlier.
Server & Tools: $1.97 billion, up 17 percent from $1.7 billion a year earlier.
Business: $4.15 billion, up 2 percent from $4.09 billion a year earlier.
Online Services Business: Loss of $458 million, up 18 percent from $559 million loss a year earlier.
Entertainment & Devices: $528 million, down 21 percent from $666 million a year earlier.

Division Highlights

Microsoft reports revenue and earnings results for five divisons: Windows & Windows Live, Server & Tools, Business, Online Services and Entertainment & Devices.

Windows & Windows Live. Weaker than-expected PC demand hurt the division during fiscal second quarter. Revenue fell 6 percent year over year, which is simply stunning during the holiday quarter. Worse: Operating income declined by 11 percent.

Microsoft estimates that global PC sales fell between 2 percent and 4 percent, greatly contributing to Windows revenue decline. Consumer PC sales fell by 6 percent, while those to businesses actually rose -- by 2 percent. Netbooks fell 2 percent.

OEM revenue fell by 7 percent, which reflects weakness in PC shipments identified by Gartner and IDC. Three-quarters of Windows divisional revenues comes from OEM sales.

To date, Microsoft has sold 525 million Windows 7 licenses. One-third of enterprise desktops run Windows 7, the company claims.

Server & Tools. Revenue rose 11 percent year over year and operating income by 17 percent. The division is insulated against economic maladies, because about 50 percent of revenues come from contractual volume-licensing agreements.

"Product revenue increased $328 million or 10%, driven primarily by growth in SQL Server, Windows Server, Enterprise CAL Suites, and System Center, reflecting continued adoption of Windows platform applications", according to the company.

Business. The division was the quarter's big overall performer (again), but grew modestly, with revenue up 3 percent and income each up 2 percent year over year. However, adjusting for the tech-revenue guarantee a year earlier, related to the Office 2010 launch, revenue grew by 7 percent. Revenue topped a whopping $6.2 billion.

Annuity licensing grew a stunning 12 percent. Lync revenue grew by 30 percent. "Microsoft Office system. Business revenue increased $420 million or 9 percent, primarily reflecting growth in multi-year volume licensing revenue, licensing of the 2010 Microsoft Office system to transactional business customers, and an 11 percent increase in Microsoft Dynamics revenue", according to the company.

Like Server & Tools, Business division is largely insulated against sluggish PC sales. Sixty percent of revenue comes from annuity licensing to businesses.

Online Services Business. Online services revenue rose by 10 percent. Search and display ads drove up online advertising revenue by 13 percent -- $81 million to $713 million. "OSD operating loss decreased due primarily to higher revenue and lower sales and marketing expenses, offset in part by increased cost of revenue", according to Microsoft's financial release. The change: 18 percent.

Entertainment & Devices. Revenue rose by 15 percent, but losses increased by 21 percent year over year. Microsoft shipped 8.2 million Xboxes during the quarter. Xbox Live subscriptions rose 33 percent to 40 million. Kinect install base: 18 million.

"Xbox 360 platform revenue grew $322 million or 9%, led by increased volumes of Xbox 360 consoles sold and higher Xbox Live revenue, offset in part by lower volumes of standalone Kinect sensors sold", according to the company.

Microsoft now reports on Skype, which has 200 million active users globally.

It's not because of iPhone 4S

Posted: January 18th, 2012, 12:36pm MST by Joe Wilcox

That's again my reaction to startling US mobile numbers that Nielsen released today. Like comScore, Nielsen shows dramatic -- and I mean absolutely stunning -- changes in Android and iPhone adoption since the 4S shipped. Android share, as measured in smartphone operating systems among new purchasers, plummeted from 61.6 percent in October to 46.9 percent in December. Meanwhile, iPhone rose from 25.1 percent share to 44.5 percent. Distribution -- not release of iPhone 4S -- is reason, or so I say.

Nielsen, naturally sees something else: "The high-profile launch of Apple’s iPhone 4S in the Fall had an enormous impact on the proportion of smartphone owners who chose an Apple iPhone" -- that would be for November and December. But that simplistic analysis overlooks mitigating factors. Among the most important -- 43 percent of new buyers chose older iPhones 4 or 3GS.

More broadly, the influences:

iPhone 4 and 3GS price cuts -- to $99 and free, respectively.
Addition of new carrier partners, Sprint nationally and some regional (C Spire).
iPhone sells alongside Androids on all three major carriers, meaning there's competition from Apple.
iCloud is a hugely appealing service and, along with iOS 5, is available for all three iPhone versions -- 3GS, 4 and 4S.

All these things dramatically broadened iPhone distribution in the United States. The new carriers opened up iPhone to subscribers who couldn't or wouldn't switch to get the handset. Lower pricing on older models broadened the number of people who wanted iPhone but couldn't or wouldn't pay $199 or more to get one. Lower pricing also lessened the appeal of cheap Androids these Americans might otherwise have purchased.

The proof is in earlier comScore and Nielsen data, even without benefit of separated sales -- for iPhone 3GS, 4 and 4S -- which would definitively answer who is buying what. According to comScore, the top three selling iPhones are 4S, 4 and 3GS in that order, which certainly says something. But Nielsen says more: "57 percent of new iPhone owners surveyed in December said they got an iPhone 4S". That means 43 percent bought one of the two older models; that's the sales power of lower pricing.

The historical data tells an interesting story. Despite the hype, iPhone share among all subscribers or new purchasers did not perceptually change following the release of iPhone 4 on AT&T and later on Verizon. It was a big upgrade from iPhone 3GS, with new enclosure, dramatically better display and higher-resolution camera. By comparison, the 4S was a modest upgrade.

For example, according to comScore, from August to November 2010, iPhone US subscriber share rose less than one point -- to 25 percent. This was during the post-iPhone 4 launch period. Over the next year, iPhone nudged up to about 27 percent average share, while Android soared, whether measured by install base or new purchasers.

Then Verizon release iPhone 4 in February 2011, with wild predictions Apple handset's would make huge share gains. It didn't. Canalys was right a year ago, when it predicted that iPhone 4 on Verizon wouldn't slow Android growth. For example, Android share was 39 percent in June 2011 compared to 28 percent for iPhone, says Nielsen. Android share reached 40 percent in July, compared to 28 percent for iPhone. At end of third quarter, 43 percent for Android and 28 percent for iPhone. In August, 56 percent of new US smartphone purchasers chose Android and 28 percent iPhone, also according to Nielsen.

The historical data contradicts earlier projections that both iPhone 4 launches would bring huge share gains. Meanwhile, 4S is, as previously mentioned, a modest upgrade. Different now: Distribution, particularly availability of lower-cost older models, to a new market of buyers. Unquestionably, Apple's handset is on a roll, at least here in the United States, but it's not because of iPhone 4S.

iPad invades the enterprise

Posted: January 18th, 2012, 10:19am MST by Joe Wilcox

Last week I chimed: "Only Windows 8 can save the PC market now". Weak consumer computer sales forebode market shifts ahead, but so do those in the enterprise. An IDG Connect study reveals just how much: IT and business decision makers are augmenting or replacing PCs with iPads at an alarming rate.

"Fully 51 percent of IT and business decision-makers say they always use their iPad at work", according to the report -- and, of course, that's the number who actually own the tablet. Sixteen percent have replaced their laptop with an iPad and 54 percent supplement it. Remember, these numbers are for people responsible for corporate computing. As the wind shifts in their sails -- or should that be sales -- so does it eventually across the computing infrastructure. The data suggests that iPads are significantly starting to cannibalize PC sales -- and not just among consumers -- and it's consistent with recent global PC buying trends.

For PC vendors and Microsoft the most troubling data comes from some international markets, where Apple has done well recently, and emerging locales that still aren't PC sales saturated like the United States is. In the Middle East and Asia, 70 percent and 63 percent, respectively, of IT and business professionals have "partly replaced" their laptop with iPad. "In South America, 27 percent have 'completely replaced' their laptop with an iPad", according to the report. "In Europe, the figure is 23 percent".

In Africa, 47 percent of iPads are purchased by employers -- 40 percent in Europe. In some global markets, then, consumerization of IT is much less a factor bringing iPad into the workplace. Businesses buy the tablets, and professionals use them for work, primarily for web browsing, reading and news consumption. Web browsing includes accessing work-related assets on local intranets.

"These findings suggest that a substantial number of professionals regard their iPad as a viable business tool", according to the study.

The implications for Microsoft are staggering. There is no Microsoft Office for iPad, yet IT decision-makers are supplementing or replacing their computers with Apple's tablet. However, work usage habits vary dramatically by region, which not surprisingly is in line with Microsoft core markets.

According to the report, "North Americans use their iPads slightly more intensively than the global norm, with a strong emphasis on web-based functionality". If persistent rumors about Office coming to iPad aren't true, perhaps they should be. And if anyone is looking for reason why the rumors could be true, here it is.

However, iPad's impact doesn't stop with the personal computer. It in some ways starts there. According to the report:

"Our survey also suggests that tablet computing is transforming patterns of content consumption. iPad-owning IT and business professionals are rapidly migrating away from newspapers and printed books, toward digital alternatives. To a lesser extent, they are moving away from DVD-based audio-visual content towards wholly-digital alternatives. This transition is taking place with striking speed. As tablet computing emerges into the mainstream, both media owners and marketers who produce content will need to consider the implications carefully".

That finding sheds some perspective on Apple's media event planned for January 19 that is rumored to be education related. What if education means something more than e-textbooks, as has been rumored?

The more important question, if you have an iPad, has it displaced or even replaced your work PC?

Wikipedia goes dark for 24 hours

Posted: January 18th, 2012, 8:21am MST by Joe Wilcox

SOPA blackout day has arrived, and Wikipedia is going farther than the planned 12-hour protest -- from 8 am to 8 pm. The community encyclopedia is going down for twice as long. Today, we'll all learn just how important Wikipedia is to the Internet community. I find it a valuable resource as a journalist. Will you miss it?

Still, there is a nugget of information to be had from Wikipedia: About why the protest. Like many other sites today, the open encyclopedia stands against two pieces of legislation here in the United States: PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), introduced by senators in May, and October bill Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), introduced in the House. A delayed House vote, from December, was scheduled for today but postponed following last week's statement from the White House. SOPA is weakened but not done yet. SOPA Strike provides an excellent timeline for both bills. Senate vote is still scheduled for January 24.

"Wikipedia is protesting against SOPA and PIPA by blacking out the English Wikipedia for 24 hours, beginning at midnight January 18, Eastern Time", according to the "SOPA and PIPA -- Learn more" page. "Readers who come to English Wikipedia during the blackout will not be able to read the encyclopedia. Instead, you will see messages intended to raise awareness about SOPA and PIPA, encouraging you to share your views with your representatives, and with each other on social media".

Either bill would give the government broad powers to take down websites, seize domains and compel search engines from indexing these properties. Little more than a request from copyright holders is necessary. It's essentially guilty-until-proven-innocent legislation that would punish the many for the sins of the few, while disrupting the fundamental attributes that made the Internet so successful and empowered so many individuals or businesses to accomplish so much. (Review the bills: PIPA. SOPA.)

Wired UK's "SOPA 101" guide is one of the best primers posted in recent days, if those bills are too long (and wordy) for you.

Wikipedia's position:

These bills are efforts to stop copyright infringement committed by foreign web sites, but, in our opinion, they do so in a way that actually infringes free expression while harming the Internet. Detailed information about these bills can be found in the Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Ac t articles on Wikipedia, which are available during the blackout. GovTrack lets you follow both bills through the legislative process: SOPA on this page, and PIPA on this one. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for the public interest in the digital realm, has summarized why these bills are simply unacceptable in a world that values an open, secure, and free Internet.

Wikipedia is by no means the only protester. SOPA Strike has compiled a long list of participants. But few sites are going as far as Wikipedia. For example, Google has blacked out its logo on the search page. Clicking the large rectangle leads to a "take action" page. Not surprisingly, Google opposes both bills. From its SOPA and PIPA info page:

Law-abiding US Internet companies would have to monitor everything users link to or upload or face the risk of time-consuming litigation...To make matters worse, SOPA and PIPA won’t even work. The censorship regulations written into these bills won’t shut down pirate sites. These sites will just change their addresses and continue their criminal activities, while law-abiding companies will suffer high penalties for breaches they can’t possibly control.

Imagine the impact -- the point to be made -- if Google went dark for even one hour to demonstrate how SOPA or PIPA could negatively affect businesses using the Internet. Of course, lawyers would line up to sue on behalf of lost business revenues. Eh? If Google went dark in protest.

The White House's position is the most perplexing around SOPA and PIPA. "While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response, we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet", according to the statement, authored by Aneesh Chopra, US chief technology officer; Victoria Espinel, intellectual property enforcement coordinator; and Howard Schmidt, cybersecurity coordinator. There is stated position to "work with Congress on a bipartisan basis on legislation" that stops piracy and preserves freedom of speech.

As I stated yesterday, if the Obama Administration really opposes SOPA and PIPA, then prove it: Blackout Whitehouse.gov today. Show support for protecting Internet freedoms. Have a look, there's nothing supporting today's protest.

Will your website go dark to protest SOPA?

Posted: January 17th, 2012, 1:09pm MST by Joe Wilcox

Jan. 18, 2012 is designated SOPA blackout day, with prominent websites planning to go dark in protest of two bills working through Congress -- Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). If you've got a big school project due Thursday and plan on using Wikipedia, get your research done today. The community-based encyclopedia plans to go dark tomorrow, and it's not alone.

The proposed legislation has generated gigabytes of negative responses, which included a Go Daddy boycott for supporting SOPA (since retracted) and culminates in tomorrow's blackout. Two months ago, I posed poll: "US Congress is considering two new copyright bills: PROTECT IP and Stop Online Piracy Act. Do you support them?" More than 3,500 responses later, 95 percent answered "No". You're not alone.

To recap, Senators introduced PIPA in May and House representatives did likewise with SOPA in October. Either bill would give the government broad powers to take down websites, seize domains and compel search engines from indexing these properties. Little more than a request from copyright holders is necessary. It's essentially guilty-until-proven-innocent legislation that would punish the many for the sins of the few, while disrupting the fundamental attributes that made the Internet so successful and empowered so many individuals or businesses to accomplish so much. (Review the bills: PIPA. SOPA.)

Wired UK's "SOPA 101" guide is one of the best primers posted in recent days, if those bills are too long (and wordy) for you.

Last week, the White House finally took a position about SOPA and PIPA: "While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response, we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet".

Tomorrow's blackout protest was scheduled to coincide with a House vote on SOPA, which has been postponed, leading to many cries of victory over the legislation. SOPA isn't dead, and last I checked the Senate still plans to vote on PIPA as scheduled. SOPA is on hold, not that the White House is really helping. The statement -- from Aneesh Chopra, US chief technology officer; Victoria Espinel, intellectual property enforcement coordinator; and Howard Schmidt, cybersecurity coordinator -- merely steps back from the proposed legislation.

"Moving forward, we will continue to work with Congress on a bipartisan basis on legislation that provides new tools needed in the global fight against piracy and counterfeiting, while vigorously defending an open Internet based on the values of free expression, privacy, security and innovation", they write. Meaning: They're backing off because of public pressure. More than 51,800 people signed petition: "VETO the SOPA bill and any other future bills that threaten to diminish the free flow of information".

If the Obama Administration really opposes SOPA and PIPA, then prove it: Blackout Whitehouse.gov tomorrow. Show support for protecting Internet freedoms.

The Go Daddy boycott shows just how impassioned are SOPA and PIPA opponents. My question: How far well they -- you -- go? Will you boycott sites that don't support the blackout? Facebook, Google, Tumblr and WordPress.com, for example -- I've seen nothing yet indicating blackouts planned for tomorrow. Imagine the impact if Bing and Google went dark for 12 hours on January 18.

Wikipedia will go dark, or so founder Jimmy Wales tweeted yesterday and then boasted: "This is going to be wow. I hope Wikipedia will melt phone systems in Washington on Wednesday. Tell everyone you know!" Wikipedia's official announcement released later. Reddit also will go dark, but not Twitter. Yesterday, CEO Dick Costolo made clear Twitter's blackout position in a couple of tweets: "Closing a global business in reaction to single-issue national politics is foolish" and "Not shutting down a service doesn't equal not taking the proper stance on an issue. We've been very clear about our stance".

Twitter has vocally opposed both bills, but Costolo's tweets, in response to others, don't reflect that. He put it in business perspective, which is more in the spirit of content providers, such as those in Hollywood, supporting SOPA and PIPA. More sensible response: "Twitter is a tool of free speech. Blackout would suppress it". That fits in less than 140-characters. :)

According to SOPA Strike, 10,000 sites have committed to the protest, but many, such as Google, don't plan an actual blackout. "At its core, this is a fight for freedom of speech, and the language in SOPA and PIPA have stepped over the line", Tiffiniy Cheng, Fight for the Future cofounder, asserts. "The SOPA Strike on Wednesday is the largest online protest that has ever happened. Several hundred million people, potentially more than one billion, will see messages about the dangers of censoring the Internet. That is absolutely unprecedented".

Will you take down your site to oppose SOPA? If you have a third-party hosted WordPress site, meaning not WordPress.com, there are many plug-ins available to automate the process. Please answer in comments. SOPA Strike provides a script you can to your site's theme to accomplish similar action.

Before anyone asks, I will take down my personal website from 8 am to 8 pm tomorrow -- using plugin "Go Dark". But, sadly, don't think it matters much since I haven't posted there in months (I've been too busy at BetaNews).

Photo Credit: sagasan/Shutterstock

Mom's PC is Google TV

Posted: January 15th, 2012, 11:47am MST by Joe Wilcox

The weekend before Christmas, mom phoned, excited, to tell me about her new 46-inch TV. She lives on a tight budget, but received an unexpected $350 windfall from Social Security. That's lots of money to her, and she spent most of it on a Sylvania big-screen television. The purchase inspired her holiday present, which I hadn't yet decided on: Google TV.

Mom will be 71 this year, and she's confined to a wheelchair because of diabetes, which also has diminished her eyesight. For my mum, the PC and TV are vitally important, particularly during long New England winters when she can't get out often. Much as the Google Cr-48 Chromebook meets most of her computing needs, the 12.1-inch screen is too small, particularly in context: Mom previously used a 17-inch iMac G5 (purchased in October 2005); the graphics chip failed last year. What mom really needs is something really big, and there Google TV offers the benefits of television and PC in one package.

I wanted to send mom the Sony NSZ-GT1 Google TV and Blu-ray player. Sony is committed to Google TV. The other supporter at the time, Logitech, had given up on the platform after losing tens of millions of dollars on it. But for mom to use Google TV as her PC, Sony's tiny game-controller-like remote wouldn't do. Logitech Revue comes with wireless keyboard that makes more sense for typing and for using Google TV as a personal computer. Mom loves it. She's liberated by Revue.

Mom isn't an obsessive TV watcher. The big benefit is getting PC capabilities on a screen she can actually read and use on the television services like Netflix streaming that are primary forms of entertainment on her personal computer. Google TV couldn't meet mom's needs, if not for Chrome. The browser opens up all the cloud and content applications she's used -- particularly since moving to Chromebook six months ago, she has lived in the cloud, and that's an experience easily transferred to Google TV. So now she surfs the web and checks and writes email on the big screen, for example. It's ideal for her needs.

I wouldn't have been as inspired about sending her the Revue, if not for Google TV 2.0 software released in October and delivered to the Logitech set-top box last month. The user experience is greatly improved. Still, I'm dissatisfied with the update, for failing to truly transform Google TV. But it seems to be a work in progress that requires change of habits. The progress: Google adding more content partners, and some stuff not seen much anywhere else -- like Crunchyroll. The habits: To really appreciate Google TV, you've got to largely give up the cable or IPTV provider's program guide.

For mom, Google TV is working out better than Chromebook for two other reasons that I would never have guessed: Apps and Android. Mom uses the Google-branded, Samsung-manufactured Nexus S smartphone I got for free (with 2-year contract activation), during a Best Buy one-day special last summer. The Android phone experience makes Google TV easier for her to grasp than does Chrome OS, which surprised me; I reasoned that the browser would be the more familiar interface. Perhaps, but if you're looking for more out of any computing device, apps and customization matter more -- and these attributes make Google TV easier to use and more familiar to her.

On the apps front, I'm quite interested in how the OEMs differ in their distributions. I updated Logitech Revue to Google TV 2.0 before sending it to mom but didn't use it. Unless my imagination has gone awry, there was an Amazon video-on-demand app installed with the Android update. Well, hell, I don't have one of those on my Sony Google TV. I have to use Chrome or go to Amazon Instant Videos from Google TV's movie search feature. Why Logitech and not Sony?

Back to mom, she needed some assistance physically setting up Revue -- being mostly confined to the wheel chair. Mom's Comcast cable box is in another room, so uses WiFi and not wired connection. Software setup she handled, including cable box, channel guide and other basic capabilities. She's sometimes confused when using Google TV 2.0, but the Home bar provides a safety zone. The remote is dunsel. My mum uses the keyboard and Revue to navigate the Comcast box and program guide, but she is only just starting to understand the benefits of Google search to find content.

"I like everything about the Google TV", mom says, and I couldn't get her to be more specific than that -- perhaps because it so simply suits her basic computing, communications, entertainment and informational needs.

New Samsung Chromebook is a cheap, plastic MacBook

Posted: January 13th, 2012, 6:16pm MST by Joe Wilcox

If you missed the new Series 5 Chromebook at Consumer Electronics Show 2012, there's a reason. Samsung practically hid the thing, during an event of otherwise big, big announcements from the South Korean electronics giant. Disappointment is my reaction to the new offering, which, regrettably doesn't temp me back to using a Chromebook.

I asked my colleague Tim Conneally, who got up close to the new Chromebook in this video, for his reaction. "My first impression: it looks like a plastic MacBook". Ah, yeah, hasn't Samsung been having problems with Apple, fending off accusations of imitating products. Judge for yourself, from the photo and link to Tim's video. Doesn't the new Series 5 Chromebook resemble MacBook but donned in plastic?

But there's something more important than missing metal. My bigger concern is performance, to which Tim dismally responded: "The difference in handling is imperceptible". The specs are largely unchanged from the original. System memory is still 2GB and the processor is less crappy. Not good, just not as bad. Samsung is unleashing an unworthy successor and one that makes Chromebook less appealing than the original -- seeing as v1 isn't enough and the new one isn't much more than a new MacBook-like enclosure and speedier processor. Specs are otherwise the same, or seem to be based on the little info released by Samsung.

A Real Under-performer

For two months last summer, I used a Samsung Series 5 Chromebook as my primary PC in the first weeks and as my only one later on. I found the overall cloud experience to be refreshing, no liberating, but Chromebook grated on me the longer I used it. The problem: Performance. On the software side, Google continually updates Chrome OS, which got better with each of the many updates. But the hardware is steadfast. At the least, Chromebook needs 4GB of memory. But really the processor -- and, more importantly, the graphics chip -- simply aren't good enough.

Living in the cloud doesn't free Chromebook from daily computing demands. If anything there are more, because so much activity is conducted online and so many services require Adobe Flash, which still seems wonky to me on Chrome OS -- that's without the demands placed on CPU, GPU and Net bandwidth.

In early October, when writing about giving up Chromebook, I didn't fuss much over what was for me sluggish performance. I'm a power user and, presumably, atypical of the type of person most likely to use a system running Chrome OS. But after getting back to a real computer, my feelings about performance lag are more pronounced.

Currently, I'm using the Lenovo ThinkPad T420s with: 2.5GHz Intel Core i5 processor (with 3MB L3 cache); 14-inch matte screen (with 1600 x 900 resolution); 160GB Intel sold-state drive; 4GB of DDR3 memory (1333MHz); DVD burner; WebCam; Ethernet; WiFi N, memory card reader; 3 USB ports, one each HDMI and VGA port; and Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit. The original Chromebook -- and, sadly its successor -- isn't in the same league. Chrome OS changed my computing habits, so I still largely do everything in the browser, but there's real performance on ThinkPad T420s and none of the waiting common with the Samsung Series 5.

My Chromebook config: 12.1-inch LED display with 1280 x 800 resolution and 16:10 aspect ratio; 1.66GHz Intel Atom N570 processor; 2GB DDR3 memory (not expandable); 16GB solid-state storage; integrated NM10 graphics; ALC272 integrated audio; stereo speakers (which in my tests deliver surprisingly rich sound for the class of machine); internal microphone; 1-megapixel webcam; WiFi N; Verizon 3G (on higher-end model); headphone/Mic jack; two USB ports; 4-in-1 memory card reader (SD / SDHC / SDXC / MMC); and 6-cell battery (with stated life of 8.5 hours).

Specs are sketchy, but Samsung claims the new Chromebook has 3X performance from the dual-core Celeron processor, which granted is a step up from the single-core Atom processor on v1. But Tim's assessment isn't encouraging, since he has Samsung's original Chromebook and has experience enough for spot comparison.

There's no Samsung press release I could find about the new Chromebook, nor does Samsung's Flickr account -- loaded with photos of everything else. There's plenty on Samsung's Series 9 ultrabook, which design and features are jaw-dropping. As for Series 5 Chromebook, it's a plastic MacBook with few of the benefits.

Android Design tells the Ice Cream Sandwich story

Posted: January 12th, 2012, 1:40pm MST by Joe Wilcox

If you're writing apps for Android, or even thinking about it, Google has a new site for you: Android Design. Well, I think it's new. A blog post popped into my RSS feeds late this afternoon, but dated yesterday. So I can't say whence came Android Design.

Christian Robertson, the guy behind the Roboto font family used in Ice Cream Sandwich -- you know, Android 4.0 -- calls the new site "the place to learn about principles, building blocks, and patterns for creating world-class Android user interfaces. Whether you’re a UI professional or a developer playing that role, these docs show you how to make good design decisions, big and small". Heck, even if you're just an Ice Cream Sandwich user (gimme Galaxy Nexus), Android Design is worth your time.

Why end users? Because the site goes into vivid detail about the design principles behind Ice Cream Sandwich. It's essentially the operating systems' story -- and that will grow with the number of devices. Until this week's Consumer Electronics Show, Android 4.0 was available just on Galaxy Nexus or to those Nexus S smartphones having received the update (I'm still waiting for it). But several mobile device manufacturers upped their commitment during CES. For example, ASUS Eee Pad Transformer Prime will get ICS imminently and new Huawei MediaPads will ship with Android 4.0 later in the quarter.

Ice Cream Sandwich is the future of Android, closing the fork between Gingerbread (for smartphones) and Honeycomb (for tablets). Whatever design principles Google applies here will carry forward to future versions. Perhaps there will be future integration, between Android and Chrome OS, down the road -- or Android could someday replace the browser-based operating system.

Perhaps because of my profession, I glommed on to writing guidelines for developers' apps, which could apply to day-to-day communications for anyone:

1. Keep it brief. Be concise, simple and precise. Start with a 30 character limit (including spaces), and don't use more unless absolutely necessary.

2. Keep it simple. Pretend you're speaking to someone who's smart and competent, but doesn't know technical jargon and may not speak English very well. Use short words, active verbs, and common nouns.

3. Be friendly. Use contractions. Talk directly to the reader using second person ("you"). If your text doesn't read the way you'd say it in casual conversation, it's probably not the way you should write it. Don't be abrupt or annoying and make the user feel safe, happy and energized.

4. Put the most important thing first. The first two words (around 11 characters, including spaces) should include at least a taste of the most important information in the string. If they don't, start over.

5. Describe only what's necessary, and no more. Don't try to explain subtle differences. They will be lost on most users.

6. Avoid repetition. If a significant term gets repeated within a screen or block of text, find a way to use it just once.

I agree with all but the last, for general writing (apps are different). In long-form writing, a little repetition helps to emphasize the point.

As for Android Design, Robertson promises: "The Android User Experience Team is committed to helping you design amazing apps that people love, and this is just the beginning. In the coming months, we’ll expand Android Design with more in-depth contents".

Microsoft search share tops Yahoo, and, whoa, that's not a good thing

Posted: January 12th, 2012, 12:49pm MST by Joe Wilcox

I told you so. In summer 2009, I asserted that the Microsoft-Yahoo search deal was "Google's Christmas-in-July present". Reasoning: By Yahoo outsourcing search to Microsoft, Bing would cannibalize share from its partner rather than lead to the combined entity gaining against Google. Last month, Bing US search share nudged ahead of Yahoo, according to comScore. It's a setback for Microsoft.

Google remains the big winner in the search share wars with Microsoft. In June 2009, the month before the announced search outsourcing deal, Google share was 65 percent. Yahoo and Microsoft were 19.6 percent and 8.4 percent, respectively, or 28 percent combined. In December 2011, Google search share was 65.9 percent, Microsoft 15.1 percent and Yahoo 14.5 percent -- for combined 29.6 percent. That's lower than November when Microsoft-Yahoo share was 30.1 percent. The point: Little has changed since the search deal was announced, except that Microsoft has cannibalized share from Yahoo.

Well, something else changed. Yahoo gave up its crown jewels to Microsoft, only to end up worse for wear in market share. Microsoft gives hundreds of millions of dollars to Yahoo, for search share that could have been gained organically and probably was -- as the software giant improved Bing and unleashed compelling advertising. Microsoft is in process of making Bing more of a development platform with Windows 8, where developers can easily tap the service into their products -- a move that can grow share irrespective of Yahoo.

For Bing, the search share gains are impressive. One year earlier, December 2010, Microsoft share was 12 percent and Yahoo 16 percent, for combined 28 percent. Google was 66.6 percent. Oh? 666. Who says Google isn't evil? ;-)

Of course, Microsoft should gain as much search share as possible. But the gains need to come from Google, not Yahoo. Looking over the historical data, there have been ups and downs for all three parties but one constant: Microsoft taking share from Yahoo and not Google.

Only Windows 8 can save the PC market now

Posted: January 12th, 2012, 10:49am MST by Joe Wilcox

Three days ago, near the end of his last Consumer Electronics Show keynote, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer boomed: "There's nothing more important at Microsoft than Windows". He better mean it, because the Windows PC is in big trouble. Fourth-quarter US personal computer sales were outright disastrous, while overall 2011 global growth was the worst since 2001. Recession that year devastated PC shipments, despite Windows XP's late-year launch.

There is no single reason for weak shipments during fourth quarter, when holiday sales typically give PCs a boost: Economic crisis in Europe, hard drive shortages following flooding in Thailand and weak demand among consumers, among others. There is a convergence of factors -- a cascading effect that disproportionately affects Windows PCs compared to Macs. On the Windows side, only Lenovo has proved immune. Apple meanwhile continues to sell Macs hand over fist, as they say, while Windows is at risk.

Worst Year Since 2001

On Tuesday, Tami Reller, chief financial officer for Windows and Windows Live, warned that the division's fourth-quarter results could fall below analysts' estimates (That's her above from the Microsoft CES keynote). She largely blamed the natural disaster in Thailand and estimated that PC shipments fell about 1 percent year over year.

Late yesterday afternoon, Gartner and IDC both released preliminary fourth quarter and full 2011 PC shipment data. Reller's statement indicated something unexpected, because of the stated reason. However, Gartner and IDC say the declines they observed -- 1.4 percent and 0.2 percent globally, respectively -- were in line with their forecasts. US declines were substantially greater, 5.9 percent by Gartner's reckoning and 6.71 percent by IDC's. The full year wasn't much better, with IDC calling 2011 the "second worst year in history" for US PC shipments.

The hard drive shortage is a mitigating factor that obviously cannot be ignored, but Microsoft is wrong to principally lay blame there. It's not like retailers sold out of PCs during the holidays because they couldn't get enough stock on the shelves. Shipments into the channel were down, but sales to businesses or consumers weren't necessarily up -- that is for most vendors. Gartner calls the hard drive shortage's fourth-quarter impact "limited". The full force is still ahead, and it comes during a quarter of lower sales anyway. IDC says that first quarter is when "the full impact of the HDD shortage is felt". Gartner is a bit more dismal, warning "first half" of 2012.

That, by the way, isn't necessarily bad for Microsoft and likely could have unforeseen benefits. The Redmond, Wash.-based company plans to release Windows 8 public beta in late February, which, based on past releases, likely will slow down current version license sales ahead of the new version's launch. Better there be a hard drive shortage now than in autumn, when, presumably, Windows 8 ships.

Top 5 Vendors, Worldwide PC Shipments, Fourth Quarter 2011 (Preliminary) (Units Shipments are in thousands)

Rank	Vendor	4Q11 Shipments	Market Share	4Q10 Shipments	Market Share	4Q11/4Q10 Growth

1	HP	15,123	16.31%	17,989	19.37%	-15.93%
2	Lenovo	13,012	14.04%	9,514	10.25%	36.77%
3	Dell	11,970	12.91%	11,156	12.01%	7.30%
4	Acer Group	9,790	10.56%	10,643	11.46%	-8.02%
5	ASUS	6,243	6.73%	4,944	5.32%	26.29%

	Others	36,564	39.44%	38,615	41.58%	-5.31%

	All Vendor	92,702	100.00%	92,861	100.00%	-0.17%

Source: IDC Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker, January 11, 2012

Focus on Fundamentals

No one should let Microsoft, or even analysts, distract from fundamentals beyond short-term shortages of a key component. Simply put: Consumers aren't buying Windows PCs like they used to. Their spending goes to other stuff, with tablets -- and that really means iPad -- ripping away sales. We just finished the holiday quarter, one of the two seasons of typically strong sales (back to school is the other).

"Continuously low consumer PC demand resulted in weak holiday PC shipments", Mikako Kitagawa, Gartner principal analyst, says. Not hard drive shortages, but weak consumer demand. "While economic uncertainty in Western Europe had an effect on consumer PC shipments, expectations of a healthier economic outlook in North America could not stimulate consumer PC demand in that region. The healthy professional PC market as well as growth in emerging markets could not compensate for the weaknesses in mature markets, with overall growth still negative".

How negative? In the United States, fourth-quarter PC shipments fell for every vendor but Apple, according to Gartner. HP shipments plummeted by more than 26 percent, while Apple's grew by 20.7 percent. IDC put HP's decline at 25.3 percent and Apple's gain at 18 percent. The Mac maker solidified its No. 3 ranking, with market share rising to 11.6 percent from 9 percent year over year according to Gartner and to 10.92 percent from 8.63 percent by IDC's reckoning.

Top 5 Vendors, United States PC Shipments, Fourth Quarter 2011 (Preliminary) (Units Shipments are in thousands)

Rank	Vendor	4Q11 Shipments	Market Share	4Q10 Shipments	Market Share	4Q11/4Q10 Growth

1	HP	4,274	23.02%	5,721	28.74%	-25.30%
2	Dell	4,166	22.44%	4,372	21.96%	-4.70%
3	Apple	2,028	10.92%	1,718	8.63%	18.00%
4	Toshiba	1,925	10.37%	1,968	9.89%	-2.20%
5	Acer Group	1,511	8.14%	1,765	8.87%	-14.37%

	Others	4,666	25.13%	4,361	21.91%	6.98%

	All Vendors	18,569	100.00%	19,906	100.00%	-6.71%

Source: IDC Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker, January 11, 2012

The Mac is big windfall benefactor of the PC shipment/sales crisis, because:

Apple's brand is sizzling hot right now.
Most people use Windows, which is old to them if upgrading, while the Mac is fresh.
iPad cannibalize Windows PC sales, as businesses and consumers buy the tablet as upgrade companion or even replacement.
Apple is more insulated from the hard drive shortage, in part because of how it sources components compared to most other computer makers.

"The industry still needs to work through some key hurdles in 2012, including recovery of HDD supply, the launch of Windows 8, and successful evolution of PC design to become still more mobile", Loren Loverde, IDC vice president, says. He's optimistic long-term. "Despite the challenges, the industry appears to be on the right path, and will be poised for substantial double-digit growth after working through these issues in 2012".

I've heard those predictions before, such as Gartner and IDC gangbuster forecasts for 2000 and 2001 or 2008 and 2009, before economic crisis crippled PC markets. Both analyst firms downgraded PC shipment projections throughout 2011, so don't bank on Loverde's enthusiasm. There remains lots of uncertainty and risk, as:

Economic uncertainty (particularly in Europe) remains
Major PC vendors place big bets on ultrabooks
Media tablets suck away PC sales
Windows 8 launches

Product Refreshes to the Rescue?

"In the United States, market saturation and the economic environment continue to weigh considerably on consumer demand. However, the market is awaiting new products and technologies, promising a new refresh cycle starting in 3Q12 and beyond with a return to positive growth in the mid-term", said David Daoud, IDC research director, says.

Preliminary Worldwide PC Vendor Unit Shipment Estimates for 4Q11 (Units)

Company	4Q11 Shipments	4Q11 Market Share (%)	4Q10 Shipments	4Q10 Market Share (%)	4Q11-4Q10 Growth (%)
HP	14,712,266	16.0	17,554,181	18.8	-16.2
Lenovo	12,931,136	14.0	10,516,772	11.3	23.0
Dell	11,633,880	12.6	10,796,317	11.6	7.8
Acer Group	9,823,214	10.7	12,043,606	12.9	-18.4
Asus	6,243,118	6.8	5,180,913	5.5	20.5
Others	36,827,666	40.0	37,358,786	40.0	-1.4
Total	92,171,280	100.0	93,450,575	100.0	-1.4

Source: Gartner (January 2012)

Ultrabook and Windows 8 are the two technologies that will matter most, but the former is off to a shaky start. "Ultrabooks were quietly introduced into the market during the 4Q11 holiday season", Kitagawa osbserves. "Ultrabooks didn’t seem to draw consumers' attention. Consumers had very little understanding and awareness of ultrabooks, and only a small group of consumers was willing to pay the price premium for such models. However, as has been seen this week at the International Consumer Electronics Show...2012 is a big debut stage for ultrabooks".

Getting on stage is one thing. Finishing the performance, rather than being booed off, is another. Windows 8 will give ultrabooks their biggest appeal -- and a rash of forthcoming tablets, too. It's major reason Microsoft must get out Windows 8 public beta fast and build up interest among businesses and, more importantly consumers. Windows 8's Metro UI is fresh -- different from past versions and also Mac OS. New is good in markets like the United States, where most everyone likely to buy a Windows PC already has at least one.

Preliminary United States PC Vendor Unit Shipment Estimates for 4Q11 (Units)

Company	4Q11 Shipments	4Q11 Market Share (%)	4Q10 Shipments	4Q10 Market Share (%)	4Q11-4Q10 Growth (%)
HP	4,137,833	23.1	5,598,619	29.4	-26.1
Dell	4,020,549	22.4	4,210,000	22.1	-4.5
Apple	2,074,800	11.6	1,718,400	9.0	20.7
Toshiba	1,925,100	10.7	1,968,091	10.3	-2.2
Acer Group	1,756,838	9.8	1,982,477	10.4	-11.4
Others	4,014,644	22.4	3,583,418	18.8	12.0
Total	17,929,764	100.0	19,061,005	100.0	-5.9

Source: Gartner (January 2012)

Execution is the key, and Microsoft has challenges ahead -- starting with holiday quarter results. Apple is expected to report record Mac shipments (again) during a quarter when Windows stumbled. The Apple Fanclub of bloggers and journalists will go ape over the differences and gloat for months. Public releations-wise, Microsoft has at least a rough month ahead -- until Windows 8 beta releases and hopefully churns up buzz.

Meanwhile, major PC vendors must contend with their own cockeyed planning. The majority chose to announce ultrabooks after the holidays. Who's buying PCs now? Yesterday, I picked on Dell for announcing its sexy XPS 13 ultrabook at CES but not shipping until the end of February. Perhaps I was unfair or short-sighted. End of February, around the same time as Windows 8 public beta, is actually brilliant timing.

Call me when Nokia Windows Phones connect

Posted: January 11th, 2012, 1:38pm MST by Joe Wilcox

I'm a fan of Windows Phone and its glance-and-go concept, and Microsoft has made lots of noise at Consumer Electronics Show 2012 about the future. Say, how's that "Get smoked by Windows Phone" competition going, anyway?

But somebody is blowing smoke about how grand will be Nokia Windows Phone sales this year. Thirty-seven million? Cough. Cough. iPhone may have reached that number during holiday quarter 2011. Besides, it's pitiful compared to the Nokia we all used to know.

Morgan Stanley put out that 37 million figure -- 43 million, when including HTC -- and 64 million Nokia Windows Phones in 2013. Those numbers are a shadow of Nokia's former self, from the company that invented the smartphone category more than a decade-and-a-half ago. In 2008, Nokia sold 472 million cell phones, for 38.6 percent share, and handily led the smartphone market -- that despite shipment delays, according to Gartner. For example, in fourth quarter 2008, Nokia sold 15.6 million smartphones for 40.8 percent market share. For all 2009, 80.9 million phones with Symbian -- then Nokia's flagship OS -- sold worldwide, for 46.9 percent market share.

It's all downhill from there. In third quarter 2011, Samsung snatched Nokia's smartphone crown. If Morgan Stanley's projections are right, Nokia will sell about half as many smartphones in 2012 as four years ago, when the market was considerably smaller. For example, smartphones accounted for 26 percent of global handset sales in third quarter 2011, according to Gartner. Three years later, smartphones accounted for 11.8 percent of global handset sales. IDC predicts that smartphone shipments, not actual sales, will reach 1 billion in 2015.

I simply don't see much reason to coo about 37 million shipments when looking at Nokia's past and Androids' and iPhone's future. I sure would like to. Windows Phone stands apart from the rabble. The user interface is fresh and, honestly, refreshing.

Nokia has announced three Windows Phones -- the Lumia 710, 800 and 900 -- but only two have shipped. T-Mobile started selling the Lumia 710, the first Nokia Windows Phone available from a US carrier, today for $49.99 with contract. Earlier at CES, Nokia announced the Lumia 900, which will come to AT&T later this year.

I'm a long-time Nokia enthusiast, who would really like to see a comeback -- marriage of exceptional hardware and Microsoft software. Perhaps I'll be more excited when Lumia 900 ships. For now, the sales numbers will look paltry if iPhone achieves in one quarter what Nokia Windows Phones might do in a year.

The photo above and infographic below are courtesy of Microsoft.

Shazam Player launches for iOS, and I'm mad about it

Posted: January 11th, 2012, 11:09am MST by Joe Wilcox

I'm whining about Galaxy Nexus this afternoon, not because of the phone, which is exceptional. It's an app wanna-have thing. Today, Shazam launched a cool new mobile app, but it's iOS-only, baby. Got Android? You're out of luck. Dunno `bout you, but Shazam is among my top-five most-used apps. The new one, Shazam Player, could be, too.

The app combines music playback with the discovery tools, including the cool lyrics feature, available with Shazam. There's integration with iTunes for playback and music buying. Users can watch YouTube videos of fav artists and share the "soundtrack" of their day on Facebook or Twitter.

"This is a momentous occasion for the company as it is the first separate app we’ve introduced since the launch of the Shazam App for iPhone in 2008", Andrew Fisher, Shazam CEO, says. "With the Shazam Player App we are staying true to our core music fans by enabling them to experience their own music libraries in a more engaging and social way".

Mr. Fisher, you do know that people with Android phones listen to music, too, right?

Among other Shazam Player features:

Arist bios
Tour dates
Static lyrics
Streaming lyrics as music plays
Access to iTunes playlists and create new ones

Okay, I'm done whining. I'll just limp along with Shazam, the included LyricPlay feature and Spotify. And you?

Dell gives more ultrabook in smaller body

Posted: January 11th, 2012, 10:12am MST by Joe Wilcox

As expected, Dell has joined the ultrabook foray, announcing the XPS 13 at Consumer Electronics Show 2012. Thin and lights aren't new for Dell, but joining the announce-now-and-ship-later CES crowd is disappointing. As a build-to-order maker, Dell is known for shipping right away. If you want an XPS 13, however, the Round Rock, Texas PC maker will make you wait until the "end of February".

The XPS 13 inherits from its predecessors, like the XPS 14: The screen is edge-to-edge, allowing for a larger display in a smaller enclosure. Dell boasts a 13.3-inch screen in the size of an 11.6-inch portable, claiming the frameless display reduces XPS 13's footprint by 15 percent compared to comparable 13.3-inch laptops. Looking at the product photo, I don't see how the screen is any more frameless than Apple's MacBook Air.

For comparison, 11.6-inch MacBook Air measures 0.11-0.68 inches thick by 11.8 inches wide by 7.56 inches deep. XPS 13: 0.24-0.71 by 12.4 by 8.1 inches deep, putting it midway between the smaller MacBook Air and the 13.3-inch model, which measures 0.11-0.68 by 12.8 by 8.94 inches.

"From the edge-to-edge frameless display that packs more screen into a compact body, to the innovative carbon fiber base that is lightweight and cool to the touch, the XPS 13 exemplifies our commitment to offering industry-leading mobile solutions that deliver durability and performance without compromise", Jeff Clarke, Dell vice chairman, says.

Specs, according to Dell:

Ultrathin laptop (0.24-0.71"/6-18mm) with Microsoft Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium; precision machined aluminum with a carbon fiber composite base

Intel Core i5 2467M and i7 2637M processor choices

13.3” HD WLED, 300-nit (1366x768) 720p; edge-to-edge hardened Gorilla Glass

Intel HD 3000 video graphics

4GB DDR3 SDRAM 1333Mhz memory

128 GB SSD or 256GB SSD drive options

Full size, backlit chiclet keyboard; glass integrated button touchpad with multi-gesture support

Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6230 802.11 A/G/N and Bluetooth 3.0 wireless connectivity

High definition audio with Waves MaxxAudio 4

Built-in 47WHr 6-cell battery (Dell XPS 13 batteries are built into the laptop and are not replaceable by the customer) offering up to eight hours, fifty-three minutes of battery life^[5]; 45W AC adaptor

USB 3.0 (1) + USB 2.0 with PowerShare (1), mini Display-Port, and headset jack (1)

Built-in 1.3MP webcam (H.264 enabled via Skype ^[4]) with dual array digital microphones

Dell ProSupport for business customers, Dell Configuration Services and Windows Trusted Platform Module options for commercial models

Dimensions: Height: 0.24-0.71" (6-18mm) / Width: 12.4" (316mm) / Depth 8.1" (205mm); Weight: starting at 2.99lbs (1.36 kg)

XPS is Dell's premium brand, and it shows in the ultrabook's pricing, which starts at $999 with Core i5 processor, 128GB solid-state storage and 4GB RAM. That makes XPS 13 among the priciest ultrabooks announced at CES.

The XPS brand "is now 20 percent of Dell’s total consumer laptop business" the company says. "Revenue for XPS laptops has increased 207 percent over last year when the company re-launched the brand".

XPS 13 buyers will receive 100GB of cloud storage from Dell and 12-month Skype Premium subscription. The first 10,000 buyers also will receive a T-Mobile 4G Mobile Hotspot with 90-days free service.

Photo courtesy of Dell

My RSS » Items by Joe Wilcox

Feeds

Items by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 24th, 2012, 6:54pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 24th, 2012, 3:18pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 24th, 2012, 12:19pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 23rd, 2012, 2:43pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 23rd, 2012, 11:10am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 22nd, 2012, 10:54am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 22nd, 2012, 9:23am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 21st, 2012, 3:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 21st, 2012, 9:07am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 20th, 2012, 10:55am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 18th, 2012, 12:10pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 18th, 2012, 7:21am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 17th, 2012, 4:11pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 17th, 2012, 12:23pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 16th, 2012, 4:26pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 16th, 2012, 1:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 15th, 2012, 10:48am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 14th, 2012, 3:29pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 14th, 2012, 11:16am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 14th, 2012, 9:45am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 13th, 2012, 4:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 13th, 2012, 11:34am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 11th, 2012, 1:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 10th, 2012, 3:29pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 10th, 2012, 10:58am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 9th, 2012, 4:13pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 9th, 2012, 12:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 8th, 2012, 3:11pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 8th, 2012, 11:13am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 7th, 2012, 1:24pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 7th, 2012, 9:59am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 6th, 2012, 1:46pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 3rd, 2012, 6:51pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 3rd, 2012, 11:22am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 3rd, 2012, 9:45am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 2nd, 2012, 12:29pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 2nd, 2012, 8:45am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 6:49pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 3:47pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 2:02pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 9:48am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: May 1st, 2012, 8:32am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 30th, 2012, 4:51pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 30th, 2012, 8:52am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 28th, 2012, 4:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 27th, 2012, 2:31pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 27th, 2012, 9:15am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 26th, 2012, 5:01pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 26th, 2012, 3:31pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 26th, 2012, 11:50am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 25th, 2012, 1:36pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 25th, 2012, 10:03am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 5:13pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 2:45pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 12:34pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 11:37am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 10:10am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 24th, 2012, 8:39am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 2:17pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 12:12pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 21st, 2012, 11:21am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 20th, 2012, 1:24pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 20th, 2012, 9:35am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 19th, 2012, 2:03pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 19th, 2012, 10:09am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 18th, 2012, 7:21pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 18th, 2012, 11:58am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 18th, 2012, 9:01am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 17th, 2012, 10:55am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 17th, 2012, 9:26am MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 7:24pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 2:08pm MDT by Joe Wilcox

Posted: April 16th, 2012, 11:52am MDT by Joe Wilcox