Posts Tagged ‘Apple’

Apple’s Trackpad: The new multi-touch mouse

Thursday, August 5th, 2010 by Apurav Agrawal

RT ceoSteveJobs @Twitter: “Floppy disks, trackballs, serial ports, dial-up modems… All gone. Now it’s time to kill the mouse.”

The recent tweet from Steve Jobs pretty much sums up the story. In the years I’ve been using computers, monitors have grown thinner and more vivid in their picture displays, and the technology that runs them has grown faster and less expensive. But two things have remained relatively constant: my keyboard and mouse.

Yet that’s about to change. I’m pretty certain I will never own a traditional mouse again, at least when I use an Apple computer. Instead I will own a trackpad — a Magic Trackpad.

The new gadget, which was announced by Apple last week, and works only with the company’s computers, looks more like a large silver tile than a mouse. But when it’s properly connected, it affords a traditional desktop computer a multitouch mouse, just like those available in most Apple laptops today.

The trackpad works like an ordinary laptop trackpad, where you slide your fingers to control the cursor on the screen. Once you become comfortable with it, you can take full advantage of its features, which include two-finger scroll on Web pages, pinch and zoom on images in Apple’s Preview application and a number of other multitouch features.

The technology behind the trackpad originates from a company Apple purchased in the late 1990′s, which had designed a similar device for people who suffered from repetitive stress injuries. The idea is that a touch surface would be less taxing on a user’s hands than a traditional mouse.

The trackpad, which costs $70, easily connects to a computer wirelessly though a Bluetooth connection, but requires the latest version of Apple’s operating system, Mac OSX 10.6.4.

Read More on http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC380?mco=MTg1ODA3Njk

Experience is everything!

Thursday, July 8th, 2010 by Roberto Saracco

You have probably seen some of the ads built on iAd from Apple and you might have read comments on various blog about what is nice and what could be better. Anyhow, take a look at one of  them like the one here:


I don’t know about you but I get a completely different feeling and experience from this ad. I get involved, I can interact in ways that suit my interest. It is quite a different experinece from that sort of interaction provided by other ads where what I can do is just click through and be taken to the advertiser home page for more…of the same.

I wonder what the experience would be if it were possibile to merge in the ads, and thus reshape it, my previous experience. A (my) trusted service provider might share some information to the advertiser in such a way that the ads would fit my context. That would bring the experience to a higher level.

A touchy issue…

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010 by Roberto Saracco

The advent of touch interfaces, booming after the iTouch and now being exploited by the iPad, has been seen by users as a new, easy way to interact with content. Actually, most web pages have been designed with the “mouse interaction” in mind. As an example an application would detect a mouse hovering on a button and then got ready to intercept the click. This approach does not work with a touch based interface where when you touch… you click.

Touch is the new way to go...

Touch is the new way to go...

Flash has also been designed having mouse interaction in mind and this may explain the opposition to Flash by Apple, www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/
According to Raju Vegesna, evangelist for Zoho, www.zoho.com/index.html , a company producing a suite of complex on line Web applications:

…the advent of touch-based devices is almost asking the entire Web to change its behaviour from what has been built up over 20 years. This is a big user interface problem for Web applications and means that many will need to be redesigned.

http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/25236/?nlid=2950&a=f
The fact is that the Web, and html, has been designed having a CRT screen and a keyboard/mouse in mind. As new devices, smart materials and new interaction means are being exploited new neutral ways for managing interactions have to be found.
As in many other areas, we have just started. Stay tuned for the Future!

Apple Tablet is coming.

Wednesday, January 27th, 2010 by Mariana Lopes Ribas

Apple is coming up with Apple Tablet. The Beta version has already been tested and here we have a feedback from the tester. How is it like?

“Apple tablet is OLED + back has solar pad for recharging, but (the charger) really doesn’t work quickly. More a gimmick. Verizon+att, wifi yes!

Apple Tablet has thumbpads on each side for mouse gestures, reads fingerprint for security. Up to 5 profiles by fingerprint for family.

Yes, there are 2cameras: one in front and one in back (or it may be one with some double lens) so you record yourself and in front of you.

I can tell u the battery life is great in ebook reading mode but not great when on wifi or playing games. 2-3hrs.

Yes, the apple tablet is running an iphone os flavor with ability to have multiple apps running at same time (ie pandora, browser).

The price will be $599, $699 and $799 depending on size and memory in apple tablet. Also, wireless keyboard + monitor connection for TV.

Also, the apple tablet is really amazing for newspapers. Video conferencing is super stable, but nothing new.

The best part of the apple tablet as beta user has been the built in HDTV tuner and pvr, and the chess game.

Yes, it’s true… I’ve been beta testing the Apple tablet for the past two weeks and it’s amazing!”

Really seems to be an useful tool. But despite all its functionality we should concern about all the critics related to the solar panel. Would it be efficient enough???

Talking about the “Future of Retail” why not imagine this device as a way for people to interact with the retail stores in a sense that they will be able to reach more information and be updated to the latest news of the market enlarging business opportunities?!

Apple’s Next Streaming Video Strategy is entangled with our Digital Life

Tuesday, January 26th, 2010 by Gianni Fettarappa

Apple is building a real always-connected, share-everything future, with personal broadcasting feature. All the bricks are just ready and Apple is building a huge data center in North Carolina with high bandwidth enabling ubiquitous streaming video. Apple’s devices have a video camera embedded and now even live video-streaming functionality have been approved and are available for download in the App Store.
It is clear Apple wants to enter the consumer video market: the company’s new personal-media strategy is to improve iTunes into a streaming video service.

The goal for Apple is: personal broadcasting, or sharing personal experiences. YouTube and Flip are just the key players in this market, and for Apple the only possibility is to make personal media deliverable and accessible anytime, anywhere through its devices. In the next decade, we will see video cameras with live-streaming software built into new generation iPhones, iPods and touchscreen tablets; everything will be integrated in iTunes, that Apple wants to use like a social experience with real-time sharing services.

All these steps are the Apple path towards the creation of an always-connected, share-everything future.
So if users have live-video capability in a phone, they can use it everywhere and broadcast live from anywhere and this huge creation of personal content will be easy to share and tag opening up a new world of collecting individual’s digital life.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

Sunday, January 24th, 2010 by Mattia Mialich

During the past years, Apple included Google in its business integrating Google search into Safari, and Google Maps on the iPhone. And it made sense. Now Google is attempting to enter every kind of business and in particular it sells Nexus One, directly competing with not only the iPhone, but with all their own mobile phone hardware vendors. To face Google’s domination in the thing (and this means OS layer, browser layer, mobile platform, and many other applications), rumors talk about a possible deal between Apple and Microsoft.
As you know, Microsoft has tried for years to gain a strong presence in the online search business. In the early 2008 Microsoft tried to buy Yahoo, with a $47.5 billion acquisition bid. After this, the two companies just continued stealing each other’s traffic, without taking it from Google. In order to compete more effectively with Google, which dominates the online-search business with 67.3 percent of search traffic (Yahoo! and MSN/Windows Live/Bing Search just 14.4 and 9.9 percent respectively, according last Nielsen Co. survey), few days ago Microsoft and Yahoo! presented a partnership plan to the European Commission and now the talk passes to the European antitrust authorities that will decide within a month if the deal is in line with the competitive norms, or not.
According to some articles over the net, Apple and Microsoft made a deal. Even if it’s not new such a cooperation between the two old-age rivals (Microsoft builds Mac versions of its Office suite of business programs, such as Word), it’s undeniable that it sounds paradoxal. The two competitors, in fact, are going to replace Google Mobile, the actual default search provider for the iPhone, with Bing (it already has its own application on the App Store that allows voice search, location finder, maps access and more), as well as the Safari browser. Being the default search engine on the iPhone obviously carries benefits for Google, which gets revenue from ads placed alongside its search results, sharing a part of that with Apple.
Most of people who want a Mac don’t like Microsoft products. In addition, users see Google as the gold standard in search. So, is get-a-mac generation gonna appreciate this contamination? Do customers accept embedding of products they didn’t request? Analysts say that this agreement could bring Apple more risk than reward.
Personally, I see this nothing more than “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, a survey strategy adopted by an impressive top predator who can become a prey.

Application Store?

Tuesday, July 21st, 2009 by Emanuel Di Matteo

“The application store has certainly been the highlight of the key mobile players’ strategies this year, but Google claims stores do not represent the future of the industry.” – http://www.rethink-wireless.com/?article_id=1691

Seems that everybody is doing the same but the same, in most cases, doesn’t reflect the best opportunity. As I wrote in another post, mobile business may not be only about Apple Store and how to copy their biz model.

Whilst all the massive players are riding into the same direction Google has two battle fronts going on. The first one is the Android platform and the other is the Chrome OS, basing all the services on the still unborn operational system browser thereby converging every service into the cloud.

In times where cloud computing has shown its major weakness on the Twitter hacking case, more important than the details is the fact that Google has more than one strategy. There is a common statement in the business area that says that if you bet all your objectives on a single target the chances to succeed are inversely proportional than betting on multiple targets.

Ongoing projects in the market:

1)    T-MOBILE hands together with HTC and Google developing the Android handset and deploying it in the market – HTCTouch3 (Magic). This new handset will focus on the user personalization and not just preloading innumerous applications.

2)    Microsoft, T-MOBILE and Vodafone working on separate application stores.
The basic strategies of TELECOM companies are: strong partnership with phone’s manufacturers and development of application stores or platforms where the companies can leverage on this opportunity. Software as a service, cloud computing.

I wonder if TELECOM companies alternatively could, for example, try these opportunities:

1)    How to use the next generation network as a seed? Is it feasible, for example, to develop specific encrypted data packets (transportation OSI level) that can flow inside the network with a priority mode, bypassing all the ordinary traffic? That would be ideal for financial operations including mobile payment.

2)    Build strong partnerships with companies that work with RFID on logistics, NFC on mobile payment and digital photography camera manufacturers, and use our sales force capillarity to spread new connectivity services thereby joining forces to offer the customer a more personalized solution in a revenue sharing biz model.

In the end it is just like genetics: mixing ideas (genes) in order to have a healthier ($) specie (company).

Newspapers, Internet and iTunes…

Friday, June 19th, 2009 by Roberto Saracco

I read an interesting paper on the impact of low transaction cost on the newspaper business. The article looks at micropayments, does not talk about low transaction cost but these are the essential prerequisite for micropayments. You can’t pay one cent if the transaction cost for the payment is greater.

The low transaction cost, as pointed out in other blogs, is at the core of business ecosystems. I feel it is worth reading this article, authored by Alan Kohler published on June 17th on the Business Spectator web site.

   ”The incredible blooming of iPhone applications and the creation, from nowhere in just a couple of years, of a booming global “iPhone app” cottage industry, has demonstrated the biggest tragedy of the internet: the failure to find a viable micropayments system.

    In fact I would go as far as to say this failure is the reason journalism as we know it and traditional media companies are in danger of dying.
    Newspapers and magazines in print are sold for ‘micropayments’ at newsstands and newsagents – $1 to $10 – but you can’t do that online. Therefore publishers are stuck with expensive, long-term credit card subscriptions or giving the content away.
    It is part of a wider problem, or benefit, of the internet, depending on how you look at it.
    When Tim Berners-Lee was developing the World Wide Web during the 1980s it was a scientific enterprise, not a commercial one. Berners-Lee is himself a computer scientist and at the time he was working at the European Organisation of Nuclear Research (CERN). (Now he mostly just collects lifetime achievement awards).
    The first web browser, Mosaic, was developed in 1993 by a team at the National Centre for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois, led by Marc Andreeseen, who went on to be founder of Netscape.
    It’s hard to believe now, but until 1991, commercial enterprise on the internet was strictly prohibited. The scientists and assorted geeks who were developing it at the time were deeply concerned that it would be taken over by the capitalists. Even when it was opened up a bit in 1991, the rules forbade “extensive use for private or personal business”.
    Which is all well and good, and the result is a wonderful, enduring culture of democracy with all sorts of very successful sites either happily providing a public service – such as Wikipedia and Craig’s List – or struggling to make money –Facebook, YouTube.
    But in a way the early internet pioneers inadvertently did a deal with the devil: Visa and Mastercard.
    The credit card companies became the default billing system for the internet, but their fees are too high for anything cheaper than a book.
    Jeff Bezos launched amazon.com in 1995 and this has become one of the world’s greatest e-commerce enterprises, now branching out into Kindle book reading devices and cloud computing. It works because books costing $25 or more per item can be billed via credit cards; single newspapers and magazines cannot because the Visa and Mastercard fees are too high.
    There was actually a good model for combining a public data service with a billing system but Tim Berners-Lee and the rest of the scientists working on the World Wide Web during the 1980s ignored it – it was Minitel, launched in 1982 in France by the state-owned entity that later became France Telecom.
    Minitel has been mercilessly sneered at by internet geeks, but it’s still going. It was going to be closed down in March this year, but because its telephone directory is accessed more than a million times a month in France, they have had to keep it going.
    Minitel is connected to the phone company’s billing system, so micropayments are perfectly feasible.
    The other major attempt to provide small payments online has been PayPal, which was started in 2000 and acquired by eBay in 2002.
    PayPal currently operates about 75 million active accounts around the world and provides the cash for most auction sites like eBay, but there have been a lot of problems with it. There are several anti-PayPal websites because of its poor customer service (eg, www.paypalsucks.com), and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission last year found that it was not the most secure or most efficient method of payment for online transactions.
    But Apple has now shown how to do it – with iTunes.
    It works with credit cards, but as a micropayments billing system overlaid on the credit card network. It began with $1.69 (US99c) payments for individual songs, and now Apple uses the same system for iPhone apps which cost between $1.19 and as much as $5.99. Many are free, most are less than $2.
    iPhone applications have become an extraordinary phenomenon. Thousands of new ones are launched every week, developed by everyone from global corporations to individuals fuelled by pizzas, scratching out a living in their bedrooms developing games.
    This week I bought Sudoku ($1.19) and Scrabble ($5.99) so now my every waking minute is spent fiddling with my iPhone. It is seductively easy to buy applications; I’ve seen some people with hundreds of the things on their phones.
    The simplicity and success of this system is an indictment and an embarrassment for the newspaper industry.
    Newspapers and magazines have been selling for the same price as iPhone apps for two hundreds years, making many families rich and employing a lot of people.
    When the internet came along they suddenly turned into rabbits in the headlights, unable to think of what to do and incapable of cooperating with each other. So in the absence of a strategy, they simply didn’t charge at all.
    As a result, journalism is now free. Sudoku, however, costs $1.19. ”

The market is just about Apple’s business model? It is becoming to be boring.

Thursday, June 11th, 2009 by Emanuel Di Matteo

Every human being in this planet that works with business, either researching or hands on, discuss about Apple successful business model all the time.

What Apple did is not new despite it is disruptive. Biz ecosystems are not new. There are many ways to differ this sort of model and MIT, for example, call it Value Chain Dynamics.

Just to bridge the knowledge gap, Microsoft works the same way with their “MS Windows Compatible” brand. Intel managed to build an “Intel based platform” gathering the game industry and forcing IBM to create a new concept “The multimedia PC”. CISCO with their worldwide network of partners certifying them on their solutions. So, what we are experiencing now is again, not new, people are just talking too much about it.

Every biz ecosystem grows around a seed. Undoubtedly.  But more than that seems that NO business ecosystem grows without a powerful brand behind. Apple began to create their success when they launched in the market the colorful iMacs and the iPods therefore creating the culture that what they do they are the best, in every detail. Microsoft before Google was THE IT COMPANY in the world. Everybody wanted to work for them. CISCO has the best connectivity hardware, perceived by the customer and their network of supporters. Intel is well known for their fast processors so, every player aforementioned has their strengths and they are in a strategic position now because they created a culture around them, years ago. Keywords: creating a culture.

Create a culture is not easy and many times you cannot achieve the results in a short period time. How to begin? Inside the company or outside? Trying to cut deals with partners, putting some effort on building a case outside or construct the goals within your own colleagues?

Example: How TELECOM companies can create a market culture around the QR codes?  A) Talking to business partners, try to find some case relating to a feasible client. B) Contact the marketing area and begin to introduce the codes on every advertisement. Use the company phone manufacturer’s relationship and embed the QR code reading application on every phone.

The question is already answered.

Game Theory: A meaningful tool to create and enhance an Ecosystem

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009 by Rodrigo Penalva

It’s interesting the relationship made by Antonio in his post with the concept of ecosystem and the Game Theory. A successful ecosystem happens when one engages different and complementary groups towards a common goal, using sided network effects produced by these complementary groups to increase the power of the ecosystem.
The first big challenge is to create an expectation in these groups by transmitting them a message that one is looking for a win-win result, looking for cooperation instead of competition as in Game Theory. One example was when Apple launched a new SDK, communicating that its effort was to facilitate developers’ work.
However, to transmit the message that you are looking for a win-win result is quite difficult because normally, the group or just a few players of the group that you are trying to engage have conflicting goals. Therefore, it becomes a tough job to maintain the image that you are interested in developing an ecosystem; it is tough to reach a unanimous solution and actions among players of the ecosystem. One example could be the Google’s image nowadays. A lot of people are starting to become skeptics about how Google manage the customers’ personal information: Google is failing to transmit the message that it just uses the customers’ information in anonymous way, and maybe for this reason, Google is losing its credibility.
The second challenge is to fulfill the expectation created. The company needs to create innovative solutions that fit in these groups’ needs. Apple Store is a good example.  First, it created a simple way to buy music where it’s possible to buy just one song and not the entire CD. In addition, the price of each song becomes standardized.
Besides, innovation is not just something that we wake up someday and say: “Today I want to create a disruptive innovation.” Google and Apple, two reference companies when we talk about a portfolio of innovative products, really have innovation embedded in their values. Google’s 20% rule is an example. The company allows its engineers to spend 20% of their working time on corporate projects of their choice.