Apparently I’m going to keep pounding on this point because I think it is really important.

Jim Dalrymple wrote yesterday, “The PC industry has spent an incredible amount of time and money trying to convince us that computers (netbooks or ultrabooks) are what we really want to use. The problem is, that’s not true.”

M.G. Siegler wrote on the topic, too. “The problem PC makers face (but most don’t seem to realize) is that using a computer is not a natural thing,” he wrote:

Much more natural is holding something in your hands and touching it to manipulate what’s on the screen. … The keyboard itself is unnatural. It’s something that kids have to take some time to learn because the letters are completely out of order.

Yes, keyboards are unnatural. I agree. And talking is natural. I agree with that, too. And touch! Touch is natural also.

But you know what else is natural? Using a freaking pen! Using a pen (or pencil or crayon) is actually one of the stages of childhood development, right there with touching, feeling and talking.

Can we have a freaking pen that works decent with an iPad, please???

Interesting stats courtesy of Tim Bray:

$350 for Apple · They’re obviously the best at turning a profit on selling phones. As Asymco reports, Apple gets about $650 per iPhone, has a margin around 55%, and thus makes a gross profit of $350 or so apiece.

$590 for AT&T · I went and dug through their 2011 Q3 numbers: They claimed a smartphone ARPU (dollars per customer per month) of $83.46 and reported a 29.6% gross margin; which over two years (a reasonable lifetime for a phone), by my math comes to just under $600.

(Dear businesspeople: I know the difference between “gross profit” and real money, and there are probably lots of places in the preceding two paragraphs where you might want to quibble with the accounting. But stay with me a minute.)

$12 for App Writers · Back to Asymco; Horace calculated the total amount that the average user spends for apps on the average iOS device. Everyone thinks that iOS is the place to go to monetize apps. Yep, twelve bucks per device.

Yes, that $12 per device is pretty bad but I think much of this is a bi-product of what is available for the devices now. There are very few categories in which I have to spend money in order to get a high-quality app. And if you add in the fact that many families have multiple devices — and that everyone in a family gets the app for one price — then the price is actually higher. Let’s say the typical family has three devices — two iPhones and an iPad — then we are really talking $36 per family. Not great but better. Okay, that really stinks if you figure that Angry Birds has probably taken $4 per device all by themselves. (Just kidding. Probably more like $1.)

The reality is, for most of us there are only, as Tim put it, table scraps available in selling apps in App Stores. But that is the reality and we as developers need to figure out how to make that work for us.

Hello, Google Play: Google launches sweeping revamp of app, book, music, and video stores

Smart move by Google, I think, to rebrand its content store. It doesn’t make sense to call it the Android Store when it includes all markets, including Chrome books, Android and Google TV. I assume the content can be run on Mac and Windows, too, or at least books, music and videos can.

But “Play”? For music and videos it makes sense to me. But for apps and books? Play implies that only games and entertainment apps are important. Does Google Play sell books for learning? How about productivity apps? Can I find work-related stuff in Google Play? And is that the logical place to look for these things?