That’s pretty disappointing. I’ve always liked webOS. I had high hopes for the TouchPad. But it’s clear now that if HP does something great with webOS, it will not be this device.
I just don’t get why you even bother releasing “meh” at this point? I can only assume HP doesn’t think it’s “meh”, but they are still human beings. They can still look at an iPad 2 and then look at the TouchPad and see there is a clear difference.
I understand the need to get something out there to get developers developing, but I have a hard time believing “meh” is going to get them excited either. It’s not like people are saying the lack of apps is the only problem (though it is definitely a big problem).
I wonder how many people would buy an iPad 1 over any other tablet on the market (not named iPad 2) right now? I bet almost everyone would.
And that should say all you need to know about the specs race. There is no specs race. The only race that exists is the one for a distant second place.
But only in a limited way, Jon Rubinstein tells This is my next.
This is interesting in that it would be a step away from what has been a “let’s be more like Apple” strategy. Well, unless you count 1990s Apple.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a bad move. It’s just different.
Apple doesn’t license out for a number of reasons. But one big one I imagine is the simple fear that it would cheapen the brand — even if they got the best partners in the world. Or at the very least, the fear that it could in some way cheapen the brand. Or hamper the ecosystem. When you’re not in total control, well, you’re not in total control.
But HP has a problem right now in that webOS is far behind iOS, Android, and perhaps even WP7 in terms of reach. The fastest way to build that up would be through licensing to OEM partners.
But if that’s the main reason, that is absolutely a mistake.
Hopefully HP just feels like webOS would benefit from outside help and they’d love to see others’ takes on what they could do with it. But that’s a bit idealistic. It almost always comes down to a business decision on some level.
And for that reason alone, I dont’ have a good feeling about this.
The author here smartly looks back at some of the initial buzz surrounding Google Buzz to see what it may mean in terms of today’s buzz for Google+.
My initial Buzz post is one of the examples, as I stated the line (which was also my title), “If Google Wave is the future, Google Buzz is the present.”
And while the author gives me credit for a “healthy dose of skepticism” as well, looking over that post, I think a lot of what I wrote was pretty dead-on from a skepticism perspective. There was potential, but I felt like Google would screw it up.
Google+ is already much better than Google Buzz ever was. That’s not to say they won’t mess it up this time as well, it’s just to say that it will be harder to mess up in such a way because the foundation seems much stronger.
While Buzz intrigued me a bit at first, within a month (after actually using it quite a bit) I realized what Buzz should have been (but sadly, wasn’t): a location-first mobile service. It was pretty much dead to me from that point on.
Looking back, when I said that “if Google Wave is the future, Google Buzz is the present”, perhaps I was just being prescient. Google Wave, now dead, is clearly not going to be the future. As such, Buzz was never the present.
So Google formally unveiled Google+ today, their don’t-call-it-a-social-network social network. I only played around with it for a few minutes last week, but it looks good. And I do mean it actually looks good, which is surprising from Google.
And now it’s time for some horn-tooting. In December of last year, we were all over this still-developing story. And it was surprising last week to find out just how dead-on we were seven months prior to its launch.
Also true. Google did toy around with this name before naming the button +1 and the network Google+ (which is still a bit confusing). Sergey Brin was involved early on, but in recent months has been working on other top-secret projects, I’m told. Instead, it was Larry Page who was actually more involved leading up to release.
There is (will be when it’s approved) an iPhone app. The network when tied together is more similar to Facebook than some people were predicting. And yes, groups are a huge part of Google+ — though they’re now called “Circles” and not “Loops”.
Also mentioned in that post is that we had heard Facebook caught wind of Circles/Loops and went into “lockdown” to create the new Facebook Groups last summer. This we believe to also be true.
Richard Kerris, HP’s VP of developer relations (and a former Apple executive) goes further:
"I don’t see why we would. Just because McDonald’s sells a billion hamburgers, doesn’t mean we want to go into that business if we’re a restaurant. We have a better solution with WebOS. Let’s go after the RIMs and the Androids. We have a strong play there: a better UI that’s more consistent."
Author Austin Carr makes the case that HP is shifting towards a model much more akin to Apple’s “control everything” flavor.
I know you've been carrying a MacBook Air since they were refreshed last year. I'm thinking about replacing my MacBook Pro (13") with a new MacBook Air next month. Would you recommend the 13" MacBook Air over the 11"?
In my mind, it all depends on battery life. Right now, the 13” Air gets much better battery life than the 11”. With the new models, perhaps Apple will close the gap a bit. But if not, I would recommend the 13”. The 11” is insanely portable, but so is the 13”, and I’d take the battery life (plus slightly faster processor) any day.
Our source indicated that Google could be working with multiple carriers and multiple OEMs on their own “exclusive” Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich) halo devices, and that they may all launch around the same time.
I know you are a Mac guy. I just bought a Macbook Pro. What would you suggest to be must have softwares for a first time Mac user?
Chrome, Twitter for Mac, Reeder for Mac, Gabble (if you use Yammer), Wallet, Boxcar for Mac, Fantastical, Carousel (if you use Instagram), ImageXY, Dropbox, Wallpaper Wizard — those are some of my favorite third party apps right now on the Mac.
Long story short, Skype’s management team sure seem like greedy assholes.
It’s one thing to have the odd options-that-aren’t-really-options clause (which may actually be a good thing in limited cases). It’s another to invoke the clause by firing employees after your liquidity event, right before the deal closes.
After the Skype deal was announced, everyone seemed concerned that Microsoft was going to run the service into the ground. Now I’m not so sure that the Skype management themselves won’t be the ones to do it.
Second, “What exactly has Carol Bartz even tried do while CEO of Yahoo?”
Her goal, as far as I can tell, has only been to improve Yahoo’s bottom line to bolster the company with Wall Street and make them a more attractive acquisition target. She’s not doing that by building new products or pushing new initiatives, she’s doing that the easier way: by slashing and burning.
She seems to think she’s trimming the fat — and to some extent she is — but at the same time, she’s been trimming Yahoo’s soul as well.
Everyone is now pissed off and calling for Bartz’s head because her strategy hasn’t paid off — at all. Wall Street still doesn’t love Yahoo, and it doesn’t look like any would-be acquirers do either. And consumers don’t love Yahoo because it seems like they haven’t done anything worth talking about in years. And they haven’t.
It’s hard to build great new products when someone has a knife in your side.
Here we go. This bidding war is sure to be fun. Google bidding for the right to protect themselves defensively. Apple bidding for the right to protect themselves offensively. RIM bidding for the right not to die entirely when that other business of their’s goes belly-up.
100% agree with everything Evan Williams lays out here.
I rarely type full domain names into the URL box anymore. I either Google something, let auto-complete do it, or use a bookmark. And yes, it reminds me of how I never actually type phone numbers or email addresses anymore.
I think that like the phone number keypad on smartphones, the URL box should always exist, but perhaps shouldn’t be the default visual way to bring up a page. As Williams notes, Chrome is moving away from this with the Omnibox which does both search and URL input. It’s something I really wish Apple would copy. Having a URL box and a separate search box is just a waste of space.
But here’s the part I agree with the most:
Too many startups have suffered a stupid name to get the domain that fit.
It’s ridiculous the names we see now that are fully built around what .com is available. That’s one of the lamest/dumbest aspects of the past ten years in the startup space.
If you’re starting a company, you should pick the name that you think best represents that company and your vision. You should not be “Edishesing” because edishesing.com was available.
If your product is good enough, people will find it. The URL should be a secondary concern at best. And thank god we’re getting to the point where it can be.
While I’m clearly all for this idea (and I do continue to believe that Apple will eventually enter this market), I think a prediction of for this year sounds way too aggressive and optimistic.
And wait, did I read “team up with a major OEM”? Yeah…
From my understanding, Apple has been pleasantly surprised by the revamped, $99 Apple TV’s reception. And I think they’re going to explore some more things there first. Things like allowing apps to beam from iPhone/iPad to the Apple TV.
The most interesting thing to me in this article is the following quote:
"blow Netflix and all those other guys away"
Of the online video models out there right now, I do believe that Netflix is the one that most intrigues Apple. And when something intrigues them…
But wait. Netflix is already on the Apple TV and iPads/iPhones/etc. Ah, true! Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
*Caveat being it has been the most popular camera for a long time. Flickr drastically undercounts pictures taken by phones — they estimate they accurately label about 2/3rds of all pictures with cameraphone “under-represented”.
The only thing that will dethrone the iPhone 4? The iPhone 5.
Also, what the hell is up with Android devices? Is it just because no single Android phone is as popular as the iPhone(s) that they are so low on these lists? Or is it something else?
At first, The Melt popped up on my radar when it was unveiled and people immediately began calling it yet another sign of “the bubble” (sign 3,576 for those keeping score at home).
This is the first real story I’ve read about it. I dunno, it sounds like one of the least “bubbly” ideas ever. A store which will work in sync with mobile apps and make money from day one? Sign me up.
If anything, it strikes me as a bit Apple-esque. The software element isn’t tacked on, it’s a part of the experience and vice versa. (SaaS — Software as a Soul.) The hardware just happens to be a grilled cheese restaurant.
Why do you bash PR people and just about everything else? You sourpuss armchair "journalists" couldn't do your job without PR. Sorry you have to weed through some nonsense to get your free tech and then pontificate about how tough it is to deal with PR folks. Go find your own stories if you don't like it and quit your incessant whining. In other words, grow a pair.
Oh, I’m pretty sure I could do my job perfectly fine without PR.
The one key thing not said in John Gruber’s lambasting of the idea that competitors will easily be able to copy Apple is that Apple is constantly moving forward with cutting-edge design and manufacturing processes.
It might be true that if Apple stood absolutely still for the next decade, the rivals could potentially catch up in terms of hardware. (In fact, this seems to be at least partially why Apple is suing Samsung; for copying — or trying to copy — older models of their products). But they’re not going to stand still.
I’ve owned Apple products for roughly a decade now (not that long, I know!). In that entire time, I’ve never once seen a competitor’s product in any of the major fields that has topped the product Apple makes in that field (Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, etc) in terms of aesthetics and build-quality.
No clue if this is true or not, but it is definitely one thing that would get me to upgrade. I’ve been on the fence since my current Air is more than fast enough for everything I need. But my desire to have the latest and greatest of everything presses on…
If you had to chose between a 15" MacBook Pro or a 13" MacBook Air (Both fully loaded). Keep in mind this is your "go-to" computer. Which one do you get?
I would absolutely go with the Air. The Air right now is my “go-to” computer. But keep in mind that I don’t typically need to do heavy image and/or video editing. I basically just use the web browser and some apps (Twitter for Mac, etc).
As long as you don’t need the maximum power that a MBP can provide, I’d defintely go with the Air (but maybe wait for the newer models to come out).
Some app developers and analysts believe Facebook’s underlying motivation is to position itself as an alternative development platform for programmers that now tailor mobile apps specifically for Apple’s iOS operating system or Google Inc.’s Android. Technology blog TechCrunch reported that Facebook is working on a mobile platform dubbed “Project Titan” that was designed to bypass Apple by using the HTML5 technology that works with the iPhone and iPad’s mobile browser, Safari.
Well, they totally fucked up the project name — but at least that was a real Facebook project. “Titan" was the codename for what becomes Messages. "Spartan" is the name they’re looking for here.
Also, I’m still confused by the WSJ’s linking rules. They link to their own stuff, but no one else, even when citing them.