Out of the Box

Each week, The WIRE tracks my contributions to other publications and Web sites.

CNet
No Flash flood in iPad Avoidance, 4/28
In my Volume Up blog, I shared one of the findings from NPD’s recent iPad perceptions and attitudes study (PDF), in which the lack of Adobe Flash was not a leading inhibitor  among those who said they were not interested in the iPhone. The day after, Steve Jobs published his Thoughts on Flash essay, reinforcing the reasons why Apple’s mobile products will continue to ban both Flash and Flash cross-compilers.

Engadget
Switched On: Revamps in Motion, 4/27
In my weekly Switched On column, I discussed the approach RIM is taking toward evolving the BlackBerry OS, contrasting it to the overhauls that Microsoft and Palm opted for. Given the news this week that HP will be acquiring Palm, the handset company’s gamble was not sustainable given its resources, but was a valuable asset to HP. Given RIM’s position in the marketplace, an evolutionary approach that keeps it competitive without risking much may be a winning strategy.

Foxnews.com
Gadgets and Games 4/30
I was a guest on Clayton Morris’s Gadgets and Games, where we discussed many of the big stories of the week with fellow guests Andy Ihnatko and Seth Porges. These included the war of words between Adobe and Apple, HP’s acquisition of Palm, and the release of the Sony Dash, which we had on the program.

NPD Group Blog
Tunnels to the Television, 4/26
My first post at the NPD Group Blog this week was a response to my colleague Paul Gagnon’s post on the DisplaySearch blog regarding the future of Hulu and the television. In the post, I discussed the increase NPD has seen in networked content devices that stream music and video around a home network and across the Internet.

E-Reader Distribution Deals Kindle Sales Beyond a Nook, 4/28
This post discussed the implications of the broadening distribution of e-readers with the Nook landing at Best Buy and the Kindle landing at Target. My colleague Steve Baker had an insightful follow-up.

If you’re asking whether Apple implemented multitasking in iPhone 4.0 (and you’re not a developer), then you’re asking the wrong question. Multitasking headlined the seven “tentpoles” that made up the major new features of iPhone OS 4.0. Apple is bringing the benefits of multitasking through a clever mix of new system features that extend the benefits of multitasking that Apple pursued with push notifications.

Covering such major bases as background location tracking and extending background music playback from the iPod app to Internet services such as Pandora, there are now very few multitasking needs that won’t be met with Apple’s approach that, according to the company, preserves the keys of security – an approach that Apple maintains will preserve the keys of security, simplicity, performance and battery life.

The task switching in iPhone 4.0 complement other changes that used to require a seemingly endless series of swipes to get at information. These include a unified inbox and folders for grouping apps. (It would be great if the app store let you designate an app upon downloading). indeed, these should even free up more screen real estate for another new feature – custom wallpapers beyond the lock screen.

In the Q&A following the announcement, Apple was asked about widgets, a feature available on the Mac and on Android, but not on the iPhone. Apple seemed open to implementation at some future time, particularly with the iPad and took a step toward more lock screen functionality with music playback controls. All in all, the update should go a long way toward removing many user interface inefficiencies that Apple had begun to attack in the platform, as well as make using the iPhone a smoother and less frustrating experience on a daily basis. But since at least some of these features – especially the headlining multitasking – have been available from major competitors, it begs the question whether iPhone OS 4.0 is enough to beat back not only the imrovements of the core Android operating system, but what others are building on top of it.

The iPhone was really something of a talking dog. It was so amazing that Apple had brought such functionality to something that was so omnipresent that it was relatively easy to forgive the cramped interface and incessant swiping that sometimes seemed required to get things done. In a form of geek noblesse oblige, advanced users accepted these limitations understanding that it was part of the platform’s overall gestalt that brought new users into the smartphone ecosystem.

But you’ll find less of that feeling of compromise with the iPad. Yes, technically the iPad is very similar to a large iPod touch. But it is also an unbound iPod touch – unbound by the constraints of screen size, limited battery life, cramped keyboard, and a user interface that lacks some of the efficiencly boosters Apple has now implemented.

As I noted in a recent Laptop Magazine article, I put the iPad closer to a notebook on the smartphone-notebook continuum in terms of functionality and usage scenarios. And yet, the iPad is not a netbook, nor do I think it aspires to be one even though at least some of the tasks — most notably, e-mail and Web access — can be managed pretty well on it. But a BlackBerry handles e-mail pretty well, too. Furthermore, I think it would be the wrong path for Apple to try to make the iPad more netbook-like; this would work to the detriment of the device experience and would of course risk cannibalizing Apple’s Mac business. So far, the lack of multitasking is even less of an issue on the iPad than on the iPhone as you’re far more likely to be engaged with the device as you use it, and there is less need to have geolocation apps running in the background. Lack of Flash is being addressed by video providers — perhaps even Hulu — working on their own iPad apps.

Read the rest of this entry »

Two of the most acute editorial minds in the business used this final week before the introduction of the iPad to weigh in on its impact. Lance Ulanoff says that the iPad, while successful, won’t be a game changer whereas Mike Elgan characterizes the iPad as a paradigm shift and the dawn of the era of “MPG” (Multitouch, Physics, Gestures) computing.

in fact, the perspectives are not irreconcilable. Lance discusses the iPad as a product standing on its own merits whereas Mike discusses it more as a symbol of what the future of computing could hold. There is a certain approachability and natural quality about “MPG” that I believe helped the iPhone broaden the smartphone market even before apps came on the scene. However, that doesn’t mean that the difference is necessarily enough to force a new device class into consumers’ hands, particularly when there is significant and well-understood quasi-competition such as netbooks..

Indeed, Mike characterizes Microsoft’s Surface table as an “MPG” device, but price size and other factors have prevented Surface from cracking the mass market or even the consumer market. That said, I believe Microsoft is working on ways to make at least part of Surface available on smaller LCDs

I found it an interesting coincidence that, in a recent Laptop Magazine piece, fellow analysts Tim Bajarin, Roger Kay, and Michael Gartenberg – all long-time Apple watchers – agreed with me that first year estimates for the iPad are in the five million unit range. As I noted in that article, it’s an auspicious start, but doesn’t necessarily mean that the iPad will displace anything or becoming so much of a need-to-have that it becomes firmly established as the elusive “fourth screen.”

Few people know that I had a cameo appearance in one of the live reports covering the launch of the iPad. The reporter sitting next to me recorded my loud cheer when Apple showed off the keyboard dock. I have been calling for dock and Bluetooth input support for the iPhone and iPod touch for years. It certainly makes sense to introduce this functionality on a larger device, particularly one for which Apple is developing a version of iWork, and hopefully it will trickle down to Apple’s handhelds.

Now that we’ve seen the first Apple accessories for the iPad, here are some third-party products that would complement Apple’s slate in descending order of practicality and potential:

1. Headrest strap. One of the iPad’s less obvious opportunities is in the vehicle, particularly as a rear-seat video system that could serve as a 21st Century successor to the portable DVD player that has seen so much use in vehicles.This accessory could function similarly to those portable DVD cases that can wrap around a headrest – simple, inexpensive and functional.
2. Clamshell enclosure. This one is the most fascinating to me. Essentially, such a product would turn the iPad into the equivalent of the detachable tablet that is part of the Lenovo U10, which was certainly the product that received the most buzz at CES among computing devices, if not all devices. The Always Innovating TouchBook has a clamshell keyboard add-on for $100, and it adds battery life to boot. It would also be great if this product provided a way to swivel the iPad from landscape to portrait mode, but that could be challenging.
3. Refrigerator mount/dock. How many concept and high-tech refrigerators have you seen with LCDs that don’t do much beyond serving as a digital picture frame. This idea is also inspired by the Always innovating Touch Book, which has a magnetic back for affixing to kitchen appliances. But it also draws from the Audiovox audio and video message boards that included a 7” digital picture frame and a long wire intended to go over the top and behind the refrigerator to an outlet that can power and charge the screen. The iPad could do a better job at providing all the great functionality of the iPod touch in the kitchen.

So, what do you say, Griffin? Logitech? Belkin? Kensington? Audiovox?

Over at Technologizer, Harry McCracken has a great post comparing some of the early skepticism around the iPad to that of the iPhone; it was a topic that came up in the TUAW Talkcast that I participated in last night. Personally, while I certainly remember some skepticism regarding the lack of a physical keyboard or 3G (the latter ultimately addressed) in the original iPhone, I remember the overall reaction as far more positive than that for the iPad. Most people were impressed by the iPhone, but turned off by its pricing whereas the iPad pricing has been perceived as quite reasonable or perhaps even aggressive.

But is it? Over at The NPD Group Blog, I’ve provided my take on its value versus standalone electronics, but let’s look at more directly competitive products. The answer is yes if you compare it to Tablet PCs or Apple’s notebooks, maybe if you compare it to netbooks, and not so much when you compare it to some of the other large tablets introduced by startups in the past year, at least on the face value of hardware.

Take, for example, the embattled Joojoo by Fusion Garage, which also intends to debut at $499. It has a 12” capacitive touchscreen as opposed to the iPad’s 9.7” screen, and it can handle Flash and Hulu, albeit with only half the battery life of the iPad. Then there’s Always Innovating’s Touch Pad with an 8.9” touchscreen and a keyboard attachment that turns it into a functional, albeit non-Windows-based, netbook. Like the iPad, it boasts ten hours of battery life and costs just $299 or $399 with the keyboard.

Neither of these products blow away the iPad in terms of absolute pricing or value, but remember that they are from small startups with no brand and are producing limited volumes compared with the millions of units that the iPad will likely ship in 2010. The iPad’s price is a breakthrough judged against the fictional rumors that preceded it, rumors that may have been based on features and added cost it did not have. Not to take anything away from the engineering that went into offering the iPad at its price, but it’s pretty easy to hit a bullseye when the rest of the world is giving you the side of a barn on which to paint it.

While they clearly add value to Apple’s products, it doesn’t appear as though Apple is too enamored of the emerging category of devices that use Wi-Fi to imbue products with capabilities they were never designed to include. Examples include Novatel Wireless’s MiFi (and Sprint’s 4G Overdrive by Sierra Wireless), the Tivit product for serving free over-the-air mobile digital television to Wi-Fi-capable devices, and the AirStash SD card-based server-in-a-stick.

Take the oldest of these, the MiFi, which helped pioneer the category. It’s become somewhat of an in-joke among iPhone users that the MiFi is the best way to address poor AT&T cellular coverage. It is a great accessory for iPod touches and MacBooks, particularly given that Apple doesn’t offer integrated 3G on its notebooks. Yet, you won’t find them at the Apple Store even though I’m sure Sprint or Verizon would be happy to have the Apple Store sales machine pumping them out to affluent customers. Perhaps it comes down to a contractual agreement with AT&T that Apple can’t offer products by rival carriers, but I doubt it.

Tivit is an even more interesting example. It would appear to be a great companion particularly for the new iPad, turning it into a large-screen mobile television perfect for, say, cars while avoiding taxing of the AT&T network. But it also stands to cannibalize Apple’s iTunes TV download business and, unlike MiFi, requires client software. I’m sure the iPhone and iPod touch are high on the target client list; we’ll see if the software passes Apple’s approval process.

This got me thinking about Apple’s continued reluctance to put Adobe Flash on its iPhone OS-powered devices, including the iPad, where its absence challenges the credibility of Apple’s claim that the iPad provides a better Web experience than a notebook. What if someone created a device, or an app for a device such as the MiFi, that would transcode Flash on the fly, similar to the way the Skyfire browser for Windows Mobile works. Would Apple block it, assuming it could? It could be some developer’s covered wagon ride to Apple’s touted gold rush.

Since my last Switched On column postulating that the rumored Apple tablet could be more of an Apple TV successor than an iPod touch with a glandular problem, I’ve heard some fantastic unpublished rumors about the device from a pretty credible source — at least one of which I believe. It’s easy to say that at $599 or more that the Apple tablet is a nonstarter but let’s remember that the iPod started at $399 and the iPhone launched at $599. But the Apple tablet could be… could be…

…just a rumor. Of it could well exist in prototype form and for whatever reason Apple could decide not to ship it. It’s happened before.

The CrunchPad, which I predicted could not be sold for $200 and has now seen its predicted price swell to netbook range, had received a lot of attention as an Apple tablet alternative, but if you’re primarily interested in surfing the Web and are willing to shell out that much, it may be worth looking into Always innovating’s Touch Book, which I’ve written about previously.

Its screen is smaller than the CrunchPad’s. But with its add-on keyboard, open source operating system, and unorthodox hardware, it’s the Chumby of netbooks, and I like its “convertible” approach more than those of Tablet PCs where the screen twists and folds over the keyboard, leaving a fat tablet. Since it must house a battery in its screen for independent tablet operation, the Touch Book’s lid is a bit thick as well, but I think it could be the stronger niche offering if its software can carry the day.