Here's How Facebook Can Beat The Analysts

 

Over the past couple of weeks, stock analysts on the Internet have started writing stories about the demise of Facebook. They all sort of embodied the same ideas and the same principles that state what they believe are the flaws in Facebook. First off, I don't believe that some of the ideas that analysts have been presenting are completely rational or accurate. But also, Facebook still has a chance. I believe that one of the big flaws in the analysts' views were that they almost all agreed that Facebook had little chance to turn the tide in their favor. To me, it makes no sense to think that Facebook doesn't stand  a chance. All Facebook needs is a little coaching from the Internet. We've seen trends like Facebook before, and if history is any indication, that the expert advice from the few of us that contradict the popular opinion, our, being everyone against the analysts, is solid advice.

  One of Facebook's problems is of course getting into mobile. We've all seen the headlines lately that have been blasting Facebook for lacking a good set of mobile applications. That's very true. Facebook clearly needs to make mobile computing a priority for their future. And while Facebook has recently updated their mobile apps for Android and iOS, it still isn't enough. The update was largely insignificant and didn't put them on the path to beating the overall trend that analysts and investors have set. Facebook desperately needs to make mobile a priority. The biggest problem with the mobile versions of Facebook is the user interface. It is painfully slow and is complicated and a pain to use. The experience of using Facebook on a mobile device is terrible. But so is the desktop website. The desktop website needs a makeover too. The user experience overall on Facebook is bad. And so Facebook needs to make the user interface overall, both on the desktop and on mobile devices, a priority.

  Some have claimed that Facebook just needs to improve on selling ads to the user. And that's an easy thing to say, but I don't think that's the case. They're doing just fine with selling ads and there is no clear indication that ad sales will be dramatically slowing down in the coming months. While yes, Facebook isn't as skilled at selling ads as Google is (but frankly, no one can beat Google), Facebook is still performing up to a reasonable standard.

  The biggest issue for Facebook is finding a niche. This was a big realization for me. Facebook needs to find a niche in online services. Is it going to be the core social networking features, like Chat, posting pictures and sharing statuses, or will it be something else? I can point to lots of evidence of how finding a niche can really help prevent a big company from becoming irrelevant in the web era. Myspace hasn't become irrelevant because they found a niche. Myspace is primarily now the place for musicians to gather. It found a niche and stuck to it, and is now seeing the benefit of not becoming a ghost in the web 2.0 era.
On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence that not finding a niche, and doing the opposite, essentially becoming an all-things-for-all-people kind of a service, can hurt the future of a web business by making it irrelevant. I'm afraid that Google is doing that with  Google+. Google isn't content with Google+ being for a niche market, or only serving a small purpose. But they forget that by trying to be an all-things-for-all-people kind of company, they make the risk of becoming irrelevant in the years ahead. Facebook can suffer from a similar fate of that of past web services if they fail to target a niche audience. So far, Facebook has targeted a way too large audience. As a result, we see that their user experience is cluttered and as a result makes it less attractive to users and makes Facebook a less enjoyable experience altogether.

  In their current strategy, Facebook is failing. But it's not too late to change. They can, and should, turn the trend in their favor. They need to make a better user experience overall, and on the mobile platforms, as well as finding a smaller, more dedicated audience (finding a niche), that will help Facebook ultimately stay relevant in the coming years.

Windows 8 Has RTM'd; What's The Bottom Line For Consumers?

   One of the hot topics of tech this year has no doubt been Microsoft's entry into the tablet space by launching Windows 8 and Windows RT, and more recently announcing their Surface tablet. It's been a long journey for Microsoft. After months and months of development, Windows 8 has finally RTM'd, or released to manufacturers. This essentially is a almost completely ready-to-ship version of Windows that OEMs (manufacturers) are now testing out on their hardware before Windows 8 goes on sale to the masses in late October.

   Windows 8 has stirred up a lot of controversy from the start. The controversy over the new Metro UI (I'll call it Metro despite the fact that Microsoft isn't calling it Metro [for legal reasons].) The new Metro UI focused around tablet computers. While the Metro UI has been praised by some, others have been extremely critical of it, saying that the new UI makes Windows no longer Windows as we think of it today.
Microsoft's biggest problem of course was that they should've made Metro a completely separate product, instead of trying to mix it in with the Windows brand. Instead, Microsoft tried to combine the Metro tablet experience with the traditional Windows desktop and behold, Windows 8 is born.

This is the "Metro UI' as Microsoft has been calling it, although they don't call it that anymore. At the heart of the user interface, which involves prominently displayed tiles that feature interactive content that helps you get the most out of your tablet, without ever entering an application.

Now despite the negative opinions of Windows 8, I'll try to explain it rationally. The case to be made for Windows 8 is quite simple, but just requires a little bit of a thorough explanation to ensure that the consumer really knows what they must sacrifice when they purchase a Windows 8 or Windows RT tablet.

1. The Metro UI

 The Metro user interface involves tiles that are capable of displaying personal information that will help you get the most out of the Metro interface. The benefits of these tiles is to display important information from the app on the Metro interface, instead of explicitly visiting the app. This interface was designed for touch enabled computers, like tablets and desktops with touch capabilities. Applications that run on the Metro UI can only be run on the Metro UI. In other words, these apps don't run on the desktop. They run in this interface.

2. Desktop Applications

  Unfortunately, one of the main areas of confusion around Windows 8 is the desktop. With Windows 8, you can have two types of devices. You can have the traditional x86 (Intel or AMD) based Windows 8 computer or tablet. Or you can have an ARM based tablet. The Intel or AMD based devices will run Windows 8, while the ARM based devices will run Windows RT, which is a special version of Windows 8 designed to take advantage of the features of the ARM platform. The important distinction is made around desktop functionality. Windows RT, or ARM based devices, can only run third-party, non Microsoft apps, in the Metro UI. So with Windows RT, third party apps can only run in the Metro environment. With a full Windows 8 device, you can run third party apps on the desktop. 

3. The Desktop Has Been Stripped Down

  One of the things that I find disappointing about Windows 8 is that the desktop has been stripped down. What do I mean by 'stripped down?' At least in my opinion, all the features that I fell in love with in Windows 7, all the UI improvements, such as the Aero visual effects, have been stripped down to bare bones in Windows 8. So if you're someone, that like me, loves the Windows 7 desktop, you'll likely hate the Windows 8 desktop, as Aero has been stripped down and the visuals of the desktop have been changed drastically. 

4. The Benefits of Windows 8, and yes, there's even benefits for desktop users.

  There are benefits to upgrading to Windows 8, even if you're using a desktop. Although primarily, upgrades would be helpful for those with existing Windows tablets. Windows 8 includes dramatically improved boot times, and overall, the OS does indeed feel snappier than Windows 7. And while those aren't the only features worth noting for desktop users, they are the big ones. The biggest benefit of Windows 8 is marketed at potential tablet customers. Those that are interested in tablets will probably receive the most benefit of waiting until Windows 8 releases to purchase a new tablet / laptop-hybrid. 

5. The Benefits of Purchasing a Windows RT Tablet

  So far, I've only spoke about the downsides of Windows RT. But the benefits of Windows RT, that is, choosing to buy an ARM based tablet, may almost outweigh the consequences. The big marketed factor of ARM based devices is efficiency. The architecture of ARM is designed around immensely higher processor efficiency, and therefore, much better battery life. And while that is the concept, we will have to wait and see whether the OEMs deliver on their promise that ARM based devices provide better battery life. 

So what does it mean for me?

  Windows 8 is ultimately centered around a multitouch experience. Windows 8 really shows off the potential of tablets, with showing the promises of the Metro UI. Microsoft has launched its own application store for 'Metro style' applications which should populate with more apps as we near the launch of Windows 8. My recommendation for you is to wait until we see a healthy variety of both RT and Windows 8 based devices to compare the pros and cons of each. Until then, just consider the trade offs of going the Windows 8 route versus the iPad route or the Android route. Each ecosystem has its own pros and cons, so consider each before making a solid decision. Right now, I'd recommend not making a final decision until, at the very least, Windows 8 releases. And if you're a desktop user interested in upgrading, I'd try to discourage you to the best of my abilities because the benefits of Windows 8 are pretty much entirely focused at tablets. This isn't much of an upgrade for desktops, but it sure is a big deal for potential tablet buyers. Windows 8 will be available to consumers on October 26 at the upgrade price of $40 for existing Windows users. 

Apple's and Samsung's ridiculous "copycat" claims

   If you haven't been following the monstrosity that is the Apple vs. Samsung trial, then I'd recommend you catch up. There's a lot to catch up on! This trial highlights the problem with the way the legal system is setup in the United States, as well as the patent system. As I write this article, I'm trying my best to remain impartial, because frankly, both companies have made some ridiculous claims so far and I'm sure they'll continue to make ridiculous claims. Or at least Samsung will continue to after Apple wraps up their side of the story.

 Of course I could write a lengthy post about how the patent system is messed up and yes, the article would be very accurate, but I believe the point has been well made by practically every journalist now, even the Apple apologists. I could also write a lengthy post about how the legal system in the U.S is also messed up, but that point has also been presented quite well. The thing I'm convinced is that both Apple and Samsung have not owned up to what they have done.

 The whole Apple vs. Samsung battle has started more than a year ago now, with Apple suing Samsung over the trade dress of Samsung's Android based smartphones. Essentially, trade dress is the appearance of the phone in both the physical hardware and the UI. And you can't blame Google for the design of Android on Samsung's devices because Samsung puts their own proprietary user interface on their smartphones on top of the Android operating system. So at no point can Samsung nor Apple assign any blame on Google for the alleged trade dress infringement. But the lawsuit quickly evolved and Apple learned some interesting legal tactics that they could take to hurt the Android device manufacturers, and therefore, hurt the Android ecosystem. Apple would quickly start launching patent infringement lawsuits against Android OEMs and this would start Apple's epic war against Google and the Android ecosystem. The Apple versus Samsung trial is certainly the most widely covered one by far and the most interesting to cover.

  My issue with the whole lawsuit is that both Apple and Samsung have performed anti-competitive measures to destroy their opponent. And I'm not just referring to "copying" each other's products. However, the big debate is over whether or not Samsung copied from Apple's design of the iPhone and iPad. This is a huge lawsuit that covers a range of 17 different products including accusations that Samsung was inspired by Apple's iPad, and therefore made the Samsung Galaxy Tab series of tablets (the 7, 7.1 and 10 inch models) as well as the incredibly successful Galaxy S line of devices.

 There have been valid points made by tech pundits that defend both sides, however, the lawsuit isn't black and white. I'm sure that there is a case to be made that Samsung was inspired by Apple, but there's also a point to be made that Apple could be jealous of the success of Samsung and is being inspired by Samsung. I could see a lot of unique features that Samsung developed in their line of phones and tablets that are really unique and that Apple felt inspired enough to mimic the functionality of these unique set of features that Samsung developed. The Samsung S-Pen, which is essentially just a stylus, and the "Tectiles", which are essentially just NFC enabled tags that can be used to perform certain user defined actions.

I will wait with anticipation for Apple to launch their next generation iPhone to see what functionality resembles that of the feature set Samsung originally had in their phones. I would have to imagine that Apple will have been inspired by Samsung to a certain extent to mimic some of the hot features of Samsung's phones. It wouldn't surprise me at all.

I'm sure that Samsung did feel at least partially inspired by Apple to make their own smartphones that would attract existing iPhone lovers. There's no doubt in my mind that Samsung did feel pressure from Apple and decided to target some of the iPhone's features and implement them in their own way, or at least what Samsung would define as "in their own way."

But looking at the big picture, I don't see Apple's case that Samsung mimic'd Apple's iOS bit by bit. Comparing user interfaces on a surface level doesn't make a case for Apple or Samsung. I'm confident that even a typical user wouldn't be confused by the looks and appearances of the iPhone and Samsung's Galaxy S phones. There are at least a few noticeable differences and that unless a consumer is really not that observational, the differences could probably be distinguished and therefore that would diminish the value of Apple's case.

Overall, Apple's case is ridiculous. Being impartial, I believe both sides are not in the clear, and I feel that both companies have engaged in mimicking behavior to a certain degree, but not to a great degree, as Apple claims. But it all comes down to the judge's ruling. My true desire would be for both companies to stop litigating and to start innovating. Unfortunately, both parties have engaged in legal warfare and now there's no way out of it. We'll just have to sit back and watch. And I hope that the judge makes the right call by not declaring either side of the winner. Send both Apple and Samsung home...neither of them deserve to be called the winner.

My rant about paid Android applications

Why is it that Android users tend to spend less (or even none) on their apps? Is it because they're too "cheap" to pay for apps. I tend not to think so. I tend to think that it is simply because the a good portion of the apps (especially on the Android Marketplace) are free. I personally find that there are very few apps on Android that really look compelling that its worth paying for. And many of the paid apps are overpriced pieces of crap that don't work well on most phones (thanks in part to fragmentation) The really high quality Android apps are WAY overpriced. Example: The average price of an Electronics Arts application on Android is $7, and the reviews are typically 3 stars, since they don't function properly on most devices and the actual app itself has poor content for the price. 

Here's some tips to developers and companies trying to get rich off of the Android platform:

1. Design the application to function well on as many devices as possible. (I've explained this already.)

2. Make it worth its price, or drop the price! Add good content, or make the app more affordable. It's that simple!

3. Make sure the content and the application itself are updated fairly frequently. This especially applies to games. If I spend more than $3 on a game or any app, I think I'd like some occasional new levels or bonus content. 

4. Listen to reviews and complaints. They're helpful (well, at least most of them). Many reviews I notice tend to detail the exact problem the reviewer is having with the application. 

5. Ensure good customer service! I can't stress enough the importance of good customer service. That should be the priority of every company and software developer. Unfortunately, most of the time it isn't. So why don't you break the trend?!


 

Reflecting Back to 2011

  It's that time of year again. While many journalists in the technology industry tend to make some ridiculous predictions for the coming year, I have cautiously avoided that route. Since the problem with making predictions is that timing is key, and many times, journalists' predictions tend to be off on timing. At any rate, I have decided to reflect back and review the big technology news and products of 2011.

3DTV (failure!) - Back at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas at the beginning of 2011, the big push of the television manufacturers' was on 3D television displays and 3D content. There are so many things wrong with 3D that I don't even know where to start. There was very little 3D content to begin with, and very few (high quality) movies were produced in 3D. Also, the need for glasses on many of the traditional, non-passive 3D displays, tended to make 3D very much a gimmick, and the fact that the glasses were expensive didn't help it much. Even with the non-passive 3D televisions, in which you didn't need to wear glasses to achieve the effect, didn't perform very well (in terms of 3D playback). The fact that 3D televisions only shipped with one pair of glasses, and the fact that the glasses were expensive didn't entice consumers, and as a result, didn't sell very well.

The invasion of Android tablets - One product we will see more of at CES in 2012 is tablets. In 2011, manufacturers started ramping up production of what they thought of as "iPad alternatives", when in fact, they weren't very much alternatives at all. The user interface on these tablets were terrible, and they didn't have very much applications or content to play with, and the overall hardware experience was poor. But in the later half of 2011, with the launch of Android Ice Cream Sandwich, some newer tablets will actually carry promise. Amazon launched the Amazon Kindle Fire, which is a two hundred dollar tablet running Android, but from the appearance, no one would be able to tell it was running Android. It has a skinned version of Android that grants you access to Amazon's wide variety of e-books, movies, TV shows, music, and applications that you can download for it. With the launch of the Kindle Fire, Amazon has set the standard for what Android tablets need to have. A low price point, and a great content eco-system in which you can acquire great movies, music, e-books, and apps, from one source. And while the Kindle Fire doesn't really compare to the iPad (you shouldn't really compare it to the iPad), it is an attractive offering for those who have a strict budget and want some of the capabilities of an iPad.

The Internet is the place to start real-world revolutions - Throughout the year, we have seen numerous real world revolutions start thanks to the Internet and social media. Egyptians started the concept by starting their revolution on Twitter, and rapidly gaining supporters through means of social media like Twitter and Facebook. Will Google Plus have the same opportunity to ignite a revolution? I can't really answer that, but is sure is possible based on what I've seen so far. The idea has spread far and fast, since other Middle Eastern countries have tried to gain liberty through the start of a revolution, thanks to the many possibilities of the Internet.

Apple's iOS ecosystem gets overhaul with iCloud and Siri - Apple has rapidly pushed their iOS ecosystem forward. The iOS platform consisting of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch. With the announcement of iCloud earlier this year, and the launch just a couple months ago, Apple is pushing all their users towards the cloud. This isn't exactly a quick transition, but some of the offerings of iCloud will compel their users to trust Apple with their data. This makes Apple more of a center point for many iOS users, with the trust of Apple for music and movies, as well as apps and now, online storage of their data. However, iCloud really is mostly useful for iOS users who have been sucked completely into the platform. Those who don't hold much of a love for Apple won't find iCloud necessarily compelling.
The release of the iPhone 4S also delivered a very interesting feature, known as Siri, which is a digital voice powered assistant. Siri, which is exclusively available on the latest iPhone, (although I'm sure they will bring it to other Apple devices eventually) can respond to various voice commands. You could ask Siri to call your spouse, send a text message, send an email, give you directions to the nearest cafe or library, provide you with weather information, and more. Oh, and Siri isn't just a plain old boring artificial intelligence system, it also provides you with hilariously stupid remarks to silly phrases you say to Siri. It is an incredible feature, and while it is in beta, you can look forward to major improvements in the future. This is just the beginning of a future in which we interact with the device less, and interact with people more. Siri is clearly a move by Apple in the steps of Steve Job's vision, which was that technology gets out of the way for the user to achieve what he or she wants.

The Passing of Steve Jobs - One of the saddest days of the year, was the day of Steve Jobs's passing. Within a mere minute of Apple announcing Jobs's death, all mainstream media started reporting it and the Internet was devastated. Twitter activity was very close to reaching an all-time high. People, even the non-enthusiasts, started mourning for the loss of an incredible genius. I, too, was mourning for the loss of Steve Jobs. At that moment, it was extremely difficult for me to imagine a world without Steve. The creator of one of the most iconic and recognizable brands in the world, passed away. Jobs was suffering with a rare form of pancreatic cancer for almost 7 years. At times he appeared in better condition than other times. In the last couple of years, his health had been draining at a faster rate, and at the last Apple event he spoke at, he appeared thin and fragile, and we all tried not to speculate too much into his health, but we all knew it was inevitable.
Steve Jobs had an extraordinary vision of simplicity, design, and overall good taste, that very few had. His, sometimes extreme desire of simplicity and elegance, led to remarkable products from the first Macintosh computer, to the iPhone and iPad. And I think we will continue to see his legacy at Apple for some years down the road. The concern that I share with other technology enthusiasts is, when will the legacy come to an end. Steve left Apple in very good hands, with some of the brightest talent working very hard to build great products, but at some point, without the leadership of such a visionary, the legacy will end. I'm not trying to predict the end of Apple here, but the legacy will die off eventually. When that happens, people will start to panic.
I don't want to spoil too much about Steve's life, so if you have a greater interest in knowing the whole story of Steve Jobs, I recommend you read the authorized biography of Steve Jobs, written by Walter Isaacson. 

HP Will Not Sell WebOS, and Will Continually Support It

   After more than a year of misdirection under the reign of former HP CEO Leo Apotheker, the successor to Apotheker, Meg Whitman, has formally announced on Friday that they will not sell off the WebOS division. This all comes after Leo Apotheker announced his intentions to sell off, not only the WebOS team, but the PC division as well. After being fired from HP in September, Meg Whitman took control and promptly cancelled their plans to sell the PC division, while continuing to say that they were not sure what their plans were for the WebOS division yet. Now, HP has reached the conclusion that they should not, and will not sell the WebOS division.

  WebOS was Palm's attempt at competing with in the smartphone industry, but only to be acquired by HP, and be misguided under the poor management of Leo Apotheker. WebOS was an operating system that ran on Palm's smartphones, including the Palm Pre series of devices. As it turns out, the Palm Pre was a costly nightmare for Palm, since it was plagued with bad reviews by almost every single tech media outlet. The Palm Pre hardware specifications were low, and was quite sluggish. Then HP comes out of nowhere and buys out Palm completely. But despite new management, the Pre line up of devices were still bashed by technology journalists and as a consequence, did not perform well.

  The final decision from HP to not sell WebOS is actually a bigger deal than what is first surmised.  Meg Whitman, CEO, and Mark Andreessen, board member of the company, spoke out in an interview with The Verge. Over the course of several questions, Whitman and Andreessen have announced that they will completely open source WebOS. And that translates into HP releasing the source code for the mobile operating system to the public, allowing anyone to write applications, with less hassle, for WebOS, or for modifications to be easily developed. While the average consumer probably wouldn't be excited by such news, technology enthusiasts have been excited by the new possibilities of the open sourced platform.

    While HP has decided not to sell the WebOS division, it is important to note that they will not continue selling the Pre line of smartphones, but instead, they see a future with WebOS running on future HP tablets that, hopefully, will be a little more stream lined and faster than the Touchpad, which was HP's first effort at a WebOS tablet, which was not as successful as one would have hoped.

   The situation with WebOS just got a lot clearer, but will not be completely clear, since we won't see HP's full vision for WebOS until sometime next year. I really do like what Palm did with WebOS's interface and design, and seeing that it will have a better future is one that I might appreciate someday. I look forward to seeing another competent competitor in the mobile space, both tablets, and smartphones from other vendors. And despite WebOS's past, it has a clear(er) future and one in which I could see it surviving as a competent mobile platform.

Carrier IQ Analyzed; Unclear Whether Consumers Should Worry

Privacy advocates all over the United States have been upset over some reports that have surfaced over the past couple weeks. Various stories were published that reported that the U.S wireless carriers install hidden spyware known as Carrier IQ that tracks users. The question up to this point is what is Carrier IQ tracking. Unfortunately, the answer is not clear. According to all accounts, Carrier IQ does track non identifiable information, anonymous usage data of users’ smartphones that helps the telecoms improve network performance. But that is not the only thing Carrier IQ appears to be tracking. The spyware is also capable of sending text message and user input to the carriers as well. And while Sprint and AT&T have both come out of their shells to say that they are not gathering user inputted data, but only gathering anonymous usage data to improve network performance. But as you are aware, big corporations are very capable of lying, even unintentionally, so while it is possible that what they say is true, it is even more possible that the PR spokesmen/women could be mistaken. And to be technically correct, Carrier IQ can be labeled as spyware, since it is installed secretly and not made known to the user, nor given permission by the user to be installed. Those who play the role of devil’s advocate have said that the intentions of the wireless carriers are not malicious, but my point to be made is that nobody is sure of the intentions of AT&T, Sprint, or T-Mobile, all of which are suspects of installing the spyware on their smartphones. Verizon made clear that they did not put Carrier IQ on their devices, but some skeptics suspected that Verizon had their own mechanism of tracking users.

[Thanks to Joyoftech.com for the great visual!]

The company that has designed the Carrier IQ software for the wireless carriers is now facing legal issues, as they are being sued for breaking certain wiretap laws with Carrier IQ. These suits are just the beginning of more trouble, not just for the manufacturer of Carrier IQ, but also for the wireless carriers. I wouldn’t be surprised to see if the FCC started probing the telecoms for information regarding their use of the software. The whole story of Carrier IQ may not be complete, since I’m expecting a spokesman of T-Mobile to publish an official comment on the behalf of T-Mobile. So while the story hasn’t completely developed yet, this is what we have discovered so far. Expect much more to be made known in the near future.