« September 2007 | Main | November 2007 »
I had the great pleasure of chatting with Ken Ray on his Technocracy Radio show a few weeks ago. We tackled a whole range of subjects from Apple and iTunes to DRM to Social networks/media. Here is the link if we want to give our 30 minute chat a listen.
http://technocracyradio.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=263669#
Henry Ford has a famous quote that says " You can buy any colour - so long as it's black". Sometimes I feel like Steve Jobs is saying the same thing with the Macbook. I wish they made Macbook's with the same color options as the iPod Nano's. I would really love a red Macbook.
There is a great site I have watched for some time now called ColorWare PC www.colorwarepc.com. They can paint your mac any color you want. I have considered having my iPhone and Macbook done red but then would be out a computer and phone.
Please Apple make the Mac's in different colors!
Many people in the tech industry have been asking me a lot of questions about the iPhone. I am taking these questions from not just the press but many folks trying to understand really where the future of communication is going and the role the handset, the most personal device, will play in that future.
My goal in this post is to share some simple insights on the iPhone. The iPhone I believe is an already but not yet device. Already because it is here and not yet because it is not the device it can be yet.
The first thing one needs to understand about the iPhone is by all definitions it is fundamentally what Intel describes as a MID or mobile internet device. Yes it would be nice if the data speeds were better but that is still an infrastructure issue. My first experience with the device was why do I need my Mac? Interestingly many more affluent college students I know who also purchased the iPhone had the same response. Once Apple decides to allow a few more simple productivity functions the iPhone could fundamentally be a class of computer.
I think it is humorous all the complaining going on about the iPhone and Apple being so restrictive in the experiences they are "allowing" consumers to have. I suppose I view what Apple does differently primarily because of observing how they have always done things. Apple since the iPod has shown that they understand how to put the most relevant product on the market at the right time without over stepping technical boundaries that may hinder price points they desire or market adoption barriers.
Apple's focus with the iPhone right now is primarily entertainment fundamentally around the iPod experience. However in the future I would bet that will change. Once Apple flushes out the iPhone as a platform what will happen is the user will choose how best the iPhone will work for them. If I have no business use for the phone like most consumers then I will through applications install what is most useful to me. Primarily this would be apps that focus on entertainment and communication. If I do use it for business then adding productivity applications to the iPhone makes sense. That doesn't mean I have to sacrifice entertainment for productivity, it simply means I choose how to make the device best fit my needs. This is the power of a platform. Apple views things in terms of an ecosystem. They understand the roles their products play in people's lives and integrate experiences across all the products they create.
Apple I believe has it's eye on all forms of consumers both business and entertainment. The power of the platform is I choose how to use it to best fit my needs. The iPhone is a platform and will continue to evolve in that direction as a key player in the Apple ecosystem.
So what I keep saying to all those who ask questions of me is basically - Be Patient, they know what they are doing.
It always seems like the fall and winter are my heavy gaming month's. I always find myself the first part of the year wishing I could play more video games like when I was younger. But life and family take priority but then comes fall. With this years release of Madden, Bio-shock, Halo 3 and more I find myself staying up until the wee hours again getting my video game fill. Each year however though the market seems to get more crowded with compelling games that vie for my time and attention.
I did the piece on the local NBC 11 channel for the news last week on Halo 3 and what it means for the industry. Some of the questions got me thinking that we may be entering a phase where more then 3 or 4 games a year dominate the market sales. Game developers are starting to really push the game play experience and come up with some super compelling experiences. Of course there will always be the franchise's that do well but Bio-Shock and Gears of War are examples of new titles that can become instant franchises.
Now for the industry that is great but for consumers what happens when there are so many games you want to play but can only get one or two. How do you decide? I am anxious to see how the industry handles market saturation of quality games. I am wondering if some business models will need to change where games may cost less or be free but have integrated marketing into it. For example Madden this year is littered with advertising that I really don't mind from Sprint, Under Armor etc. I am wondering if the future of this industry isn't more subsidized games through advertising. Just a thought.
I am following up my post on the future of social networks with a second line of thinking that covers some things I didn’t cover in the first.
I believe that the future of social networks are specialized group social networks. I believe as Facebook as shown by allowing special interest groups as well as friends create their own social networks. This is also becoming known as the social web.
Social networks are what I call a third tier of communication. Similar to e-mail where you are interested in communicating with a person or groups of people but do not desire an instantaneous conversation like a phone call, text message or IM. It is an advanced form of electronic communication that is organized around social interactions. I believe that a top tier Facebook like network will exist but where people will really spend time is in their specialized groups. Like friends in the “inner circle” or family members in groups together. Other special interest social networks can be things like the moms of a particular child’s sports team, a motorcycle or car club, a bowling league etc. You can see where I am going where the power of a social network is when it becomes specialized. Right now it is focused on friends but I feel it will really become compelling when it is focused. Think about this, Fantasy sports leagues have been tremendous social networks for quite some time.
This is where I hope some level of standards or interoperability show up. Because I love Facebook and hate MySpace I would prefer all my friends and family members be on Facebook. However that is not the case as the masses are still on MySpace and its archaic technology. I would love it if Facebook talked to MySpace so I could manage all my networks from one space. That is why ideally the Facebook platform has so much potential. If special groups just took the platform and changed the colors, look and feel etc of Facebook then I would still be using an experience I am comfortable with. However now I am using it in a more focused fashion. I can’t tell you the number of kids who I talk to in college that loved when Facebook was just for college students. They used it primarily just for their college. They loved how powerful it was when it was used for college life particular to their school. That is why I believe the future of social networks are focused, specialized social networks. Then we can cross the barrier of just people under 40 using social networks, but all walks of life can find value in a social network.
