http://homepage.mac.com/metroxing/iblog/B1641024610 Music. Movies. Media. Mac. Minutae. All rights reserved. Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:37:32 -0800 Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:37:35 -0800 iBlog 1.3.5 Verizon, AT&T, SBC, & Google – Let’s End the “Free Lunch” For Everyone!

Verizon and SBC/Southwest Bell/Pac Bell/Pacific Telesis/AT&T or whatever they’re called this year has called for an end to “free lunches” on the internet – running out of revenue options (guess that customer service and adding new features, that wasn’t on the table?) and that companies like Google are taking advantage of a “free lunch” on their bandwidth.

So, I guess it’s a two-way street Verizon?

Speaking of streets, how much are you paying to drive on our streets?

Or those “free” right of way poles you string your wires on.

Free lunch ends when yours does, buddy. It’s my street and my property. I don’t have any of your “services” so come and take down your wire running in front on my house since it’s an eyesore and besides, no free lunch for anyone, right?

I have Comcast phone & cable broadband and they have their own wires so feel free to set up a 4-hour window with me to come and take down your wires getting a “free lunch” on my visibility and property.

And while I haven’t polled all my neighbors, if we decide to switch over to all non Bell companies, don’t bother driving on our streets after we make the switch – after all, you wouldn’t want anyone getting a free lunch.

And if we take a step back, when you were a monopoly utility, didn’t WE pay for that wiring and presumably you take tax deductions on that expenditure – you are going to give all that back? (along with that other free lunch – the “regulatory fees” you charge us but aren’t actually regulatory since you pocket them?)

And really, doesn’t the internet belong to WE THE PEOPLE – remember, no free lunches – we’ll get back to you on what the back monthly royalty fees you owe us, WE THE PEOPLE.

I almost forgot, even though I’m not a customer anymore and NEVER EVER intend to spend another dime with you, you keep sending me mail at a DISCOUNTED LOWER BUSINESS RATE than the $.39 I have to pay for each letter. Let’s end that free lunch also.

Be careful of the Pandora box you open. ]]> Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:37:27 -0800 Blockbuster Movie Rentals will clearly have to re-invent themselves soon before they become the typewriter repair shops of today – quaint reminders of a different time.

But why would Apple spend BILLIONS to buy Blockbuster, its THOUSANDS of employees and its BILLIONS in debt?

There are ZERO reasons.

Yes, Robert Cringley us right about one thing. The future evolution of the iPod will clearly be the iPod as a er ... pod.

The first step in the next releases will undoubtedly be wireless/bluetooth, et, al but before long (and of course, long before anyone else gets its right), Apple will “fix” the iPod so you can dock it in a mothership pod to buy music & movies.

Does Apple need Blockbuster to do this? No, Apple just needs about an 8’ by 5’ foot space ... do you need to buy a 10,000 square foot store to install a vending machine?

No.

Apple will probably add to their stores first and then, it will be a fight to see who gets it next. Like the intent on vending machines – which is to draw in foot traffic – and who knows, that customer might buy something else – that’s all you would need. A space or a wall will do nicely.

If Apple wants to buy anyone, they might buy, Zoom the company with the ipod vending machines.

But why would you spend billions of a store and a store name that reminds people of the days of video and not DVD’s?

Why would you spend billions on a store clearly fewer and fewer people are going into – associating it with old technology? When they have Netflix or Video-on-Demand now?

These iPod motherships would be perfect on campus, in company cafeterias, in airports, and in countries where homes are smaller or a more social societies (pretty much the rest of the world) where people tend to gather in the streets, in plazas and coffeehouses, the un-tethered iPod is perfect – people can dock in while buying a coffee, or waiting in line.

There’s still plenty of work to be done – the whole authorization issue, security issues regarding accounts, etc ... (perfect for an Apple iPod phone that adds your purchase right to your Apple mobile phone bill :-)

But you can see the possibilities are endless.

However one possibility is not just remote but pointless.

Apple needs to buy Blockbuster the day they need to buy Del Monte. ]]> Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:17:33 -0800 PRE-SHOW RUMORS

The Mac DTV/PVR

On the surface, who wouldn’t want one? But the reality is that as a large corporate-America company, there is NO WAY Apple could release a Mac DVR feature without DRM. Smaller companies can fly under the radar and release a DVR without any DRM or even strip out Macrovision but Apple CANNOT do it – especially since they are building up a video store. Right now, you can plug in a card or an external device and record to your Mac without any restriction. You can then convert and make discs or files choosing from a dozen formats all un-encumbered by DRM.

Just look at TiVo to Go and all the work TiVo has to do to make the “rights holders” happy and yet, they are still grumbling there’s not a “broadcast-flag” DRM.

So be VERY careful what you wish for.

A 42” Apple Plasma Monitor

It would one dull MacWorld if this were part of the keynote. Whether it’s true or not, who cares – it’s a monitor. Should Apple sell one, sure – but it’s like an iPod dock – if Apple doesn’t make one, three dozen 3rd party companies can step forward and do it. It’s something you might announce on the third day of the Developer’s Conference. It’s nice but it’s not a major announcement.

Fox joins the iTunes Store

From all the interviews in the trade ads, it looks like it’s going to happen at any time (along with CBS) but frankly, I’m sure Apple told Fox that it would get lost in the frenzy of their “other” announcements and let’s hold off and give you your own day. It’s no biggie. Besides, the March sweeps are just around the corner so that would be a better showcase such as when PRISON BREAK returns; you can buy all the episodes so far to catch up. For CBS, March is of course, March Madness.

The Mythical “Numbers 1.0”

A word processor (PAGES) that is set up as a mini-mini desktop publishing makes sense since there are still thousands of newsletters and SoHo “creators” who find Word’s newsletter templates appallingly stupid and inept and $799 a bit much to pay for a full powered desktop publisher to use 3% of its power and features. KEYNOTE makes sense since Steve Jobs wanted presentation software that didn’t hurt your eyes to look at it but why do people want another spreadsheet app? IT’S BORING. NO ONE CARES. People who use spreadsheets are not going to switch from EXCEL. Hell, I’ll bet MS can’t convert the last 50,000 people using LOTUS 1,2,3 – so there’s ZERO point to releasing “Numbers” since if you really, really need Excel – you’re not going to switch and why go out of your way to tick off MS to sell 5,000 copies of some boring piece of software. I cannot figure out anyone is even bothering to talk about it.

The Tablet PC

The 72 of you who want a Mac tablet – please switch to the Commodore. You are needed there.

The Mac PDA

It’s called an iPod. Please refresh your browser.

The “iPhone”

The cell phone companies are like prison gangs. Do you really want to go out of your way to get a shive? Is it better to fly under the radar and give them the impression you’re working with them but really keep a wary eye on where they are at all times? Just look at Verizon – first they disable Bluetooth (for your “protection”) and now with V-Cast, you have to pay $15 a month for “advanced” services and every song costs you $1.99 so it’s $16.99 for the first single you buy. That’s the kind of pricing scheme they want.

So there are two scenarios:

At $.99 per track, the phone companies cannot make more than a couple pennies at most.

They know and Apple knows if you create an iPhone that’s a real iPod + Phone, people are just going to buying their tracks from iTunes at $.99 per or simply download their own CD collection.

Unless you are trapped at an airport and must listen to I WANNA BE SEDATED, you will not pay $1.99 nor will you bother paying them $15 a month.

Apple and the cell phone company looks like an idiot if it’s $.99 at home but $16.99 on the road – that is NOT going to fly so until the phone companies are willing to give, there will be no iPhone.

With that said, at some point after the iPod is no longer flying off the shelves – just merely selling a lot of (in 2 years?), there’s the possibility of creating a VOIP or WiMax phone that simply bypasses the cell phone companies ... or Apple simply points out, take the SIM card out of your present phone – drop it in ours. You’re still on the cell phone network using your number & service. But that would tick off the cell phone companies and there’s no point in doing it right now – let’s wait until iPod’s hit the 150 million mark and then go after the cell phone companies.

THE SHOW ANNOUNCEMENTS

The ExpressWay and Not Firewire Highway 800

As we predicted (On November 12, 2005 BTW), there was no reason not to start selling the Intel Macs especially since Steve Jobs claimed they were building Universal Binary/Intel versions of everything in the past 4 years – Apple just had to get the chip order in and so forth ... the laptops look great and is yet another cool must-have gadget for tech head – MUST BE THE FIRST ON THE BLOCK to get an Intel Mac. Love it or hate it – they have to be the first to know and get their hands on it. As usual, Apple/Steve Jobs is smart – let’s sell the MOST EXPENSIVE laptops first :-)

On thing that some people are grumbling about is the lack of Firewire 800 on board ... well, this PC mag excerpt should explain everything and the possibilities that ExpressCard offers not just for storage connectivity but even enough bandwidth for HDTV tuners:

“ExpressCard's throughput is ideal for video transfers and uncompressed files. To compare it with throughputs you're familiar with: Gigabit Ethernet has a throughput of 125 MBps, FireWire 800 (seen only in new Apple notebooks so far) runs at 100 MBps, and USB 2.0 can reach 60 MBps.

ExpressCard will have the theoretical maximum throughput to transfer data at a whopping 250 MBps (actually, 500 MBps total; 250 MBps to the computer in one direction and 250 MBps to the card in the other). This is in comparison to the now seemingly sluggish 132-MBps PC Card standard.”

So if you trust Apple & Steve Jobs to make it better – it’s a minor thing. The only real problem is for video editors who edit with a PB (on the go) so they cannot really switch over until there are ExpressCard connectors to HDD’s but how hard can that be? I wouldn’t be surprised if there was something before the week is out.

The .Mac Integration

First, iWeb looks great - a very cool (finally) intro/newbie web design app – the last being PAGEMILL that was as easy to use (And while PageMill was quirky and had weird coding to HTML, it was 1996 after all and yes, I’ve tested out all the pretenders since then and NONE offer the ease of iWeb already). It’s CLEARLY not for HTML coding junkies but it’s for the rest of us who don’t care to know or know any HTML.

And yes, there is more integration between iMac and iLife apps and so for some reason – that seems to tick people off.

As a .Mac user from Day 1 and a continual user, I’m not sure why people loathe .Mac so much because they really know so little about it.

They sneer at it as a $100 email/storage as if we were “dupes” because they can get it for “free.”

First, you could not be more wrong – you could try but you not be successful to quote a TV series character.

.Mac is so much more than just an email/storage service even before iLife ’06.

First, maybe some of us don’t want an email that signals something wholly unprofessional like ‘hotmail,’ what the hell is that?

And yes, you can get storage on the ‘net for free – how trustworthy? How many people have had ISP’s just disappear on them?

Is there a place that can sync your ADDRESS BOOK app files on the ‘net so you can access anywhere there is an Internet connection? Aren’t you tired of exporting, importing, creating and trying to keep your address books straight and the same?

Or how about a backup and sync of your Safari bookmarks? Again, accessible WORLDWIDE with an Internet connection – of course, bookmarks without an Internet connection is like water without a glass.

Or the fact that I can backup selected files on a schedule or manually to a site accessible worldwide?

Or that my storage space is represented graphically as a HDD icon and I can see files & folders just as if it were physically attached to my Mac? That I can drag files to and from it?

Or that I can easily assign passwords to folders for people to drag or drop in files?

Never mind that we get free sounds, GarageBand loops or free games every few months ...

Or even before iLife ’06, I could highlight some photos and get them published in a classy template by clicking a few times?

Same with video? Or even before iWeb, I could create webpages by selecting a template and a few minutes be on the web?

Of course, if you are a webmaster and a coder using BBEdit or DreamWeaver, of course. Mac seems like child’s play to you but does that mean if you don’t have use for an app or service, no one should get to use it?

And yes, .Mac is integrated with Mac apps but it’s OPTIONAL and ENTIRELY YOUR CHOICE. It’s not like iLife is $179 and you have to “waste” .Mac. It’s a very clear and separate charge – if you want it – great – if not, you can continue to run iLife 3,4,5 and now 6 and have every single feature except easy web publishing – it that really worthy of scorn and almost outright hatred?

Also, there are no two ISP/web hosts that accept files the exact same way. How is Apple supposed to sort through all the offerings from the thousands of webhosts? Even no blog site accepts files the same way – how is Apple supposed to create one app to handle all that? While DreamWeaver can consolidate all your files and build you a map, you still have to upload properly – basically Apple creates an app to upload to a site they control. If it’s not enough for you for whatever reason, don’t use it. It’s not for everyone.

It’s not like MS anti-virus maintenance program where if you don’t pay up, your machine gets too bogged down to run.

NOT every app is designed for you and if you don’t like or don’t need or can’t afford .Mac – no biggie – MOVE ON.

But also don’t bad mouth an app or service unless you know EXACTLY what it is and what it does. That would be like dismissing email in its entirety because you get spam.

MOVE ON. ]]> Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:41:23 -0800 The iPod is already amazing on so many levels – not just the device and its impact on consumer electronics but how its effect is not only felt in pop & societal culture but also how it managed and manages to confound so many people.

The problem is that one really needs to understand pop culture, marketing, the financial markets; technology, computers, personal electronics and importantly, MUSIC to really begin to proper understand the iPod and its lasting impact.

Let’s get a few major points out of the way.

No matter what you attribute the success of the iPod to – it’s simply an amazing phenomenon. If you were to create a list of products that have sold worldwide in the 40+ million range in the last 50 years – that would be a pretty short list. If you add in the fact that the average selling price of the item probably averaged @$250 over the current 5 year life span of the iPod? Your list would be pretty tiny. So it’s not a fluke or a fad.

And the iPod is really the world’s first mass market customized product that touches kids and adults. That sounds like a misnomer but if you understand consumer markets, marketing and the business end of products – you’ll soon see why the iPod cannot be beaten anytime soon.

But we’ll get back to that in a bit.

First, let’s get some of the fallacies out of the way:

iTunes Music is closed/proprietary.

No, in fact, iTunes is about as open as you can be. Unlike your other entertainment choices such as a DVD, book or even a CD, iTunes lets you make a FULL backup of the tracks you buy from the Apple iTunes music store as a “data” file or better yet as an AUDIO CD playable on BILLIONS of devices worldwide. How difficult? Highlight. Click and put in a blank CD-R. It does the rest.

You are technically breaking the law by making a copy of your DVD. You cannot make a legal reproduction of your book and its pages and making a backup of a CD requires another couple steps. Only Apple’s tracks (Fairplay m4p) offers you a chance to strip out the DRM forever.

In all fairness, WMA stores also offer you essentially the same option.

Which brings us to Fallacy #2

Yea, but iTunes Music is closed/proprietary.

So are WMA stores and Microsoft’s DRM. And unlike DVD’s or books – only music gives you a choice. You can buy the highest fidelity consumer option as a CD*. OR you can buy the same tracks as an Apple Fairplay m4p track OR you can buy it as a WMA track from one of the many WMA stores.

And since everyone pretty sells EXACTLY the same tracks (other than a few hundred exclusives), and the all cost about the same AND you can convert them all to audio CD formats at any time you choose, if you own an ipod, why not buy from the Apple store? The perfect analogy is two Starbucks on opposite corners. They sell EXACTLY the same thing but if for some reason, you prefer to wait for the light and cross the street to go to more inconvenient one – go right ahead but there’s also one right here for you on this side of the street.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, if you hate Starbucks. You have Peet’s Coffee also but it’s a block away – analogous to CD’s.

*Of course, Sony with their root kit failed to offer you the highest fidelity on a CD format with their WMA player as default playback on a computer and no copying – as Wendy’s used to say – One choice is no choice.

Which brings us to Fallacy #3

The iTunes Store/iPod is a Monopoly.

With iTunes market share in the high 70%, and with iPods at 85-90% of the market, it is in the most un-educated sense a monopoly. But before you go wildly off base ...

Having a high market share does NOT make it a monopoly!

A TRUE ILLEGAL monopoly as defined in economic terms means you use your high market position to lock out your competitors and to generally be the bully on the block.

Does Apple prevent other online stores from selling the same tracks? NO.

Does Apple prevent you the consumer from obtaining the tracks from some other source? (CD store, mail order, etc ...)? NO.

Does Apple have the lowest price (to drive out competitors by possibly selling at a loss?) NO.

Does Apple prevent you from loading tracks from other sources onto the iPod? NO.

Never mind that the iPod plays back 8 formats and on the PC side will convert unprotected WMA to one of iPod’s 8 formats, (protected WMA to audio CD can go right back to iPod ... slight inconvenience is not considered a major hindrance)

Does Apple prevent retailers from selling competing Mp3 players? NO.

Does Apple prevent manufacturers from creating competing Mp3 players? NO.

In all fairness, some governments are looking at Apple’s deal to lock up the NAND Flash drive market as a “monopolistic” maneuver and it’s too early to say how it will be ruled but since Intel & Micron just announced they were building a new NAND Flash plant, it’s not as though Samsung has proprietary technology AND it’s just normal course of business if you’re smart or big enough to lock up a supplier to make only a part for you – just as auto makers have suppliers who will only work on their parts so ultimately, it should not be ruled monopolistic.

Which leads us to the biggest fallacy.

The iTunes Store/iPod Success is due to its Marketing.

Is Apple a smart marketer? You bet. Apple gets more free PR than the next 5 companies combined. Other than the movie studios, the TV networks and the President of the United States – Apple is talked about every other 5 minutes but that’s not the sole or even the most important reason for the success of the iPod.

Here are some of the KEY reasons for the success of the iPod and until someone can deliver on all of these or Apple fails to deliver on all of them going forward, the iPod is unassailable and UNTOUCHABLE.

DESIGN

Apple has one key advantage – Steve Jobs. No other consumer electronics company has one guy who is respected (and feared) by marketing, engineering and design – if he says it’s not good enough – you know it’s not good enough. What are you going against? The guy who fought for the Macintosh 1984 ad? The guy who launched the consumer personal computer market, the online digital music market and who knows what else? The guy who had a hand in launching some 4-5 iconic products that will stand the test of time? (Mac, iPod, iMac, Apple II, etc ...) not to mention his work at Pixar ... who are YOU to question if he says your scroll wheel is no good or the headphones are not solid feeling enough? Dozens of companies have world class designers but their product is either designed just to win awards or gets neutered by marketing or manufacturing (we’ll put plastic here, we can say $.04 a unit!) and very few companies have a guy respected and feared enough where everyone just gets in line.

The principle behind the portable mp3 player is simple enough. I want to listen to music. I want to load my music easily. I want to scroll, play, back up, go forward, and turn up the volume & down.

Why was Apple able to deliver on these simple principles and no one else really? Two reasons. Besides missing a gatekeeper like Steve Jobs, they are/were companies either run by marketers or by engineers but unfortunately for them – not by both. The marketers believe in brochureware – as long as we have the most features, we will win the market share battle. That’s fine for graphics card or PC speakers when everyone shops by specs – as long as you provide drivers to run the card or the speakers, all is well. These people are confused, confounded and puzzled as to why their mp3 player clearly has way more brochure check marks is not out-selling the iPod. PEOPLE are STUPID (people as in us, the consumer) – can’t they clearly see how many check marks are ticked off on the box?! We MUST be fooled by Apple marketing (is the only conclusion they can draw). That’s why when Apple had 5 Mini colors, one of their competitors had 10 – we have twice as many colors! We should sell twice as much! That same competitor now has an ipod look-alike (well, if you’re legally blind and standing 25 feet away) AND it comes in three colors! We should sell three times as many!

To them, they pick up an iPod and think, we can do this – it’s just a HDD (or NAND drive) with a screen and some navigation device – they just don’t get it.

But that’s the key to Apple’s design success. The iPod is a media player that happens to have a storage disk. Everyone else thinks it’s a portable hard drive that can play media. That’s the engineers/manufacturers talking. They think their job is done if they can get everything crammed in there that marketing asked for and they can manufacturer it for the agreed upon price. They believe it’s up to them to say when something is done and if marketing questions them – what do they know about components? We’ll just tell them we can’t do it or it’ll cost another $10 wholesale – that’ll shut them up.

So all the other “features” that people are always screaming about – clearly by the sales of the ALL the other Mp3 players COMBINED should prove to you that very FEW OTHER people CARE ENOUGH.

And of course, that’s just the INSIDE of the iPod – the outside of the iPod? Again, not just world class but is a fitting showcase for the work done on the inside AND of o=f course – leading to the next major key reason for the success of the iPod ...

THE USER/SYNCING

Unfortunately for Apple’s competitors, they think their work is done when they can manufacturer their product for X dollars and it features X+1 features. They believe they are done when their product ships – the rest they could care less about. They worked on the principle that they were smarter than you and if they came up a solution, who were consumers to question it? There was an mp3 player that required all songs be placed in folders marked FOLDER_01, FOLDER_02, etc ... or the player did NOT recognize any of the tracks inside. As an engineer might say, ‘deal with it.” Or the mp3 player where the battery would fall out but hey, marketing wanted a replaceable battery to trump the ipod, here ya go.

Of course, the iPod goes deeper in little steps. You pull out your headphones, the playback stops right there – paused – waiting for you to plug back in ... or of course, a HOLD button so jostling wouldn’t affect your playback from volume to fast forward, etc ... one competing mp3 player required you to navigate 3 menus deep to access HOLD.

And of course, that extended to syncing. Apple had the forethought to design a jukebox to do it all. Plug in your ipod. Itunes launches. If it’s activated, it synced EVERYTHING so you don’t have to guess. You can even burn a CD right there. And of course, along the way others choices and options were added but the principle has always been the same – how do we make it easier for you?

For those using the latest version of the Windows Jukebox, funny, it looks much like iTunes ... go back one version and it looks completely differently – not to mention you had to go buy another piece of software to burn a CD-R.

There were some WMA players that required you to use Internet Explorer to load tracks. No syncing. You had to start over to move tracks around ... or the Dell DJ until recently – you’re not allowed to load two tracks with the same track name in one playlist ... yea, can’t imagine a scenario where anyone would want to listen to the same song even by two different artists ... again, not a media player – it’s a portable HDD that can play back media.

After all this time, you think they’d learn? Not really, not to embarrass any particular brand but a recent PC magazine (and not a Mac magazine) tested out 10 portable mp3 & media players – here are some of the flaws of the iPod competitors ... display grainy, can't listen to music & view photos at the same time, bass causes player to make clicking noise, no mp3 ID tag info on screen, gridlines across the screen, playback limited to low res video and requires proprietary software to encode video.

So until Apple’ competitors fix their major flaws, they’re not going to get any traction in the marketplace.

ITUNES MUSIC STORE

Mac users take it for granted you can plug in an external device, it launches an app and it shows up on the desktop and your files are ready to sync or are already syncing.

Most PC users are surprised the iPod works just as well on the PC side – you build a library of tracks in iTunes. You plug in your ipod, you un-mount. You are ready to go. That’s it.

The software is simplistic in appearance and I’m certainly not arguing it’s perfect but everything is straightforward and it’s Apple smart. Once you place a track in the iPod Library, you can drag it to as many playlists as you want – some PC jukeboxes require you to load the song again and again for EVERY playlist you want the song to appear in.

It’s no wonder that the re-designed Microsoft Mp3 jukebox now looks like iTunes and surprise so does Sony’s Connect.

Of course, the next major upgrade was the iTunes Music Store. Again, some people are quick to dismiss it as even possible to sell tracks online but until Apple came along, some online stores were happy to sell 100,000 tracks a YEAR calling it a great year. Apple has sold over 600 MILLION tracks from ZERO in 4 years. Again, its simplicity is deceiving – it’s all-seamless from CLICK to DOWNLOADING to placing into your PURCHASED list. No need to click 11 times to buy an album and if you try to buy the track again, iTunes will thoughtfully point out you have purchased it already.

Now the success of the iTunes stores peeves off many people and they have developed an entirely new litany of complaints.

First, I’m not advocate of DRM. But the DRM on Apple’s Fairplay is like a 2-foot fence. If you can’t hop that, you’ve got other issues but the attitude of 90% of those who loath the iTunes Store is seemingly based on the belief that they can see through the “scam” and anyone who buys a track is a dupe.

First, your restrictions are listed right upfront. Unlike CD’s with restrictions included sealed inside or the Sony rootkit – there is no surprise. If you choose to buy this particular product – here are your restrictions. And unlike many other products with restrictions, we have a choice to go buy the CD or even buy a WMA track NEVERMIND that you can legally erase this restriction in a few minutes.

And yes, it’s 128kbps – again, not a surprise. It’s an adequate format. It is compressed but so are CD’s. Yes, CD’s are a compressed audio format also. Short of you having a seat in the center inside the recording studio, everything is a reproduction – some better than others but it’s a tradeoff LIKE EVERYTHING YOU BUY.

Yes, like EVERYTHING ELSE YOU BUY.

The iTunes Store promises you this. Here is a 128kbps audio track. You can listen to 30 seconds of it. You can click to buy it and you can have it (generally) in less than :60 seconds. Done.

No calls to see if it’s in stock. No driving to a store in hopes they have it. No need to buy 12 tracks to get the one you want. Etc, etc ... I’m NOT saying it’s better than a CD or even better than a WMA track. It doesn’t promise you the moon. It promises convenience and near instant gratification. That’s ALL. And for MANY people, that’s enough. And unlike other competitors, you can completely ignore the iTunes Store.

And now, of course the Video Store.

And let’s get a few more fallacies out of the way.

The iPod only plays tracks from the iTunes Store.

No, and unlike the older Sony players that insisted on converting ONE WAY ONLY all your mp3’s to ATRAC3, the iPod could care less. Load 10,000 Mp3’s converted from your CD collection or buy 10,000 tracks from iTunes – THEY WILL PLAY BACK EXACTLY THE SAME.

If your computer crashes (hard drive dies), you lose your songs.

Yes, but why are digital files different than anything else in your life? Lose a CD – will the store give you another one? Lose your car keys? You’ve never lost anything else in your life? Or more likely, grow weary and put it away? How many CD’s in your collection disappear with every move you’ve made?

ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK

By design and by luck, Apple has moved the fight every time someone gets within 100 miles of the iPod.

No Windows Access. DONE.
No Online Music Store. DONE.
No Smaller Drives. DONE.
No Photos. DONE.
No Flash Versions. DONE.
No Color Screen. DONE.
No Video. DONE.
No Online Video Store. DONE.
And that’s just the past 4 years – What’s Next? Clearly NOT DONE.

In today’s buyer’s market, you keep pressing your advantage until your competitors are DONE.

THE ACCESSORIES “COTTAGE” INDUSTRY

Clearly, now not just a cottage industry anymore but fuel for the world first Mass Market Customizable Item.

Add in MARKETING & PR,

You have the world’s first MASS MARKET CUSTOMIZABLE ITEM.

Manufacturers, sellers, companies – have two goals in creating a new product.

Make People Want to Buy it.
Sell a HUGE Amount of it.

Pretty Simple.

But very hard to pull off for an extended period of time. Yes, you can get people to buy almost anything for a short period of time before people become dis-satisfied or another new “better” (newer) and shinier object appears.

Ultimately there are really only two markets: The trendsetters and the mass market followers.

In many senses, it’s easy to create a product that trendsetters will gravitate towards – make it new, make it exclusive and usually make it expensive.

Now, if successful, it’s a lucrative business as your margins are great. These are the $5,000 handbags, the $500 sneakers and the $2,000 cell phone. But it’s ultimately limiting as the trendsetters move on and of course, if you lower prices or even sell a lower priced line in an attempt to broaden your market greatly, you lose some of your cachet as exclusive.

And generally copy-catters will copy some of the elements of your design and the mass market will buy those choices – diluting the look & feel – causing the trendsetters to move on as more people on the streets are “closing in” as it were.

Some companies choose one target or the other. They know that there will some overlap but if they choose to pursue the mass market, the trend setters (and their margins) will whither away fairly rapidly.

But the iPod breaks that set pattern due to:

Apple design (inside & out)

Apple’s constant changing designs and the initial exclusivity and limitedness of each new iPod.

Apple’s stagnated pace of add-on of features (online music store, photos, video, video online store, etc ...) that not only appeals to the trend setters but also increases the perceived utility for the mass market to follow.

AND a little luck with the 1,000+ 3rd party accessories, which seals the deal. Even the mass market is loath to appear to be too mass market but ...

EVERY iPod is MASS MARKET but yet UNIQUE because every iPod is a ONE of a KIND ITEM in the WHOLE WORLD.

There are no two iPods completely the SAME!

It’s Mass Market.
It’s Custom.

The closest equivalent are cars but at $15,000 (at least) for the cheapest car that others might envy ... the price of entry into the fabulous world of the iPod is only $99.

Cell phones are close but since most people are restricted to their choices when they signed up and with a few exceptions of literally 1,000 phones – 99.5% are just a hunk of plastic with a user interface only someone who works at a telecommunications utility could love.

The iPod on the other hand is literally everything to EVERYONE DIFFERENT.

It’s pink with Swarovski Crystals and a playlist of teenage Rocker “Grrls.”

It’s black with a blood wrap and 1,200 Nu-Metal songs.

It’s a bootable Linux machine.

It’s a showcase in size (applicable to almost any iPod at any time of release).

It’s a commuter’s video player of last night’s LOST.

It’s the portable photo backup on vacation and at the end of the night – plug it into a TV and watch it right then.

It’s the perfect soundtrack for going through the yearbook or deep in snow country.

Because nearly EVERY aspect of the iPod is customizable to reflect your personality – starting with the content. It is the very personal soundtrack to your life. Then you work your way out from the skin or box to add-ons to the $300 noise canceling headphones to the wireless streaming box to the connector that lets you use your BMW M3 steering wheel to control the content – that’s the design and accidental luck of the power of the iPod.

(Luck - You cannot get 300 vendors to make 1,000 accessories for your product if you begged – it has to happen organically).

It’s the Early Adopter/Trend Setter Toy because there’s always another one coming and it’s always new – it’s exclusive but it’s also customizable so they’re not “embarrassed” to carry it around after 3 weeks because the music inside makes it their very own exclusive object.

And for the Mass Market, it’s has two fold sway – it’s both a useful tool and it offers them cachet as trendy & being able to afford something “trendy” and exclusive.

Again, the price of entry is only $99 and Apple has smartly priced it so it’s enticing to just jump a little. If you’re considering the SHUFFLE, for only $70 more, you can have a color screen and the amazingly sized NANO. If you’re considering the NANO, for $50 more, get one with the twice the capacity and/or why not for another jump to the iPod Video?

And that’s how you build the world’s first Mass Market Customizable product.

That’s why the iPod is not a fad but it is literally all things to all people.

And that’s how you lock out your competitors because Apple holds sway over the Early Adopters/Trend Setters & the Mass Market – leaving non iPod buyers to either feel they missed the boat on something new & exclusive or to the “average” mass market buyer – you couldn’t afford $99?

The only people left for all the other mp3 companies are basically people who simply like going the grain. They are psychologically suspicious of anything popular – as if they are the only ones smart enough not to fall or be duped. That’s why it’s even harder for Apple’s competitors to gain traction because the only market really left to them are the bargain hunters and consumers who resent having to buy their product by default – as they cannot be seen buying anything remotely popular. And most of Apple’s competitors’ players don’t help matters by all having some major flaw or missing feature – the consumers “forced” to buy their products are certainly not going to be starting a groundswell viral marketing campaign of good word-of-mouth to overtake the iPod.

Which of course makes the new competitors players that look just like iPods puzzling (there are at least 4) (and again, if you stand 20 feet away in low light) because they clearly don’t understand their only appeal right now is to market to those who loath the popularity of the iPod so why would they buy a prototype looking chunky ipod look-alike – causing them to spend their time answering one question, “if you like that look, why didn’t you just buy an ipod?” If anything, building a shabby iPod look-alike is probably going to make the remaining 10% of the market, throw up their arms and just buy an iPod ... oh, yes – those competitors? They’re priced the same or HIGHER than the iPod.

Of course, an iPod is not a necessity of life. And if you’re not a computer user, it’s hard to figure out how to get content on it or if you simply don’t need to listen to thousands of songs but as the world economy grows – Apple’s potential selling audience is probably close to 600-800 million so anything could happen here on out but it’ll take some serious competition and for Apple to seriously slip for anything to change in the near future.

Neither looks to be happening on the horizon soon. Of course, there’s competition but name one industry where people aren’t fighting like feral dogs for 1% share and there?

So, while there are pessimists who worry about how much upside there is – there is plenty. The transition is just beginning but with the competitors still believing it’s just the outer casing and Apple marketing as the key success to the iPod, iPod’s reign is pretty secure.

And yes, there are plenty of WMA stores including the new MS MTV one but asking teen-agers to dump their iPod to use an iPod look-alike ... as if.
]]> Sat, 07 Jan 2006 12:29:45 -0800 Apple About to Pass Dell: Market Cap Measurement

At @$75 a share with about 843 million shares outstanding, Apple Computer is worth about $63.2 BILLION.

At @$31 a share with about 2,34 billion shares oustanding, Dell is worth about $72.5 BILLION.

Since Dell has traded in the $29 to $33 range in the last 2-3 months and with most analysts listing Dell as DOWNGRADE , it’s pretty safe to presume there will not be intense movement outside of that range in the next few weeks.

Depending on how exciting Apple’s MacWorld Expo’s announcements ...

If Apple hits $87 to $88, it will pass Dell in market cap if Dell continues to trade at @$31.

If Dell trades at the lower end of @$29, Apple trading at @81 can pass up Dell in market cap.

Guess it’s time for someone to whip up a widget ;-)

BTW, Gateway’s market cap is @$1 BILLION, HP @$85 BILLION and MS at around $288 BILLION ... ]]> Thu, 05 Jan 2006 12:37:11 -0800 For those wondering if Apple will feature the Intel chime and the INTEL INSIDE logo?

If you look closely at the end of the new Centrino ads ... Does that blue bar look vaguely familiar?

http://geocities.com/metroxing/Intel2005.mov.zip

It appears that Apple is beginning the Intel takeover from within ... ]]> Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:23:13 -0800 Creative, Inc. seems to be confused how to get out of the conundrum they are in - mainly as the leading Mp3 player for the WMA market ... which means their market share stands at about 5% of the overall portable mp3 marketplace.

They are considering suing Apple for royalties on 'navigation of music on a portable mp3 players.' That sentence is enough to cause a roar of laughter, slaps to the foreheads and brains to explode for a variety of reasons from the patents process 200 years out of date to just general disbelief. Of course, the legal merits are hard to say as the courts could and have ruled in both directions.

But of course, that's why companies have lawyers and will sue each other at the drop of a hat. Unlike some smaller companies who will settle for financial reasons, Apple is large enough to withstand any decision and rich enough to fight this for years.

But then as the "opening gambit" of their lawsuit/royalty process, they go and release a new line of MP3/WMA video players that gives new meaning to the word UNCANNY or as others might deem it - ripoff.

There are few clearer examples (short of a counterfeit factory cranking out Louis Vuitton's) of a violation of the "trade dress" protection laws (as legally defined - "Trade Dress is a distinctive, nonfunctional feature, which distinguishes a merchant's or manufacturer's goods or services from those of another.").

You have to ask yourself - why?

On the verge of suing a competitor for allegedly stealing their navigation system, they go and release a thicker but visually (from the front) a design that clearly copies the hardware and look of the competitors mp3 player?

What kind of strategy is that?

To settle? To "swap" Apple's alledged patent infringment for their trade dress "violation?"

I'm sure Apple is willing to let someone sell something that is visually and from 10 feet away 90% of an iPod ... that sure sounds like Steve Jobs and Apple to me ... bwahahahaha.

That sounds like something lawyers would dream up, this is brilliant, they'll be forced to settle ... of course, if they're wrong and bankrupt Creative, what do they care - they already have billed and been paid.

What does it really say about your business? The only way we can compete is by manipulation and legal manuvering? That the ipod simply cannot be out designed in any aspect so our ONLY recourse is to try and copy it in as many ways possible and then sit back and hope they settle with other legal manueverings that we're attempting?

Why would you name a company CREATIVE then?

Certainly the lawyers apparently running the company are creative but design, manufacturing and marketing - not so much?




]]> Fri, 09 Dec 2005 14:44:40 -0800 Like the FREE IPOD deals, they sound good on the surface but ultimately, you'll pay more than you would with your time and money.

Cable ala carte may have worked 20 years but not now. If you look at the Top 50 cable networks ratings, about 48 of them are owned wholly or partially by Viacom, NBCU, Disney, Fox, Warner, Comcast or Hearst.

What does that mean? ESPN ala carte? $24.99 a month. Why not? There's no rule that says pricing now (about $2 a channel) gets converted to ala carte pricing - just like at a restaurant - you get 30% of the meal for 80% of the cost. But they'll be deals. If you agree to take ALL the other ESPN channels, the bundle deal is $17.99. But wait it gets better - if you take Disney & ABC - that's only another $7.99 a month or you can buy each channel separately for $9.99 a month.

So, two scenarios. We will probably pay $10 more a month to end up with slightly fewer channels or you will pay about $100 to get about 10 cable channels.

This is EXACTLY what happened the last time government decided to mess with the industry - we ended up with cable re-regulation and what happened - monthly rates dropped a little but if you wanted a cable guide - $10. If the service call was your fault - $35. Wiring insurance? $5 a month, etc, etc ... so ultimately we ended up paying essentially the same but anything non TV reception related, we were suddenly paying about 300% more.

I am not defending the cable companies but merely stating what is going to happen in the REAL WORLD. You will not be able to cherry pick 10 channels for $2 a month. You will still get the home shopping channels (As a special thank you, QVC & HSN Free FOREVER!) or the non-English channels that are MUST CARRY local channels.

What will happen is if you want ESPN, MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, E!, Bravo, A&E, etc ... you will pay around $10 to get each channel or you can pay about $15 to get their 10 "sister" channels. We will be right back where we started but the cable companies will make even more money. Want to make a change - that's $10 EVERY TIME. To prevent you dropping out after football season, ESPN will sell you a year starting in August for a set fee or it's $49.99 a month if you sign up in September through December.

Part of the reason the censorsorship groups want this is that they cannot control their own kids and want us to do so and they just think they should speak for us. Just because they don't want to watch certain channels, they want no one else to ... never mind that some people don't want religious channels or preachers who advocate assasinations - that's the braod spectrum of America but of course, anything they don't want - they don't want for the rest of us.

America is the ONLY country where there are 300+ channels. Let's not go and ruin that just because some people don't know how to appreciate other channels. There is literally something intersting, educational, and fun on EVERY channel. You should start watching the other channels and exploring instead of tightly just doing one channel over & over. When you get a newspaper or magazine, you will get articles or sections you do not read - should be getting your money back for those pages you don't read also?

Ala Carte will not work on many levels from the reality of the details (you will pay more for less - mark my words) to it's just a ploy by censorship mavens to the Bell companies trying to mess with cable companies to messing with the only system and country with 300+ channels.

Do NOT let the FCC make your decisions for you. ]]> Fri, 02 Dec 2005 12:00:27 -0800 The media often miscategorizes the Beta vs. VHS debate between Apple & MS but finally in the case of the "non-ipod" dock connector, we have a winner! And the winner is, of course the iPod.

Apparently having run out of things to blame and or pass off as the reason WMA players are selling poorly (never mind the poor interfaces, bad design and not that really PLAYS4SURE thing), it's really been that power plug all along that made you pick the ipod - that is the reason you bought the ipod, right?

So, now the WMA & Microsoft minions are allegedly banding together to build a "universal" dock connector.

Never mind that Apple sold about 25 million of its 35 million ipods when the dock connector changed from model to model or that it's gone from Firewire to Firewire/USB to USB only ... that's GOT to be the ONLY reason for the success of the ipod. Nevermind that only a handful of accessories really require the plug connector (mostly speakers) though of course, the ultimate accessory is that car manufacturers are including it so you can see & control your ipod from the steering wheel or whatever so of course, MS is scared to concede that market since they've been throwing money at that market for years - also without any success ... but, here are MS's main problems:

So far, after a year of PLAYS4SURE - the "universal" software connection that's supposed to create a seamless sea to sea wall-to-wall WMA player extravaganza of consumer "choices" has produced - surprise - dozens of players that do not "play4sure."

So, how long will it take MS to gather & consolidate a couple hundred mp3 manufacturers, auto makers & MS' engineering group into agreeing on a decision/standard? What do you think? A year? Two years? Three? By then, there might be 100 MILLION+ iPods ... so what dock connector do you think car manufacturers will choose if they choose a dock?

The format used by perhaps 100 million devices or "the other one."

Guess which one is VHS and which is really, really Beta ... in the sense it's not really ready for prime time use?

And that's presuming that PLUGS4SURE actually works better than PLAYS4SURE ... Anyone holding their breath?

The other main problem for MS is that there is already a second choice - the 1/8" or 3.5mm output port so basically the first choice is iPod integration and control. The second choice is simply to provide a 1.8/3.5mm plug for external audio sources which would cover 99.98% of the market (I'm sure Sony uses their own proprietary 2.9mm plug :-)

Why would you spend money to put in a THIRD choice? It's one thing to offer a third engine choice, it's another to offer a third audio dock connector choice ... but I'm sure MS will throw $500 million down this hole anyway ... hope the stockholders don't mind ... ]]> Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:47:21 -0800 TiVo is announcing an update to Series2 subscribers that their TiVo ToGo service will now allow conversion to "ipod video" and Sony's PSP.

Some are quick to call this another Fairplay "reverse engineering - Real Networks-like shenanigan."

Here's why Apple has not responded and it's all good news for Apple.

a) iPod video is NOT an actual format. It's MPEG-4, it's HHC.264 - whatever you want to call it. It's a standard format and so far, there seems to be 5 new shareware apps a day to convert the 50 video formats out there to a 320x240 MPEG-4 size to playback on the iPod so the fact that TiVo is offering this feature means they are 51st in line to join the party. There is nothing being reverse-engineered here.

b) Apple gets another $15 million dollars worth of free publicity for the "video ipod."

c) Apple gets to go to the other networks and scare them (a little) ... hey, would you rather we sell your little TV shows for $1.99 or would you rather let them tape it off the air for free?

d) Will this actually cut into Apple itunes sales (even if Apple adds other networks?) Never mind that there are only 1-million actual users of TiVo branded DVR's and that only Series2 users who have a PC, AND TiVo ToGo AND a video ipod AND who are interested in spending two/three hours to convert and import an hour of video ... raise your hands. The answer is no to cutting in sales and yes to selling more video ipods.

e) Even if someone whips up a standalone iPod DVR device (how cool would that be though!) with an ipod connector interface that records in MPEG-4 320x240 - it's still good news for Apple since they'll make money from the connector, the MADE FOR IPOD program and selling you a video iPod ... plus no matter how great your TV reception is, $1.99 at the itunes store will still buy you a better resolution MPEG-4 since they compressed theirs from a digital master and of course, like selling LOST/DESPERATE now - you still have to tape it ahead of time ...

f) Basically, Apple gets more free PR, even more linkage to the cool mindshare of 'portable video,' again - ticking off Archos & Creative that apparently to the media & the general public, ONLY Apple makes a portable video device ... all and all, as if Apple needed any more help to sell more iPods ... ]]> Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:42:20 -0800 Business 2.0 is reporting that a new startup working with all the major record labels will soon be going after the itunes market by selling you a track you can "keep" forever and you can decide on the format you choose (ipod, cell phone, PC, etc ...) ... they reverse-engineered the ipod to get the ipod to accept this format.

Nevermind that Sony is involved in this venture and how poisonous the name is now to digital consumers ... after the summer where they settled a payola scandal for the record label, and a class action lawsuit in which they made up movie reviews, everyone at Sony apparently needs an ethics class or 7.

While on the surface, this seems like formidable competition for the itunes store, if you look beyond the inital thought, you realize it's just sadly inept.

First, the record labels cannot agree on anything so whatever they finally agree will be a camel designed by a commitee under the auspice of the U.N. They will basically end up as it is right now but after spending yet untold millions AND charging it to the artists.

Why? Consumers have had online stores, Mp3 players and digital audio formats BEFORE the ipod and itunes and yet, basically chose to ignore them. Why? Because they were designed by webmasters, marketing people, promotions people, lawyers, their lawyers and even the manufacturer reps handing out specs ... designed because the webmaster wanted to cross it off their list, by marketing people to add more FLASH, by PR to highlight their "most important" artists, by the lawyers on all sides - not sure what they contribute but the'll make sure to in their thoughts just to charge $400 an hour and of course because they are specs ... you'll notice that NONE of these are designed for people or more importantly MUSIC PEOPLE.

The itunes/WMA stores could not be a fairer test economically speaking. The mp3 players are sold in the EXACT same stores and on the INTERNET. The music tracks available at the major music stores sell virtually the EXACT SAME tracks. Yet, one store holds 70% of the market and one player holds 70-90% of the market and market segment of mp3 players.

Who do they blame? Apple marketing ... by marketing, what they are really saying is that us, the CONSUMERS are so STUPID that we are snowed by marketing. Sure, we will buy inexpensive items on a whim and we are subject to marketing but honestly, who can sell 600 million tracks and over 30 MILLION ipods just on marketing? That we are so POWERLESS that a shadow of people dancing are enough for us to shell out $200+ dollars ... Really? By that measure, there would be NO unsuccessful products as long as you ran a few ads a week? Really?

There must be something more. Yes, ipods are fashionable and ipod ads are nicely done but the success of the ipod is really quite simple - it delivers what it promises. It promises you can listen to a huge amount of music easily. Yes, it has a lot of add-ons like podcasts, video, contacts etc ... but the core reason is a very simple proposition. Do you like to listen to music?

And the key it delivers is CONVENIENCE. Convenience (along with the right pricing) trumps ALL. Yes, trumps all. Laserdiscs are actually a higher video fidelity than DVD's but they lost to VHS because of convenience. Or even why DVD trumped VHS - yes, the cost of the players helped but if you had to rewind DVD's - would you care the fidelity was higher than VHS? Not really. You would think - why pay $300 plus a new format when I still have to rewind but being able to jump anywhere? Analysts and early adopters/tech geeks always think specs will carry the day - if so, people would be buying a lot more $800 graphics cards. It's not specs or features that the "mass market" craves, it's CONVENIENCE. Why do you eat a particular fast food resturant? Because it's on the right side of the street? Why does Starbucks open two stores across the street from each other? CONVENIENCE.

itunes delivers convenience. You click on the BUY button. It DOWNLOADS it AUTOMATICALLY, when you plug in your ipod, it loads it for you.

That's why people do not need competiting stores - what is simpler than that?

(Proof - how's business at Rhapsody? The tracks you can almost also play on ipods?)

Now, the itunes store is not perfect for every person in every scenario you can envision but if you want a track and you don't want the CD, or wait for the CD or go to the store and hope they have the CD - itunes is there. Is there a tradeoff? Of course, but a CD is also compressed audio but that's another argument.

So, what does Navio promise? A DIFFERENT DRM music format than the Apple one (fairplay m4p) - the music buying market is comprised of people who want to own CD's and in many aspects, loath DRM and want their MP3 at a higher fidelity (320 kpbs VBR) over what itunes can deliver. These people know how to convert their CD's and probably also know how to download free music - so would they buy a track with a different DRM? Unlikely - why would they?

The promise they can keep the track forever? Honestly - how compelling is that? People cannot keep track of their CD's, housekeys and banks accounts when they move - they're going to expend so much energy on a $.99 track? Not to mention, that format ALREADY EXISTS - it's called a CD!

And while people skirt over the fact you can burn your itunes track to a CD and thus eliminating the DRM, my guess is the RECORD LABEL's DRM track is NOT going to offer you this option since they are letting you download to a multitude of formats - so again, why wouldn't you just the CD if you love the song so much you want it on your ipod, phone & computer?

Another selling point is that you cannot "lose" this track - you really trust the multitude of record labels to keep track of you & your music FOREVER? That you completely trust SONYBMG music to hold onto your account, even if inactive for 11 months as you serve in Afghanistan - that they will promise to keep you in their system forever & ever? Can you imagine calling tech support to retrieve YOU LIGHT UP MY LIFE?

Or is it easier just to buy a CD and if you lose it, just buy another CD?

Does this make owning an ipod, PC or mobile phone EASIER or more WORK for the average user (the only audience left since the high end user of digtial music is not goinbg for this)?

So, why would you do it? How much can you save on a track? The record labels are NOT going to sell you a "forever" track for LESS than an ipod track - same as a Sprint music track - $2.50? Remember, you will own it FOREVER - don't you think they'll sell it to you for $9.99 a track but if you're an artist and you're 22 years old now, you wouldn't want to give up royalties for that long unless you get a huge lump sum now, right? So, IN DA CLUB will cost you $39.99?

But can you transmit it to your hologram in 2017? Or are you better off buying it for $.99 and backing up your ipod and worry about 2017 when it rolls around? Your kid's photos , yes but long will you actually care about GOLD DIGGER?

The really sad thing is that the record labels and perhaps Sony most of all has spent nearly $100 million on "copy protection" that does not work on Macs or Linux and now is malware and being recalled ... ALL charged to the artists? Why about just lowering the cost of CD's $2 dollars? Too radical?
]]> Fri, 18 Nov 2005 11:13:07 -0800 While we have no privilieged info, it's puzzling why people would not believe the rumors - it seems very logical.

First, Steve Jobs admited they'd been building a x86 version of EVERYTHING Apple has been working on in the past 4-5 years so they were virtually ready to go.

They simply had to come out and explain everything publically so all the other developers could start working on tweaking or completely re-writing their software code and of course, prepare us for the coming change so people could make informed decisions - buy a Mac now for the software you already own or be on the leading edge at the transition for all the good & the bad.

Add one other factor - over the holidays, it's gift buying season (for self or for others) and not the time to explain the transition to 'average' shoppers. After using a PC lo these many years, they just want something that works. It matters little what chip is inside to iMac and iBook buyers - can I surf the net? do photos, video, write some short notes, print and email?

It also makes perfect sense to announce a target date and deliver BEFORE that day arrives.

Some people also wonder why the announcement after holidays/December?

Nevermind that MacWorld has been running for 20+ years in SF - almost always in January (one year, it was moved to early Spring) and it works because there a PR/tech news lull after the holidays ... and now, it slots in there with CES.

Another reason January works because unlike people working in a garage, you can't just announce a product before the holidays and have it in the stores in mid-November. To manufactur and ship it - unless it's real small, light and costly - you generally want to go by ship adding another month to your timetable ... so when Apple wants to announce something for the holidays, they might use their summer platforms like MacWorld Tokyo/Paris or like the recent Photo show but when they want a clean slate PR (new year! new toys!) after the frenzy of the holidays and not to squeeze it into the artifical year-end buying season, January gives them and everyone a whole new year to target, ship and sell.
]]> Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:26:27 -0800 Microsoft’s current feelings about Apple bring to mind the line the Joker utters in the first BATMAN movie, “Where does he get such wonderful toys?!”

As others have asked - is MS scared of Apple? In a financial sense - no. MS still throws off cash like water on a wet dog and in that aspect; MS can go on wasting cash on whatever strikes their fancy.

But Apple (and Google) has grabbed the buzz away from them as the innovator of technology and they are desperately trying to wrestle that crown & buzz back ... and failing. Part of it is the bureaucracy but mostly because they are built to sell to corporations, governments and agencies and don't really understand consumers. Selling to that group is relatively easy in a business sense – they announce openly what they want and you know who is making the buying decisions - MS is great at surrounding those decision makers and helping them make their decisions.

Consumers confound them.

Consumers confound them in more than one aspect.

Why? Because we have no real idea of what we want and even if you ask us – we say things we don’t really mean. “Yes, I want low-fat food!” But when it comes to actually buying it? Or “Yes, I’d like to watch TV on my PC,” but when push comes to shove, what it really means is I’ll pay exactly nothing extra for that feature – hence why the PC companies have managed to sell a couple million $599 home media PC machines bit not many at $2,500.

And back to point one, because Microsoft has built a business on the MOST selling “features” at the LOWEST PRICE to corporations, governments and agencies – the problem is that set of thinking doesn’t carry over to every purchase consumers make – otherwise we’d all be driving small 4-door sedans or as DELL found out, people do not buy 50” plasma TV screens that way – yes, we do look at features and price, of course but we weigh a couple hundred other factors.

How does Microsoft’s culture stifle them? Because they design everything BACKWARDS. You just have to look at their PC Media Center design. They designed a Digital Rights Management (DRM) scheme and went to the studios and record labels for approval and more importantly, asked them if they were willing to pay MS a few pennies/dimes or dollars on each piece of digital media sold (not to mention the MS servers and encoding software they would be buying). Once THEY signed off, MS designed the PC Media Center around that and NOT around the consumer.

Apple is the complete opposite. Just as the ipod was not the first on the market, it was easily the most logical. What do you need an mp3 player to do? Be able to load songs easily and be able to navigate through my selections in any many ways as I can think of (by CD, by artist, by genre or by my own playlist). And of course, minor things like volume control, skipping forward/backwards, etc ... really, not a radical concept by any measure yet why have ALL the others failed? Because like MS, those companies made a living on selling things on specs (graphic cards, PC’s, etc ...) – to them, the most important component of an mp3 player was not the consumer but at what price could they assemble a flash/hard drive, a screen and some chips – the consumer was the LAST thing they thought of.

Hence why there are still mp3 players on the market today where the song or album name gets truncated but the encoding rate is in BOLD or one where the battery falls out or where it takes 5 menu levels to “lock” the player so jostling it doesn’t turn it off or where you cannot load two songs with the same name on one playlist ... why, because these are mini drives that play music and not the ipod which is a music device that just happens to be a drive base device. That is the key difference. Seems simple but so far has eluded a couple dozen companies other than Apple.

And in that sense, MS is scared of Apple because the rules Grandpa Steve Ballmer & Bill Gates taught them NO LONGER applies. “If you have a competitor, you just surround them (extend, embrace and absorb) but on the internet and in today’s’ world, you cannot control manufacturing and distribution anymore. The old rules DO NOT WORK anymore. Look at their strategy for mp3’s – we’ll pay for technology and marketing and as long as you use WMA and our DRM, we’ll help you set up stores around the globe – we’re offering “choice!” but unlike PC’s of 15 years ago, the internet means that MS cannot cut off access as they could before. Clicking to go halfway around the world is just as easy as clicking to go down the street.

That’s why MS is scared because outside of the PC business/ government market – they just don’t have the smarts, the tools, the know-how or the culture to compete. Can they change – sure, anything is possible. Will they? Hard to say – while they have thrown many tens of billions at the outside markets, they have failed in everything from watch OSes to car OSes to cell phones to MSN to MSN search to the Media Center and even the Xbox is about $2 billion short of breaking even – and through it all, Windows, Office & the Server division continues to deliver about a BILLION dollars per month into the bank so maybe instead of trying to be Bill Gates at a rave, maybe they should just be Bill Gates at GovernmentTech Expo. ]]> Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:55:50 -0800 While the record industry is astonishing in its greed and complete misunderstanding of supply and demand - what's more puzzling is why no one questions the record industry tactics, rumor-mongering and policies? First, as with everything else they do, it's behind the scenes and off-the-record so you have to piece together what they are really saying.

We have two major thrusts a) Digital music is being held back because Apple's DRM is closed so "we're not giving consumers a choice."

If Apple holds up to 95% of the HDD based portable music player market and over 65% of the flash based (after 3 months), haven't consumers CLEARLY made a choice? Isn't Apple doing its part and clearly the 'other' choice in the market is not much of a choice? If anything, this is the fairest test of them all. Everybody essentially sells the same tracks. No one holds a distribution monopoly (especially now with the Internet) so someone in Butte, Montana or New York City has EXACTLY the same access to players and to digital tracks so the choice is competely fair and up to the consumer. And don't attribute it to marketing - if we equated amount spent on marketing with success, we'd be drinking New Coke, clear Pepsi and lining up to see Van Helsing. Consumers are not that dumb but that's what some competitors attribute the iPod success, it's just marketing! (which apprently stands for - we don't know why we can't compete - it must be marketing).

What is their fascination with giving consumers choice? It's to take back leverage from Apple so they can raise prices. It's not able conusmer choice, it's about record label leverage ... to (surprise!) raise prices.

After years of WMA online stores wandering in circles, Apple comes and after a few years - 500 million tracks and as the latest example, the Japan store opened to a million track week after Sony had struggled to sell a couple hundred thousand tracks the ENTIRE YEAR! So, what is the record labels response?

B) We have to raise prices "to build the business."

What kind of economic thinking is that? Yes, thank you for providing a solution to 70% of digital music download buyers - that's nice but what would really do the trick is to raise prices! That will cause the rest of the population to join in - the ONLY reason they were holding out was that prices were too low.

What?

So, this way when we sell mobile tracks at $3 a pop, it won't seem as obvious?

Why would they think like this? Because they don't care about growing the digital business. They simply want to maximize short term revenue and raise prices so high that people will go back to buying CD's. With CD's, not only do they make more money, they make more money they can hide better. Look at the recent payola scandal in New York City. After all this time, they still believe that forcing radio stations to play certain songs is the best way to market - after all, what do they really care - the ARTIST pays for it - not the label. That's right, all "promotional" costs are charged to the artist - with digital tracks, everything is clear and out in the open. Everyone can get an accounting at anytime. U2 can check how many copies of PRIDE they've sold on the itunes music store with just a few clicks - in the real world? "Oh, that's in the warehouse or we're processing returns - we can have a number for you in 7 weeks." That's why they are willing to spend MILLIONS on DRM they know is breakable! In EVERY article when questioned, they admit it can be broken and yet, they continue to pay for it - why? Because the artist pays for it - so what do they care? Most of these CD copy protection schemes can be broken by pressing the SHIFT key or merely by using a Mac normally. Imagine if some security company sold you something just as "secure?" Yes, if you push hard on the door, it will open wide but as long as you only lean against the door, it's pretty much lock! For this, for you, only $30 million! - what Sony reportedly paid for their copy protection that could be defeated with a marker.

And related to that is their desire to build the subscription business. Since it's like radio, the record labels pay less royalties since it's not a sold track - they don't really care that you can record the streams and make Mp3's. They are getting a monthly check from Real, Nap & Yahoo. They basically want you to spent hundreds of hours each month arranging and re-arranging tracks to LISTEN to and if you like it enough you might buy the digital track (same price as itunes), or you'll want the CD anyway. Again, it's a great situation for them. This way, you might be paying them 2-3 times for the same track.

The record labels are a business - they can be greedy and short sighted and that's their perogative but let's NOT just let them coast on quarter-truths, rumor-mongering and treating us like idiots - we need to ask them point blank - what the hell?

]]> Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:36:11 -0700 This isn't an argument about legality or ethics but merely a statement of fact that Microsoft's OS development is almost always about 5 years behind Apple and/or the Mac throughout the age of personal computing.

This isn't even an argument about whether it's a good thing or a bad thing - it's merely a statement of fact.

As the savvy computer user age drops to single digits, there is clearly a mass of people who are less than knowledgeable about the history of personal computers.

The Windows OS started out about 5 years behind the Mac and has yet to catch up once again. In fact, the reason for the weak and leaky XP OS can be directly traced to the ebb point of the Mac OS - in the 1990's when Apple and the Mac OS was weak and leaky but now, surprise, the "robust" Vista will appear a little over 5 YEARS after OSX ... well, it's only a surprise to those without any idea of the history of the PC.

There are many places which can give you all the details - both fun and in scholarly approach but here's a summary.

99% of the "forward" progress of the personal computer can be attributed directly or indirectly to Apple or the Mac. Note that I am saying PERSONAL COMPUTING. Some people are under the mistake impression regarding Xerox's PARC's role. Xerox PARC was a think tank back in the days when corporations would sometimes spew out so much cash they could afford to fund PURE RESEARCH. They hoped that it would fund a new profitable line but it wasn't their primary goal and in many cases, the companies had no idea what to make of the stuff their brainiacs came up with ... AT&T (Bell Labs) had no real interest in doing much with transistors nor did Xerox PARC with a bevy of early computer-related concepts and ideas (Ethernet, mouse, etc ...). They willing & in a way un-knowingly launched a new industry. You also have to consider that the concept of a "personal computer" was literally SCIENCE FICTION. Even if you could build such a thing - you would need to build a massive corporation and who in their right mind mind would buy one for their HOME? Are you mad? So, they were more than willing to let people trapse through and see what they were up to. If they let you in to look around - it's NOT stealing and just as importantly, Apple was the first to implement it for people to use (Xerox's mouse was not about moving all over the screen and offering you control over the computer).

So, anyway - back to the main story ...

To repeat, 99% of what you take for granted appeared on the Mac first and in some cases - taking up to FIVE years later to appear on the PC.

All of the major upgrades to the Windows OS appearing about 5 years after the "based-on" Mac version from Windows 3.1 (the first useable Windows version) to Windows 95 to Windows 98 to XP and now to Longhorn. So, no matter whether you think MS is 'stealing', borrowing, inspired by or simply a long list of coincidences, the fact is without the Mac, the PC OS & Windows OS would still literally be using a Longhorn as transportation.*

* Okay, I don't a longhorn can actually pull a wagon but you get the meaning :-)

And if that's not enough for you, nearly all of he major software & hardware developments in the last 20+ years can be attributed to Mac ...

Sound, Graphics and able to use a Mouse as a controller device.

Laser printing and color laser printing.

Desktop publishing (Aldus PageMaker) and design in general.

Fonts and typefaces you could see on the screen.

MacPaint which led to Photoshop (which did NOT appear on the PC until years later and was almost un-useable on the PC until the mid 1990's).

MacDraw which led to FreeHand/Illustrator and thousands of object graphic apps.

Mac has had a built in networking capabilities (for printing and such) and ethernet since the late 1980's. Yes, more than 15 years ago, Mac users could send a file to another country to be printed from their desktop.

And for gamers, Mac users were playing NETWORKED games (including first-person-shooters) since that time including the precursor to Doom (Wolfenstein). (Still don't believe me? Halo on the XBox was a Mac game until MS bought Bungie).

And for geeks, Apple's attempt in the mid 1990's at launching an object oriented programming language and concept has really bore fruit in the open source age now ... I'm not claiming that Apple invented open source but that by launching and trying to create an object oriented environment, that opened up more possibilities that object/collaborative programming was not some pie-in-the-sky thinking ...

Mosiac which lead to Netscape. (of course, the internet has been around forever but until the Mac got involved, it was just an arpanet ...)

It's no real coincidence that once development stopped on Netscape, IE has stopped in place and now that Apple with Safari and Mozilla with Firefox/Camino is blazing forward, MS might be able to develop that hard to fathom code for tabbed browsing.

And that's just the cream of the crop. We could go all day and all night and point out that without the Mac, the PC would be making beep noises only (and that's if you add a sound card), in green mono typeface and forcing people to type RUN ... for "normal" computer users, the question is - isn't that precisely why I turned on the computer, or do I just want a really loud fan to heat my room?

So, you can hate the Mac, Steve Jobs and Apple but unless you like a text based OS with no sound or even a computer that's "personal," you have to bow before the Mac, Apple, Steve Jobs and all that the Mac has brought you so far ...

There's plenty more in the last 5 years to make your life easier that's not even covered but it's very telling that the Windows OS has essentially been stagnant since Windows 98 to XP - the EXACT same time period minus 5 years that Apple was stagnant in their transition from OS6 to OS8.

And now that Apple has 5 years under the belt with OSX, here comes MS's Longhorn/Vista - if it comes out next year, it'll be a little late but the plan has worked so far. ]]> Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:02:28 -0700