Yearly Archives: 2010

Apple is Open… and So Is Android and Windows and…

Posted on by

This is ridiculous. Open isn’t what you think it means. Open means anyone can use it and expand upon it and modify it.

Apple makes open systems, folks. Last time I checked I can write apps for iPhone, iPad and Mac OS X. I can do the same thing for the web, for Windows, for Android and Chrome OS, among other platforms. Even Kindle is open. From that perspective, they are all open systems.

So Google let’s me muck around with the source code. So what? How many people really do that?

We used to say Microsoft is open because people can make whatever hardware they want. Well, they all made the same hardware and no one could see the source code. So how open is that?

Google’s different, since you can play with source code. And look at what that’s doing for developers, creating a device-by-device decision rather than supporting the platform. Will it be on more devices? In time it could. Could there be more Android devices than Apple devices? Of course that’s possible. But it’s still not an issue of open. That’s a licensing decision.

Google and Microsoft believe in specialization. They make the software, someone else makes the hardware. Apple’s fundamental belief is that consumer markets require the whole stack. They must be able to rely on the device, the monitor, the software, the whole enchilada.

That doesn’t make Apple closed. It makes Apple different.

Why the Recall Should Improve Your Faith in Toyota

Posted on by

UPDATE: I’m completely wrong. I had a friend who had worked in the industry straighten me out. It turns out “voluntary” is a misnomer. It’s only voluntary because the government says recall or we’ll make you and the “voluntary” part is for PR purposes. What a shame. What my friend said to me:

You’re giving Toyota too much credit.  Coming from working in and growing up with the auto industry my entire life, I will tell you that there is no such thing as a voluntary recall.  It’s always one of those gun-to-the-head things, believe me. Don’t want to burst your bubble or anything. The gov’t probably gave them the option to voluntarily recall (for PR’s sake) or they would be forced into it.  There’s a whole process.  I worked in safety restraints testing, which is strictly regulated, tested, and monitored for potential recalls (and has lots of lawsuits because no one wants to admit that they weren’t wearing their seatbelt).  Having the option to ‘volunteer’ to recall is also based on the severity.  And when you volunteer, you also get more flexibility on how you manage it, to minimize your costs, etc.  No one wants the gov’t in their business.  Plus no one wants to do an expensive recall unless they absolutely have to.

I also could tell you a thing or two about Japanese quality, having worked for both Japanese-owned automotive suppliers and American-owned automotive suppliers.  It’s all a facade, really.  A lot of cover ups and saving face happens. Bottom line, I will give to you is that the Japanese are much better at ‘managing their customers’ especially at the dealership level.  The American cars get a worse rep because they don’t deal with a problem and fix it right away.  The Japanese automakers might have a lot of problems, too, but they fix it right the first time so the customer is immediately satisfied and doesn’t let issues fester.  But this is a good practice in any industry.  Some get it and some don’t.

Before the recall — before I thought Toyota had done the right thing — I had mixed feelings about my current Toyota vehicle. As mentioned, I had owned multiple Toyota cars and trucks before my latest RAV4 purchase. And while I did a little research, I didn’t think twice about buying a Toyota. They always got the little things (and big ones) right.

The RAV4 felt different to me. The airflow was odd, the way the spare tire worked was weird, the way the car started was strange. For the first time I’m not getting better than listed gas mileage with a Toyota. I’m way under. There were a bunch of little things that made me question the car’s quality.

I’m not saying I’d never buy a Toyota again, and the recall won’t dominate my decision. But next time I’ll do more research and drive more cars to see which one I like best.

—–

ORIGINAL: If you missed it, Toyota recalled 2.3 million cars, trucks and SUVs, announced last week. There is concern that the acceleration pedal could stick. This follows a recall regarding floor mats that could slide and get lodged under the break pedal. Both recalls were voluntary. Toyota also announced that they stopped production of these vehicles until the problem can be resolved. This pedal problem is believed to have caused 19 deaths here in the U.S.

So I’m listening to the radio this morning on the way to the gym and hearing that Toyota is taking a huge hit because of this, that people are uncertain about buying Toyota cars now.

I can understand how that would be an initial reaction. After all people trust their car to keep them safe and not go all HAL on them.

But, folks, this is foolish.

Toyota just voluntarily recalled 2.3 million U.S. automobiles over 19 deaths. The tobacco industry lives with those deaths every millisecond. If anything, it reconfirmed my belief in Toyota. After all they could have swept this under the rug and ignored the problem. Instead they will incur hundreds of millions of dollars in recall costs, production costs and sales — not to mention the likely hit to its reputation.

If anything, I have more faith in Toyota doing the right thing in the future.

—–

Disclosure: My wife and I own a Toyota RAV4 that is not in the recall. The two of us have been driving a combined 36 years, have owned three Toyotas, including the RAV4, plus six other cars including three Hondas, a Nissan and two Pontiacs.

Of iPad, Grandmothers and Cross Country Flights

Posted on by

I happened to be on vacation when the iPad was announced. I was in Florida for a week of R&R. Being this far from home (3000 miles from Portland, OR) and leaving my laptop at home afforded me two unique perspectives on the device.

The first perspective had to do with my 83 year old grandmother. For years when we came down she would ask if she should get a computer. Finally last year we bought her one. I thought she’d use it for two main things: Skype to see her great grand daughters and a browser to read the blog I write about my girls. The computer, when I arrived last week, was sitting exactly where I left it the year before. Even though I wrote her detailed instructions and practiced with her, she’s still afraid of it.

And honestly I can’t blame her. When I turned it on all these dialog boxes popped up, upgrade notices, app upgrades and the like. Even I felt overwhelmed.

I think, in the not-too-distant future, the iPad will be perfect for her. Initially it’d be a great device for seeing the web site. And later, as Apple adds a camera, it’ll be perfect for video conferencing. It’s simple to use: no right mouse clicks, no dialog boxes popping up at her, none of the things that makes computers so scary.

The second realization occurred on my way home. We had a 5+ hour flight home and I usually pack multiple books, mp3 player, etc. I’ve also been working on both product and business plans. The ability to conveniently carry all the things I need in one system that could go the whole trip is extremely exciting to me. No guessing what I’ll be in the mood for 3 hours in, I’d just have it! Feel like reading? It’s there. Have a product idea? I can write it down. Burned out? I can watch a movie or play a game.

I’m very excited. I’ve wanted a device like this for a decade, seeing it as a great way to read books and PDF documents. I thought about Kindle but it doesn’t handle PDF well and… well, I didn’t know why.

Now I do. Kindle felt like a compromise. The iPad, based on spec and videos, is so much closer to the right device. I’ll be in line early when it is released.

—-

A side note: Clayton Christensen writes about disruptive and sustaining technologies. When a new product enters an existing market, often times that new product feels like a toy to the incumbents. Compared to laptops — for people who are in the tech business — the iPad is a toy. But to those not in the market — many consumers who are either frustrated with the experience of PCs or those who haven’t bought one — the new product is extremely appealing. And over time that new product gets more and more powerful. This is how DEC, IBM and the like felt about Microsoft, Apple and Intel in the beginning, too.

Gazing Into a Smartphone Crystal Ball: 2010 Edition

Posted on by

There is one thing clear in the business of product marketing and that’s that those that figure out who their customers are and cater to them win. This is no different in the mobile world than it is anywhere else. The future winners in the smartphone world will have laser focus on their value statements.

A Mobile History

Once upon a time, there was an upstart company named Palm. Jeff Hawkins, one of Palm’s founders and its creative lead, was unhappy with the various mobile systems that came before, having worked on some of them and been observer of others. Jeff felt there had to be a better way and a better purpose.

His belief: that the purpose of this device is to organize his personal information. He spent months walking around with a carved piece of wood in his pocket. Periodically, he’d pull it out of his shirt pocket to check his calendar, to do list, perform a calculation, or look up a phone number. Of course, he didn’t really do any of those things as it was a piece of wood, but he pretended. And through this process refined the device, operating system and product features which became the first massive success in mobile computing.

After Jeff and the original crew left to form Handspring, Palm Computing invariably lost it’s way. Instead of continuing to advance the greatest personal organizer in the history of organizers, Palm played feature war with Microsoft’s Pocket PC (later Windows Mobile) operating system, confusing it’s customers and eventually falling in such disrepair it licensed the competing operating system.

Flashbacks

After 20 years of innovation and advancement, fits and starts, handheld computing is mainstream. These modern devices, combining yesterday’s handhelds, today’s cell phones, and add-on software, will sell in excess of 100 million devices this year alone. And while Apple isn’t the sales leader, they clearly are the thought leaders with more than two billion app downloads.

But it’s not Apple’s applications that have made it so successful. It’s Apple’s laser focus on an entertainment device that makes it so spectacularly successful. World-class browsing? Check. Elegant, simple device? Check. Cameras, video? Check. Music? Duh. Oh… and lots and lots of games.

But Apple wasn’t the first to make mobile take off here in the Western hemisphere. Arguably, RIM with their ubiquitous BlackBerry devices has been even more successful. Figuring out how to penetrate the IT department through control and security, figuring out how to make business people and administrators everywhere salivate like Pavlov’s dog every time the red light blinks at them (new email!), RIM, too, was laser focused.

And the rest? Well, not so much. Microsoft and Nokia were busy creating devices that included everything but the kitchen sink. Palm, too, disintegrated into this world. Who could really blame them? Customers were pulling them in all directions and, with the only history of technology in the modern era being PCs, clearly the licensed operating system was the only way to go.

A Look Ahead

It’s too early to quit, but it’s not too early to predict some winners. Assuming they stay focused on their core constituencies, Apple and RIM will be clear winners. Both have carved out a large but prominent niche in this new mobile world.

Symbian (the operating system some of Nokia’s smartphones), Microsoft’s Windows Mobile and Google’s Android are bigger questions. They cater to a niche — hardware companies that don’t want to write their own operating systems. The problem, of course, is that consumers buy combined devices, hardware and software, and to cater to a wider net of potential hardware licensees, these operating systems must expand the breadth of capabilities. And customers have shown that, at least in the mobile world, they don’t want products that don’t do everything well.

For this reason, Android and Symbian have a leg up. Since they are open source, it allows the hardware vendors to mix and match features with their target niches. While this is a major problem for software developers who need consistency across devices, it gives the hardware vendors the ability to focus on their own niches, assuming they can define one.

The big question is, though, where are the additional niches? Is there room for more than two players in this space and, if so, what customer are the others focused on? Does Palm fit into this picture with their proprietary hardware and software? Is an integrated web/mobile device, as Palm is basically pitching it, a real opportunity and do customer think of themselves this way?

While no one knows for sure who the winners will be, you can bet that whomever it is has a clearer focus on their customer than the others.

Of powerOne and Differentiators

Posted on by

Out with 2009, in with 2010. I’ve barely had time to stop and enjoy the fact that January, 2010, marks 13 years for Infinity Softworks. So to celebrate, we released a brand new web site and a brand new product, powerOne for iPhone and iPod Touch. And we also “released” a brand new focus: When you aren’t a programmer and you need a specialized calculator, what do you do? You now have an app for that: powerOne!

I’ll be honest. The past few years have been a struggle. And this last year — falling prices, crazy device sales and increased competition — has been particularly taxing. But it’s forced me to really think and one question has been circulating through my head: why do people buy our products? I think we’ve been asking this question for years without fully understanding the answer.

When we started out there were so many things different about powerOne than any other: the template format made seeing and entering data on a smartphone so much easier, many of the included calculations are designed in terminology for the market (i.e., mortgages) versus terminology for the technical (i.e., TVM), you can add-on calculations, you can create calculator templates, and you can share the results.

It took me 12+ years but it’s clear to me now why people buy powerOne: it’s programmable. You can create your own — as simple as entering a formula in a spreadsheet cell — or copy one that’s already made at our community site.

That’s its differentiator: creation. The rest are just facilitators  — amplifiers, if you will — to that differentiator.

There are lots of products that can calculate — there must be 2,000 calculators in the App Store alone — and there are lots of products that send results and use your industry’s vernacular. But there are few that use customizability to combine all these elements together.

It’s funny how this happens. Differentiation is one of those funny things. I always thought I knew. But until we got into the hyper-competitive world of iPhone applications and had our brains beat in for a year, I didn’t know what I didn’t know. Well, now I do. And when it comes to product and brand building, I’ll never lose site of that differentiator again.

“As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. This is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

– Donald Rumsfeld
former Dept of Defense chairman
George W. Bush Administration