Orange Executive Reveals Tablet Details, Then Deny’s Them
The web has been rife today with news that Stéphane Richard, an executive from the French communications company France Télécom, had let slip could-be details about Apple's supposedly upcoming tablet in a recent radio interview. During the Europe 1 interview, which aired Monday morning, Stéphane Richard revealed to radio host Jean Pierre Elkabbach that the highly-debated tablet could feature a built-in webcam, possibly similar to that found in Apple's current computer line-up, in addition...
-
VP for France Telecom verifies Apple tablet on the way?
Filed under: Rumors, AppleFrench tech blog Nowhereelse.fr had a scoop of sorts this morning. It turns out that Stphane Richard, VP of France Telecom, was interviewed by Europe 1's Jean Pierre Elkabbach today. During the interview, Elkabbach made a comment to Richard: "According to the weekly Le Point, (in) a few days your partner Apple will launch a Tablet with a webcam." To that, Richard simply replied, "Oui." ("Yes") Elkabbach, probably sensing that French television viewers would love to know if they'd be in line for the new device, continued: "Is it that Orange users will also benefit?" This is in reference to the Orange wireless brand in France. The long, complicated answer from Richard: "Bien Sr!" ("Of course!") Our French is not the best, so it's impossible to verify the rest of the discussion or the context in which these comments were taken, but according to the translation of the Nowhere Else page, the tablet is to at least be announced (if not sold) by the end of the month. In addition, the blog reports that the tablet will have a webcam and videophone capability built-in. Update: TUAW reader Florian translated parts of the video and sent this to us: "They [the customers] will benefit more easily with the webcam. It will indeed be transmitted from the image real time, we will update this [use] in a way that videophone has been a few years ago and is also the network size and network quality that we put in place to serve the French will allow the new uses to develop." While that translation obviously leaves a bit to be desired, it seems to be the source of the information about videophone capabilities. The original video (in French) follows on Page 2 if you wish to translate for us and provide additional commentary. L'interview politique de Jean-Pierre Elkabbach by Europe1frTUAWVP for France Telecom verifies Apple tablet on the way? originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.Read|Permalink|Email this|Comments Jean-Pierre Elkabbach - Apple - Orange - France - Stéphane Richard
-
Will Google's Android Play DOS to Apple's iPhone?
Daniel Eran Dilger Today's broad array of smartphone operating system contenders are offering lots of potential answers to a problem that only requires one. It appears the market has two options ahead: either pool generic hardware makers behind a single operating system and deliver a smartphone marketplace that resembles the Windows PC market, or watch them fall to a dominant leader and have a smartphone market that resembles Apple's iPod ecosystem. This decision isn't going to be made by a class of intellectual elite, or by government mandate. it's going to be made by the market itself. Here are the factors that will influence the outcome, either marginalizing Apple's iPhone into a niche as the company has twice experienced previously at the hands of DOS in 1981 and Windows in 1991, or positioning it as the dominant leader as Apple has achieved for itself with the iPod since 2001. The third segment in this series looks at Google's Android and the Open Handset Alliance as a possible “DOS-attack” against Apple's iPhone. Subsequent segments will look at Nokia's newly opened Symbian and other mobile contenders challenging the iPhone. Will the iPhone Meet its Match from a Modern Day DOS? Will Windows Mobile Play DOS to Apple’s iPhone? Will Google's Android Play DOS to Apple's iPhone? Will Symbian Play DOS to Apple's iPhone? Google Acquires Android. In 2005, Google purchased a startup named Android, which had been in business for nearly two years. The secretive startup was known only to be working on software for mobile phones. It was being run by a who's who of mobile industry veterans, including Andy Rubin, the founder of Danger. Rubin had earlier worked at WebTV along with Chris White and Andy McFadden, both of whom had also joined Android. Richard Miner of Orange and Nick Sears of Tmobile also brought their mobile provider experience to Android. At the time of the acquisition, Google didn't announce any plans for Android and instead only told BusinessWeek, “We acquired Android because of the talented engineers and great technology. We're thrilled to have them here.” It appeared that Google was only going to be expanding its search services for mobile phone users, along the lines of the Google SMS answer system it had recently released. Google Buys Android for Its Mobile Arsenal - BusinessWeek Windows XP Media Center Edition vs Apple TV: The Fall of WebTV The GPhone Myth. As reports began to leak out about talks between Google and hardware makers throughout 2007, rumors began to fly about “the GPhone,” a competitive offering that was supposed to take on the iPhone. Some phone enthusiasts hoped Google would jump in to rescue the struggling OpenMoko project and turn it into a viable project that could attack Apple's new smartphone. In October 2007, I printed the Great Google GPhone Myth, taking apart the idea that Google would be directly competing against the iPhone, and describing that Google was really working on a free alternative to Windows Mobile as a conduit for getting its search and related services on a broader variety of mobiles. Google's services were already on the iPhone. In November, Google played its hand: it had organized a consortium of companies called the Open Handset Alliance to develop open standards for mobiles. The first product from the group would be Android, a mobile operating system built on the Linux kernel. Google wasn't getting into the phone handset business at all; it was only making sure that its mobile search products would not risk being marginalized by the threat of Windows Mobile on phones in the same way Microsoft had been working to leverage its PC monopoly to push Google search off the Windows desktop. The Great Google gPhone Myth Introducing Android: Leader of Linux. Two weeks later, Google released an early version of the Android software. On top of a Linux kernel, Android uses a specialized version of a Java Virtual Machine that takes Java language code and turns it into what Google calls “Dalvik bytecode” rather than Java bytecode as a standard JVM would. This allows Google to leverage existing and familiar Java language tools without paying Sun for a Java license. Like Mac OS X and its fraternal iPhone OS, Android includes a variety of open source libraries, including SQLite and WebKit. On top of that, Google developed a series of frameworks that handle the tasks Cocoa Touch does on the iPhone. Android also bundles a set of applications. While Apple adapted its existing Mac OS X to work in a mobile environment to create the iPhone OS, Android is more like a customized Java environment running on a specialized mobile Linux variant: elements of maturity in an otherwise experimental new platform. What is Android? -Google Android was by no means the first mobile OS using Linux. Both Palm and its amputated ACCESS software arm have Linux-based mobile platforms. Nokia has Maemo, which it uses in its Internet Tablets, and also recently acquired Trolltech and its Qtopia mobile Linux platform. Motorola has teamed up with MontaVista Software to use its Mobilinux. Intel created the Moblin project for mobile Linux, aimed at Internet devices. Google's OHA also isn't the first consortium to attempt to standardize a mobile Linux platform. The OSDL started the Mobile Linux Initiative to define requirements for hardware; the Consumer Electronics Linux Forum (CELF) then worked to define various phone profiles aimed at the Japanese market; the Linux Phone Standard (LiPS) Forum tried to do the same thing in Europe. In 2007, LiPS was folded into the new LiMo Foundation, along with the OSDL. All of these committees have had some overlap and some complementary features. Several of Google's OHA partners are also LiMo members, including NTT DoCoMo, Wind River, and Motorola. So why didn't Google just join LiMo? “LiMo, very candidly, wasn't moving fast enough,” OHA board member John Bruggeman told CNET. Google hopes to herd the Linux cats into a progressive, structured platform that can battle against Symbian and Windows Mobile to succeed as the new DOS of smartphones. Will Google fracture or unify mobile Linux? The Presumption of the Necessity of DOS. The previous segment examining Windows Mobile pointed out how the PC industry as a whole assumed that Microsoft's desktop Windows monopoly would easily take over dominance in the MP3 player market, pushing Apple into a niche position. This was expected because DOS had pushed Apple's early computers into a reduced role starting in 1981, and Microsoft had repeated this again in 1991 when the DOS world migrated to Windows, effectively pruning Apple's Macintosh into a Bonsai platform. The inability of one company to dominate any product category has been frequently repeated by PC industry pundits as a given, despite the fact that history is full of examples of this happening. Sony dominated personal music players for two decades under the Walkman brand even while equally large competitors tried to push it from this position; Nintendo has similarly owned handheld gaming despite ill-fated efforts to grab a piece of its pie by products running a generic platform such as Microsoft's WinCE (Gizmondo), Linux (GP32), and Symbian (N-Gage). In fact, outside of the Windows/DOS PC, there are actually few examples of a generic platform taking over an industry. Nearly every other consumer-facing product uses proprietary platforms: car makers, stereo equipment, appliances and so on typically all use designs custom to their maker. The paradox of the Windows PC market has been that Microsoft's broadly licensed software supposedly saves hardware makers from investing in software development while ensuring compatibility, when in reality it adds significant costs to PC makers while limiting their ability to differentiate themselves. That explains why PC makers have been perpetually merging together and going out of business while Microosft has rolled in money over the last two decades. Parallel efforts to copy Microsoft in broadly licensing an operating system have regularly failed: IBM's OS/2, Apple's Mac OS, Palm's PDA OS, even Microsoft's own efforts to duplicate Windows dominance in other markets, from copy machines to PDAs to smartphones to SPOT watches to music players. The closest copy may be Symbian, but its customers are partners, not simply consumers of a generic third party's operating system as Windows licensees are. That indicates it is not necessary to duplicate the dominance exercised by Microsoft over the PC industry in the smartphone market. Google's Android and Symbian exist more as technology sharing pacts among manufacturers, but both aspire to take Microsoft's DOS role among smartphones. However, the idea that Apple's iPhone must be dethroned by a modern-day DOS, whether Windows Mobile, Android, or Symbian, is not just debatable, but does not sync with the reality of more recent events. Apple's recent history of the iPod further refutes the idea that a software analog to Microsoft is needed. The iPod Emergence: Apple & Pixo vs IBM & Microsoft. Apple's iPod in 2001 made no effort to clone the DOS business model; it actually did the opposite. When Apple entered the market, there were a number of existing MP3 devices using custom software, hardware designs, and DRM codecs. The iPod used off the shelf components to deliver a custom MP3 player using third party software, but Apple also added its own technologies: easy to use sync with iTunes, a fast Firewire interface that made uploading music far faster than the prevailing USB 1.0, and an attractive industrial design. With the iPod, Apple played the role of IBM in 1981, using Pixo's embedded operating system to enter the market quickly, just as IBM had used DOS. The difference was that Apple didn't direct any market attention toward Pixo and added a lot of value on top of that core embedded OS. A modern day Compaq couldn't simply clone the hardware and license Pixo to run on it in order to compete against the iPod, because the iPod was much more than just generic hardware running Pixo software. As the iPod developed, Pixo's role diminished and was eventually displaced. Just like IBM, Apple jumped into a new market just as demand was beginning to explode. Apple made MP3 players far more attractive to a general audience by delivering greater playback capacity than most entry level devices offered, along with an ease of use that encouraged buyers to jump in at the higher end of the market. That left Apple with not only the lion's share of the market, but also by far the most profitable segments of the market. Two decades prior, IBM badly fumbled its play with the early PC and ended up irrelevant in the PC world by the late 80s, sideswiped by Microsoft's DOS and the cloners who were licensing it in parallel, notably Compaq and later HP and Dell. Steve Jobs had witnessed that happen, and was determined to not let it happen again to Apple. Rather than being manipulated by a software middleware vendor as IBM had, Apple worked to incrementally develop the iPod market itself. After consuming the hard drive-based player market, Apple took on the Flash RAM-based market with a tiny hard drive system used in the iPod Mini, and followed up with Flash-based devices of its own in the Nano and Shuffle. This allowed Apple to progressively serve an increasingly wider market, incrementally growing upon an established foundation. With the iPod, Apple became, in effect, an IBM with its own internal Microsoft. Microsoft's Failure Despite Features. In contrast, Microsoft entered the music player market by promoting music player hardware reference designs around WinCE. However, it was unable to ship a finished design until the iPod had become firmly established around 2005. Later branded as PlaysForSure, the devices were sold by various hardware makers and all purported to support the same DRM and the same music subscription services while also offering a broader array of hardware that presented video before the iPod did, supported wireless before the iPod, and so on. Despite these unique features, all of those PFS designs still failed. Microsoft blamed the failure of PFS upon its music store and hardware partners and decided to take Apple on itself in 2006. It relaunched a Toshiba PFS player as its own device under the Zune brand, adding WiFi music sharing features and a larger display than the current Pods had. It failed dramatically as well. Did Microsoft's attempts to float a new DOS among music players fail because of Apple's success, or due to Microsoft's own problems? The failure of the Zune, which followed the iPod model rather than the DOS model, seems to suggest that Microsoft itself was to blame. Consider too that Microsoft's Windows Mobile phones, which use the same underlying operating system as its failed PlaysForSure music players and the Zune, had similarly flopped even before Apple could release a charismatic phone equivalent to the iPod. Of course, when the iPhone was released, it hit Windows Mobile hardest. The iPhone made Windows Mobile Smartphones look ridiculous and underpowered, and made Windows Mobile Pocket PC phones look clumsy and awkward, despite the fact that they both supported a variety of features the iPhone didn't, including the ability to edit documents, capture video, send MMS, and so on. Simply adding on features did not enable Microsoft to compete against Apple. The only conclusion that can be drawn from all this is that competing against Apple requires more than just having a feature arsenal. Microsoft's failures in themselves do not necessarily mean that Google's Android will fail in its attempts to float its own smartphone platform. Why Microsoft’s Zune is Still Failing Microsoft’s Zune, Vista, and Windows Mobile 7 Strategy vs the iPhone Will Google Succeed where Microsoft Failed? Microsoft's demonstrated inability to successfully enter consumer markets for MP3 players and smartphones has given observers little faith that the company will somehow turn things around in late 2009 when its next generation of devices are expected to be released. However, prior to that the first fruits of Google's efforts to build its own smartphone operating environment will arrive. Will Google's Android take over Microsoft's crown as the “DOS vendor” among smartphones? Supporters of Google's Android project point to some parallels between Android for smartphones and Windows on the PC: Android will allow hardware makers to differentiate in ways that can offer features Apple can't (or doesn't want to); it should allow software developers to offer features Apple does not allow on the iPhone; it embraces open, hobbyist experimentation in ways that Apple currently isn't; and it opens the potential for content providers that Apple is not interested in allowing. Openness is Android's key competitive feature. Will all this openness allow Google to unseat the iPhone to become the primary platform developers want to participate in, and subsequently soak up the market for third party hardware makers that Windows Mobile serves? While Google currently has no market share due to the fact that no Android phones have yet shipped, it does have broad vocal support from a variety of the same kinds of hardware manufacturers that supported DOS and Windows and helped to make those platforms successful in the desktop PC market. HTC and Android. The first Android phone is expected to be the HTC Dream; Taiwan's HTC (High Tech Computer) also manufactures Palm's Treo Pro phone as well as many of the most visible Windows Mobile devices. In addition to models produced under its own name, HTC also sells Windows Mobile devices under the Dopod brand, as well as no-name phones branded by providers, such as AT&T, Orange, Sprint, T-Mobile, Verizon Wireless, Vodafone, and others. HTC will also be building the XPERIA X1 Windows Mobile phone for Sony Ericsson. HTC was quick to throw its support behind Android despite its long term alliance with Windows Mobile. Why would it so enthusiastically support an unproven platform from a company that has no experience in consumer hardware platforms? One can only assume that HTC is not happy with the current state of Windows Mobile, and desperately wants another “DOS” to succeed where Microsoft's has so spectacularly failed. As an Original Design Manufacturer for Palm, HTC watched as Palm adopted Windows Mobile in place of the Palm OS and subsequently fell even deeper into crisis. Palm's only successful phone since has been its Palm OS-based Centro. HTC undoubtedly sees Android as its ticket to becoming the next Dell, but without a similar dependance upon Microsoft. Android for mobile phones is essentially playing the role of Linux for PCs, except that it has the backing of a major company behind it. Can Android Take on the iPhone with Openness as its Feature? As great as this sounds, it's important to consider that Linux on the desktop has made no significant progress in eating into Windows dominance after a decade of trying. Being open, free, flexible, and decentralized hasn't been enough of an advantage to get consumers to migrate from Windows to Linux in any fraction of significance. Similarly, in the music business, Linux-based MP3 players have had no impact on the iPod, despite offering more features, flexibility, support for additional codecs, and so on. In the mobile phone area, Linux enjoys a sizable portion of the smartphone market, but this is almost entirely due to phones sold by Motorola in China, where the advantages of Linux' openness are void. Motorola's Linux phones offer nothing to users in terms of openness or flexibility, and are really no different in terms of features than other appliance 'feature phones' based upon closed operating systems. And again, a key problem with assaulting Apple in a feature war is that neither the iPod nor the iPhone became popular by being “highly featured.” They both delivered perhaps 80% of the functionality found in all other devices in the market. Rather than trying to match every feature and cater to every niche as Microsoft had with Windows Mobile, Apple's devices did a few things very well at launch, and incrementally developed into full featured devices that still lack some of the more unique features of their competitors. Further, in terms of openness, the demographic that embraces Linux' characteristic freedoms is not the same as the demographic that buys smartphones in quantity and then pays for data service. This is a critical fact to consider because a big part of the iPhone's success stems from the fact that it is being pushed by mobile providers who want to capture the cream of the market willing to pay a premium for data services. The Frankenphone. Combining the fractured aesthetic of HTC's Windows Mobile phone hardware with Android's software, based upon Linux' perpetually unfinished DIY openness and Google's Java-like development platform, will not result in a product similar to the iPhone. Instead, it will look a lot like phones that have already failed in the market. Apple's advantage comes from slick hardware designs with a close attention to detail, combined with software that purposely does less so that it can do what it does better. Even Apple's own conservative attempts to broaden its software capabilities with iPhone 2.0 have resulted in instability problems that can be blamed upon both Apple's early releases of its phone operating system and software from inexperienced third party developers new to the platform. Would the current frustrations with iPhone 2.0 be somehow mitigated by additional openness that also embraced all kinds of variables from different hardware makers with less quality control than Apple, a loose committee of additional cooks working to serve up operating system features targeted at every possible conceived need, and a wider third party software group with fewer constraints on illegal behaviors? The Failure of Open. While it is politically unpopular to criticize the well meaning efforts of open source contributors, the failure of Linux on the desktop, the failure of the vaporware Indrema game console, and the failure of the OpenMoko project to deliver a workable phone within a year of its deadline all underline the serious problems open development faces in the world of consumer oriented devices. Open has simply failed to deliver on its promises in the world of consumer hardware. OpenMoko was supposed to release its first mobile phone to consumers for $250 several months in advance of the iPhone. When the iPhone shipped, the group then announced new plans to get its phone out by the end of 2007. Instead, this spring the group announced new plans to move to an entirely different development platform, and ship its phone mid year for $400 with limited functionality and incomplete software outside of basic GSM phone features. Linux's notable successes, from Motorola's Linux phones to the Tivo DVR to Linksys Routers, have often come without any associated openness or freedom, and were instead delivered simply to provide their manufacturer with a free kernel to build upon. This indicates that while Linux may find its way into an increasing number of smartphones, it will likely not be accompanied by the glorious freedom of an open development environment Google has said it would offer with Android. Apple iPhone vs the FIC Neo1973 OpenMoko Linux Smartphone Can Google Succeed Where Open Has Previously Failed? Despite “openness” being Android's strongest competitive feature compared to Apple's iPhone, Google recently revealed that its wide-open development model is intentionally gravitating towards a closed association of top tier partners due to practical considerations. In July, Google accidentally sent out a notice that revealed that it had been seeding private SDK updates to only a subset of its contributors, angering those who believed that Android would be as open as Linux on the desktop or the OpenMoko project. Further, Google has restricted initial development to higher level APIs just as Apple did, further indicating that Google itself realizes that being wildly open to impress a minority of hobbyists will not result in the commercial success of its new platform. That serves to neuter Android's primary advantage over the iPhone. Without delivering on the premise of being wide open, Android is really just a less mature set of Java libraries used to create a specialized binary that runs on a Linux foundation. Unlike Apple's iPhone, Android phones won't have a slick user interface developed by professional artists, nor the iPhone's legacy of mature software development frameworks crafted over the last thirty years, nor the iPhone's tightly integrated hardware with award winning industrial design, nor its marketing power tied into the iPod and Apple's retail stores. Android won't be an open iPhone, it will only be a Windows Mobile phone with a better kernel that runs specialized Java software instead of Win32 or .NET code. Don't expect consumers to be impressed by that. The Biggest Missing Feature. There is one remaining factor that strangles to death any last remaining hope that Android might assassinate the iPhone and assume the crown of the “DOS of smartphones.” That is: Android delivers zero price advantage to consumers. In 1981 and 1991, consumers who wanted Apple computers faced the sticker shock of a somewhat arrogant price tag. Apple sold its computers, as it still does, at the higher end of the market, but there was simply far more range in prices available. In 1981, that meant the Apple II was $2600 and the new Apple III was $3500, even before you added a monitor. On the low end, Commodore sold its far less powerful, but “still a computer” Vic-20 for $300, while IBM entered the market with the IBM PC at $3000. Over the next few years, Apple focused on delivering additional sophistication at the same price, releasing the $10,000 Lisa and then the $2,500 Macintosh. IBM continued selling PCs in the same $3,000 to $10,000 range, but other DOS PC vendors began selling machines at prices that ranged as low as $1500. That left Apple with a roughly $1000 price premium over low end PCs. The products weren't really comparable, but consumers only saw the huge price difference. In 1991, Apple was still selling moderate to high-end Macintoshes for $3,800 to $10,000; the crippled Mac LC was $2500, and obsolete-at-birth Mac Classic ranged from $999 to $1500. Windows allowed PC makers to ship a functional $1500 PC and claim a rough approximation to Apple's $2500 entry level system, maintaining that apparent $1000 price premium. Today, pundits are lucky to find a Dell or HP system that is even a couple hundred dollars less than a comparable Mac. However, in the smartphone business, the iPhone 3G is now the same price, if not less, than generic competing phones on the market. Even more significant is the fact that the price of the phone hardware is nearly nothing compared to the cost of the service plan. This fact simply eases any price premium that could cause buyers to flock to a smartphone running a generic operating system over buying the iPhone 3G, regardless of whether it runs Windows Mobile or Android. 1990-1995: Planting Software Seeds Android Partners Have Already Failed. That same pricing principle similarly prevented buyers from considering many of the alternatives to the iPod. While Apple's original iPod models were more expensive than many of the first MP3 players on the market, they were price competitive with models offering similar features. By 2004, it was Apple who was undercutting MP3 competitors on price. Microsoft offered zero price advantage when it began selling the Zune, a major factor in its failure, but Microsoft simply couldn't out-price the iPod; it was already losing money offering the Zune at the same price as the iPod. Apple now has tremendous market power in buying RAM and other components that will prevent any competitors from being able to offer a huge discount over the iPhone's $199 price tag. Even if competitors were to give their phones away, they would only offer a $200 discount to users who would then still need to pay the same mobile fees to use the phone. Android's other partners, including Samsung and LG, have already failed to capture any significant market share in the music player market. Are they going to maintain their position as smartphone makers now that they face similar competition from Apple, its iPod ecosystem, its iTunes Music and Apps Store, Apple's retail store experience, and other factors that are pushing the iPhone? If they can, it is not obvious how partnering with Android will help. Other Problems for Android. Android was announced in early November 2007 and was followed with an early preview SDK within a couple weeks, a month ahead of Apple's initial announcement of the iPhone 2.0 SDK. However, between March and July 2008, Apple delivered nine progressive releases of its SDK, opened its App Store, and sold 60 million apps, raising $30 million to support iPhone software development in just the first month. It has since released three more SDK updates to developers related to iPhone 2.1, which is expected next month. Android just published its first open SDK beta update earlier this week, warning developers that “applications developed with it may not quite be compatible with devices running the final Android 1.0.” Additionally, Android still has no phones available. By the time the HTC Dream is expected to launch, Apple will have an installed base of around ten million iPhone (and iPod touch) users supporting software development through iTunes. The business model for selling Android apps is no better than that for selling jailbreak iPhone apps: there is no iTunes Apps Store to promote them, so users will have to track them down on their own. Android developers also have no real freedom that jailbreak iPhone developers lack. The only difference is that there are ten million iPhones to sell jailbreak apps to, and currently zero Android phones. If selling a jailbreak iPhone app sounds like more trouble than its worth, imagine trying to sell Android apps to a non-existant audience. Now add the official iPhone App Store into the mix, where publicity, promotion and profits are booming. What platform is going to have the most applications? How many users will flock to a smartphone platform with no apps? The wisdom of releasing a desirable phone and achieving a significant installed base before releasing an SDK makes a lot more sense in retrospect. Additionally, while Apple has a decade of experience in shipping regular updates to Mac OS X and its Xcode developer tools, Google has only shipped a random assortment of web-oriented SDKs (a number of which have been abandoned) as a tangent to its core business of selling advertisements. When the Android SDK 1.0 is finished later this year, developers will not only lack an installed base to sell their apps to, but will also have no high profile market for selling their apps in, and subsequently no financial incentive to develop applications that add value to the Android platform, just like Linux on the PC desktop. Around the same time, possibly within the next month, Apple will be shipping its second major OS release: iPhone 2.1. Apple will also be upgrading its entire user base to the new software so that developers will have a cohesive platform to target. This mirrors the efforts Apple has taken to upgrade its Mac OS X users to the same reference release. Mobile developers will be seeing money pouring in via iTunes while crickets chirp in the Android section of various mobile online stores. Apple’s iPhone Vs. Other Mobile Hardware Makers: 5 Revenue Engines Same Same, But Different: DOS Model Problems. Android developers will also have a series of other problems to manage. Like Windows Mobile, Android is intended to support everything, from BlackBerry-style keypad phones with a small touchscreen to the simple Windows Mobile Smartphone form factor lacking a touch screen to iPhone-like full size touch screens. Also like Windows Mobile, Android phone makers will have the option to leave off Bluetooth, WiFi, GPS location services, graphics hardware acceleration, and so on. Each Android phone will also have unique camera hardware, support for different video and audio codecs, and varied support for other differentiating proprietary services demanded by mobile operators. This will force developers to to make complex decisions regarding the lowest common denominator they choose to support. So while the iPhone will have a cohesive feature set, a managed software environment, and a functional market, Android will be a loose federation of hardware makers selling the same random features found on Windows Mobile today, with a chaotic development environment that lacks any central market for users or developers. And it will be run as an experiment by a company with no experience in consumer hardware or platform development. The Missing Tap. One specific example of the “DOS model problem” is that Android currently does not support multitouch. It's not touched on in the API, and Google quietly tap dances around its omission. Why no multitouch? Because multitouch screens are expensive, and most OHA hardware members are more interested in making a profit in a competitive phone market rather than impressing consumers as Apple did with the iPhone. Most existing smartphones, even those trying to directly rival the iPhone, use a stylus driven, pressure sensitive tap screen or a simpler, cheaper touch technology that lacks support for sensing multitouch. The iPhone's screen can actually sense up to five fingers at once, but the primary feature multitouch offers on the iPhone is the two fingered tapping and the pinching effects everyone associates with it. Android could certainly support multitouch if there were a demand for it, but that's the point: Google knows that its hardware partners are cheap and unlikely to put out hardware that actually competes with the iPhone. Instead of using expensive technologies that deliver clever yet largely invisible functionality, OHA members, just like PC makers, are far more likely to add flashy, impractical gadgety fluff that's cheap to tack on, such as slide out keyboards, neon tubes, and scratch and sniff stickers. That's how you impress gullible nerds on the cheap. Google itself is blowing smoke and erecting mirrors to distract from the reality that it being a “DOS vendor” means supporting bargain basement hardware from penny pinching duplicators. Android has been demonstrating some “wow” features such as a Street Maps app that pans around based on an internal compass in the demonstration phone. The problem is that that kind of thing only makes for a fun demo. Nobody needs to twirl around their phone in the air to see a view of the other side of the street, but everyone who has used an iPhone will wonder why they can't pinch to zoom out. Even worse, most Android phones aren't going to have a compass built into them, so Google is demonstrating features most Android users won't be able to use. That Sounds Like Microsoft… Google's design decisions are beginning to look a lot like Windows Vista; rather than actually working to make laptops boot faster, Microsoft came up with the idea of adding a small screen to the back of Vista laptops so users could check their email without having to wake the system up. But this was a stupid idea for a number of reasons, the most obvious being that most users just want a laptop that boots up quickly. Few laptops got the mini screen, but every user who tries Vista on their laptop will wonder why it doesn't boot up as fast as Mac OS X Leopard. In the same way, Google is advertising features for Android that most users won't ever see in their actual phones while ignoring things people will expect based on their exposure to the iPhone. Android is simply selecting the wrong features. Android will offer the advantages of supporting MMS, recording video, and the list of other features Windows Mobile already supplies. Those features didn't stop Apple from firing past Microsoft in the smartphone arena however, just as the Zune's highly touted WiFi and screen didn't phase iPod buyers. Incidentally, just months after the Zune, Apple had not only demonstrated a larger display but a higher definition multitouch screen, and not only WiFi, but functional WiFi that could be used to browse the web or check email. This suggests that Apple, with its faster release schedule, won't stay behind any of the leading features potentially offered by Android for very long. Android partners, however, will find it as difficult to catch up with Apple's unique features, just as Microsoft has been stymied to keep up with Mac OS X, the iPod, and the iPhone. The underlying reason: both Google and Microosft are tasked with maintaing support for a huge variety of hardware options demanded by all their partners. Apple has the unique circumstances to do only what it needs to do itself. Android in Windows Mobile's Shoes. Like Windows Mobile, Android faces a difficult market. In the US, it competes against the popular BlackBerry in corporate markets and the iPhone among consumers. Worldwide, it competes against entrenched market leader Nokia. The difference is that Google, unlike Microsoft, has no in. Windows Mobile was adopted by Windows-bound IT shops despite its weaknesses. Nobody has any preexisting reason to try an Android phone apart from hobbyists and open software enthusiasts, a demographic that has done little to move Linux on the PC desktop. Google also lacks Microsoft's installed base; it's starting from zero. The smartphone industry initially doubted Apple's chances of making much progress with the iPhone, despite the company having the Mac platform, the iPod, retail stores, platform development experience, marketing savvy, industrial design prowess, and so on. Google doesn't have any of those things. Mobile Providers vs Android. Apple also started with an exclusive partnership with AT&T, a three legged race that demanded effort from both. Google is hoping that hardware makers handle the hardware details and that mobile providers will be excited to sell its Android phones. While hardware makers such as HTC clearly appreciate having found a free alternative to Windows Mobile, it's not obvious why providers would be excited about Android, as it promises an openness that most mobile providers strongly oppose. AT&T took a big risk in getting behind the iPhone, as the phone encouraged users to use email rather than fee-based SMS and MMS, it supported WiFi for data access, and it bypassed AT&T's MEdia Net services to plug into iTunes instead. Verizon refused to parter with Apple and grant it those kinds of concessions. Is AT&T going to take a similar risk to partner with a phone that is not exclusive to it, and is Verizon now going to open its arms to support phones that do not exclusively support BREW, VCast and its other proprietary services? While Android may well eat into Microsoft's Windows Mobile business by stealing away its hardware makers, it seems unlikely that Android will ever serve as more than free alternative to Windows Mobile in a market where Windows Mobile is increasingly irrelevant. Android may have the dubious distinction of swallowing Microsoft's mobile business the same way Microsoft ate up the Palm OS, but even if it accomplishes that goal, Google will likely find itself unsustainably hungry immediately afterward. It will also find itself swimming in a shark tank of hungry rivals, including Nokia's Symbian, RIM's BlackBerry, and Apple's iPhone. Symbian is the final generic platform vying for the opportunity to play DOS in the smartphone market. The next article will examine Nokia's chances in its bid to match Microsoft's PC dominance in the mobile market while setting out in a new venture to copy Android's open software model. Did you like this article? Let me know. Comment here, in the Forum, or email me with your ideas. Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast (oh wait, I have to fix that first). It's also cool to submit my articles to Digg, Reddit, or Slashdot where more people will see them. Consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!
-
Tablet “Confirmation” of the Day -- This Time From France Telecom
Another day, another Apple tablet “confirmation” making the rounds. This time it comes by way of France Telecom, whose executive claims the tablet will debut in the “next couple of days.”TechCrunch is reporting that France Telecom (aka Orange) executive Stéphane Richard this morning “confirmed” in an on-air interview that Apple’s famed tablet device is set to debut in the “next couple of days” -- presumably meaning at the Jan. 27 event already scheduled.Here’s an English translation of the relevant part of the conversation with French journalist Jean-Pierre Elkabbach:Jean-Pierre Elkabbach: According to weekly Le Point, in a couple of days Apple will be launching its tablet computer …Stéphane Richard: Yes.Jean-Pierre Elkabbach: … equipped with a webcam.Stéphane Richard: Yes.Jean-Pierre Elkabbach: Are Orange customers going to be able to enjoy it?Stéphane Richard: Of course!Richard, the number two chief at the French communications giant, appears a bit caught off-guard on the video of the event posted at NowhereElse.fr. (If you speak French, you can hit the link and scan to about 6:10 to see for yourself.) Of course, Richard could also simply be referring to existing rumors about the Apple tablet since he doesn’t reveal any new information.At this point, we figure that whatever Apple plans to announce on Jan. 27, could it ever live up to the hype being bandied about?
-
Rumor Has It: January Event “Confirmed,” More on the Tablet
I'm really sorry. I do realize these tablet rumors are becoming tiresome, but you know, don't you, that they're going to get a lot worse in the coming weeks as we approach January 26 and Apple's not-yet-officially-confirmed-but-unofficially-will-definitely-happen media event? The latest tidbits come from Fox News' Clayton Morris and (somewhat unexpectedly given how he should know better) an ex-Apple, ex-Google China senior executive. Let's get started… Fox's Clayton Morris writes that he's been talking with his very own private mole inside Apple HQ about the as-yet unconfirmed media event (first reported by the Financial Times) and has this to offer us: While nothing official has been handed down from the notoriously tight-lipped company, my source took the Financial Times report one step further by saying this event will focus on the mobility space, meaning we'll see something related to the iPhone/Touch product line. Could this be the announcement of the mythical Apple tablet we've been hearing so much about? Well if it isn't, if El Jobso doesn't announce a tablet, if, instead, the whole event is nothing more than a high-profile sales pitch for a slightly-higher-capacity iPod shuffle, I'll be torn between shedding bitter tears, or laughing myself sick. Maybe both. “Focus on the mobility space,” eh? How charmingly vague. You have to wonder why these “sources” are always so…unhelpful. I mean, a real, genuine, worthwhile secret mole should be leaking specific, valuable information, right? That's what moles are supposed to do, it's in the job description. But when it comes to Apple's moles, this just doesn't happen, does it? Instead, they offer infuriatingly nebulous non-information that seems, if nothing else, perfectly suited to further fuelling speculation, rather than offering, y'know, facts. I think of these sources as the tech community's version of spirit mediums who, after (rolling eyes) 'miraculously' connecting with the dearly departed, then bafflingly waste that rare and wonderful chance at communication by playing an odd game of Guess Who? “Focus on the mobility space” might as well be “I see a man with thinning hair whose name begins with something sounding like Ste…” I have a modest theory; these “sources” are tasked with providing fuzzy details to media hacks. It's all part of a precise marketing strategy, pioneered by Jobs, designed to get the flames of the rumor mill burning brightly. It probably saves a fortune on actual advertising. A Little Less Vague Also fanning the flames today is a report by Engadget's Richard Lai who writes that former Google China president Kai-fu Lee has claimed privileged insider-knowledge of the mythical tablet. Lee's comments appear on Lee's microblogging site and, translated by GadgetMix, read in part: The Apple Tablet looks like a bigger iPhone that sports an awesome UI packed in a beautiful 10.1-inch screen. The tablet combines the functions of both netbook and kindle, an ebook reader. It has virtual keyboard for text entry and a webcam for video conferencing Lai adds: We've heard a lot of this same noise before: sub-$1000 price, an iPhone-like appearance, 10.1-inch multitouch screen, video conferencing, cellular connectivity, 3D graphics and virtual keyboard. What really got our attention is Lee's link with Foxconn — the Apple OEM is one of the main contributors to Lee's post-Google investment venture, Innovation Works, so there's a good chance that Lee's spoken to someone overlooking the manufacturing of a certain Apple device. Kai-fu Lee also adds in his blog that “Steve Jobs will be introducing this product in January,” lending credence to Clayton Morris' sepulchral source at Cupertino. Well, that's it — another day, another round of rumors. Make of them what you will. As far as I can see, we don't know anything more now than we did when we reached for our hot lava java this morning, but, please, don't shoot the messenger. At least this specumor (I'm enjoying my portmanteau's; this one's a cross between speculation and rumor) is bolstered by what appears to be sort-of-credible evidence. Honestly, though, January 26 can't arrive fast enough. I'm thoroughly sick of all this guessjecture. UPDATE: Looks like my modest theory is correct, if Fake Steve is to be trusted.
-
10 Years After Y2K -- Stories From the IT Battlegrounds
"This really could have screwed up our lives, and you know, a whole bunch of little geeks saved us." - Paul Saffo. Director of the Institute for the Future in Menlo Park, California, in an interview with American RadioWorks It was a fear fest of epic proportions. Magazine headlines predicted that the end of the world would shortly befall us. They told harrowing tales of feral computer systems going awry the minute the clock struck midnight on January 1st, 2000--planes would fall from the sky, power grids would fail, the global economy would crash, nuclear power plants would go into meltdown mode, lines of communication would be cut, and the contents of bank accounts would vanish."I cannot be optimistic...It's clear we can't solve the whole problem, so we have to allow some systems to die so mission-critical systems can work... Pay attention to the things that are vulnerable in your life and make contingency plans.... Don't panic, but don't spend too much time sleeping, either." - Senator Robert Bennett, then-Chairman of the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Problem, Y2K Citizens Action GuideThe cause of all this excitement was the purported Y2K bug. In response to dealing with computers that were about as capable as the iPhone, programmers prided themselves on being thrifty with their code to ensure it didn’t stress memory or capacity. One way to do this was to skip putting a “19” in front of the year and use only the last two numerals. And why not? These programs would be long retired by the time 2000 rolled around. However, not only were many expired programs, operating systems, and applications still chugging away as 2000 crept around the corner, they were also running critical systems like power grids, government agencies and financial systems, hospitals and airports, elevators and public transportation. And so, the race was on to fix the code before the bug bit. Often the fix was a simple patch, but in some cases, programmers struggled to figure out what little time bombs lurked in ancient and undocumented code. Around the world, attempts to squash the bug are estimated to have cost over $300 billion.Mac users were mostly immune as the system software was programmed to accept dates as far into the future as 29940. Assuming third-party applications didn’t go nuts, Macs would be fine. Apple happily pointed this out by airing a commercial during the 1999 Superbowl featuring the poster boy for naughty computers, Space Odyssey’s HAL.At the time, Apple's "acting chief executive" Steve Jobs had issued a statement saying: "HAL is the perfect spokesperson to address the Y2K issues because he lives in the year 2001 and speaks from experience. Plus, HAL is the foremost expert on things that can go wrong with computers." As the big day drew closer, gas masks, radiation kits, safes and water purification systems were hawked in magazine ads and late night commercials. People even began to horde survival supplies. An October 15, 1998 story in the New York Times shared the results of a poll stating that “10 percent of the nation's top executives are stockpiling canned goods, buying generators and even purchasing handguns.” Ominous quotes from experts seemed to indicate that life as we knew it might cease to exist for awhile."Suddenly, those individuals who have insisted that they will be withdrawing all their cash from the bank before the end of the year do not seem quite so misguided. The prospect of the millennium bug eating your savings may be more than just the nightmare of overactive imaginations. At a meeting in Washington recently, delegates were stunned to hear Henry Kissinger announce that he intended to withdraw all his money from the bank as 2000 nears."- The Times, London, March 20th, 1999But 1/1/2000 arrived and nothing dire happened. Perhaps enough code was fixed in time, perhaps the whole thing was insanely overhyped. Probably both. Even those who were on the frontlines of Y2K lunacy disagree about what might have happened. This is how they remember it.What's All the Fuss About?I'd like you to do me a favor. Get a steaming mug of coffee, herbal tea, or whatever beverage puts you in that relaxed, contemplative mood. Now close your eyes and drift back in time with me to early Spring of the year 1998. William Jefferson Clinton occupies the Oval Office, Dale Earnhardt still dominates NASCAR, Denver dethroned Green Bay in the Super Bowl, the U.S. unemployment rate is 4.3%, and the federal budget is enjoying a rare $70 billion surplus. Life is, all things considered, good. Fade in on a second floor conference room of the John Wesley Powell federal building on Sunrise Valley Drive in Reston, Virginia, headquarters for the U.S. Geological Survey. Around the table sit a half dozen (mostly) somber business casually-dressed technical types. The urgent mission that has brought them together is a discussion of the threat posed by and mitigation strategies for the impending Y2K disaster, looming a scant twenty months into a forbidding future.Speculation has been rampant, even this far from the target date. Voices of doom permeate the airwaves, print, and cyberspace. Aircraft will tumble, willy-nilly, from the skies. Trains will crash headlong into one another at high speed. Satellites will cease to communicate. Bank accounts will be drained. Personal information will be lost forever, or exposed for all to see. Twenty-four times, at the top of every hour, on average a little over 4% of the world's computers will freeze up or begin to spit out random nonsense as midnight processes along its inexorable westward path. The damage, the carnage, the impact on humanity will be horrifying. Society's misguided reliance on doped silicon semiconductors will lead to our downfall. All is lost. Cash in your 401(k) now and spend it all on Friends laserdiscs before Y2K drags us clawing and screaming into the slavering jaws of oblivion.One by one, the grim-faced custodians of the information systems that help guard our nation against a plethora of natural hazards--flood, volcanoes, earthquakes, invasive species, and more--give their candid assessments of the situation. The prognoses are poor. There is no cost-effective way to dodge the Y2K demon. Large-scale models are being created to simulate the event and ameliorate the consequences to whatever degree possible, but no one really knows what will happen on that fateful day. As we go around the table, administrators of the agency's thousands of Windows NT4 and 3.1 machines shake their ashen-countenanced heads at the terrifying uncertainty presented by this technological monster. Finally, it is my turn to report. I’m the Y2K coordinator for the Telecommunications Services Branch of the Office of Program Support at USGS HQI am reading ;Login: magazine and don't hear my name called the first time. They try again, with more stridency. I look up, eyebrows raised questioningly. "Please give the Y2K status for the Telecommunications Services Branch," the facilitator commands. I clear my throat. "We have two Sun 4500 clusters and about 250 Data General AViiON workstations. All of them are running some flavor of UNIX, whose designers intelligently provided the date function 32 bits to work with while Bill Gates was still mucking about in prep school. At 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, 19 January 2038, when this issue has some relevance to TSB, I will be long retired and quite possibly dead. I really don't see any good reason to make a fuss over it at this point. End of report."And that, dear children, is how I got excused/banned from all future meetings.Robert G. Ferrell is still an Information Systems Security Professional for the US Government and, ironically, now writes the /dev/random column for ;Login: magazine.A High Stress Non EventI was one of the senior network engineers at Long Beach Memorial hospital in Los Angeles. We had five hospitals in our circle of responsibilities. Long Beach which was the home site, Orange Coast, Anaheim, Saddleback and Miller's Children's Hospital. Plus there were many small offices, labs and remote sites that "kinda of sort of" fell under our roof.There was a very chaotic assortment of very old software and new software with a lot of it falling between the two extremes. One of our oldest applications was the surgery scheduling software which ran on even then "old" Netware 3.1 servers using Btrieve. This was akin to a "made in the garage" application and was not well supported even in the best of times. This was not the best of times.We had new software down in Radiology where they were using high speed networks to digitize and read x-rays etc remotely. Not to mention all the odd appliances like routers, switches, print servers, neonatal data transponders, wireless, security systems and so on. And I'm not even counting all the COBOL applications that had been custom written by long past employees or consultants, DOS, Visual Basic apps, home brew Access Databases and yes, the rogue server or two. Or three…or four.In a word, messy.We spent over a year and a lot of effort trying to identify problem apps and put fixes in place either from the vendors or hacking it ourselves in the case of the unsupported applications. The idea was make this as much of a non-event as we could.When it came time for the actual roll over, all IT staff were required to be on site, not on call, be ON SITE which really tweaked more than a few spouses. In my department, we had our own itty bitty party and we got to see the fireworks from the Queen Mary from a parking structure. Right after 9PM we got a call from a sister facility back east saying one of their business scheduling apps died on the stroke of midnight. We used this same application, as did many other facilities, and we got calls as each time zone rolled over. Since it was a business app, I did not have anything to do with it. I was much more worried about my servers and network hardware. Happily midnight came and went and all my stuff was running fine. There were some instances where the date got jacked up but the firmware still ran even though the log files were nuts insisting it was 1961 or other silly things like that.In the end, Y2K was a high stress non-event for most of the IT staff at all our facilities. Mike Sweeney is now a Network Security Manager at an undisclosed location.Beanie Babies And Tulip Wars(Note: Mac|Life changed two names in the story below to protect the ignorant)Prior to joining True North at the end of 1998 (now InterPublic Group), which is the largest ad agency in the world, I was the CIO of Fallon McElligott, a much smaller ad agency. Fallon's CFO, Mr. X, and I began the "Y2K is like the Tulip Craze of the 1600s" war. My argument was that Y2K was just an end of the millennia mania, much like the Beanie Babies at the current time and the Dutch Tulipmania of 1633. All hype and not much reality. I argued that Beanie Babies were as worthless as the Dutch Tulip bulbs and in the same vein, Y2K would come and go with as many or as little problems as every other year. Mr. X, being a member of the bow-tie wearing, afraid of everything crowd, thought that Y2K would cause everything from elevator stoppages to airplanes falling out of the sky. I remember asking if he was related to Chicken Little. I was summarily let go from Fallon, only to "fail up" to being named the CIO of the world's largest ad agency.There I fell in with a much more enlightened crowd -- at least at the level of Management Executive Committee, or MEC (which was comprised of the CEO, the CEOs of the 14 major holding companies, the CFO, Chief Legal Officer, and myself). When I came on board at True North, the Y2K plan was like any other. We had the requisite letter-to-the vendors campaign (asking what they were doing), review of all software and OS configurations, and review of our Unix mainframe code.Because we were an ad agency, many of the thousands of computers were Macintoshes. No problems there. Many were PCs, and Microsoft was already addressing any patches there. That left outside vendors, physical plants, and our Unix mainframe. A quick call to the mainframe guys told me the one thing I needed to know -- if there was going to be a glitch, they'd catch it the day after, patch it, and we'd be back billing just fine. Besides, if someone doesn't get a bill for a couple of days, it wouldn't kill us.An hour or two of research on my part found that:1. International monetary float would not be affected -- no international financial downside to any Y2K problems2. Nobody would be billing the first few days after the 1st of the year anyway -- no world-wide downside to any Y2K problems3. Our ad system (the system that runs ads on more TVs, print, and radio than you'd ever expect worldwide) was always pre-bought anyway, and I was assured by all TV stations that "every ad would run, even if we have to manually push a button" -- no client problems there, even if Y2K did go crazy.In short, if we could bill, and we could put client product out the door -- who cared what else would happen? Well, that was the logic that the MEC shared with me.Then I started to meet the IT team. Our CTO wannabe, Mr, Z, was convinced, much like Mr. X back at Fallon, that the sky was going to fall down."Microsoft is going to have more holes than Swiss Cheese" he would run around saying. Our EDS contractor thought that his letter campaign would help any liabilities (at $150 an hour on his part). Our security guys thought that someone would find some date-based loophole to break into our systems. Our physical security guys wanted signs on all elevators saying "do not enter on 12/31/99 unless you want to be here for awhile." My own IT-CFO (my budget was in the high tens of millions) thought that every billing system we had would fail. I had found Mr. X’s missing flock of Chicken Littles.To ease everyone's nerves, I promised not to do anything "radical" until we convened my own CIO's council, made up of all of the holding company CIOs and the national CIOs. Over 100 people. We all met in Chicago at the beginning of 1999. Think over 100 Chicken Littles. Squawking in 40 to 50 languages that the sky was going to fall.I couldn't believe it.It took me until June to convince my own IT staff to transfer the EDS $150 per hour letter-writer to the legal side of the house so I could fire him.I had to permanently assign my CTO wannabe to the Unix mainframe programmers (after taking them out for a great Steak and Wine dinner in NYC and promising that I'd make it up to them) so that he could randomly test any code with dates in it. We purposely set up the tests for twice a month because there were really only about a dozen or so places where a date could be entered. We figured that would keep him busy until at least December 15th and they only had to deal with him twice a month.I even had to acquiesce (because of the rabid IT leadership complainers) to sending out an "international testing task force" to review all of the Y2K binders in each country and at each of the major holding companies. A wry note here -- I noticed in the travel bills that no one went to countries like Canada, Mexico, Bolivia, Congo or Ethiopia for testing. Of course the UK, France, Italy, Australia, Japan, Brazil and China; i.e., the "fun" places were visited.In short, I slashed the Y2K budget as much as possible. I would have killed it all had I been given the chance.By August the IT betting pool had me being "canned for short sited Y2K stupidity" at 2-1 odds.By October they upped the odds to 4-1. I took the bet.By November my CTO wannabe was writing "an official memoranda for posterity" and sending it to the head of HR and Legal that I should be canned for "Y2K Ostrich-like behavior". And he had additional signatures. The odds were now 6-1 against my making it to December 1st. However, our security analyst stopped staring at the sky and he convinced our IT CFO (who liked the "savings compared to our peers"), telephony, and physical plant staff to do the same.December 1st rolled around and the CEO and I had dinner on that night just for laughs (and to show support that leadership wasn't falling for any of the complaints). December 15th rolled around and the odds makers were now betting "for" me. I hedged my bet just in case.December 31st I held a party at my house in Chicago for anyone in IT leadership who wanted to attend. My CTO was at our HQ's call center "just in case." At "minutes after midnight" in every country in the world, I would get a phone call saying "all is fine". I told the CEO that by the time it hit Chicago, if I was still sober, I'd call him. About the time the fireworks on Lake Michigan died off, I called the CEO. I was semi-sober. He wasn't even close.When we got back to work I shipped everyone who had complained about my Y2K attitude a little "Clucky the Chicken" Beanie Baby and a Tulip Bulb (paid for by the big payoff on the bet I wouldn't be canned). Most didn't get the joke.Every December when I plant my Tulip bulbs here in California, I can't help but laugh.Dorian J. Cougias is now the founder and Lead Analyst of Network Frontiers and is the co-creator of the Unified Compliance Framework.NEXT: More Stories from IT BattlegroundsTiny Parachutes for SaleWhat really stands out in my mind about Y2K all these years later was the overriding unreasonable expectation of what could happen rather than what actually happened. Starting in about 1998 there were suddenly so many people who knew nothing about programming and next to nothing about technology explaining frantically why the Y2K bug was important and that programmers like myself really needed to pay attention to it. We were aware, thank you. I remember working on Y2K issues in 1981 for a product that was off the market long before 2000.I equated it to being in an airplane in bumpy weather. It’s then you wonder how good the pilot is. If you start screaming, “I wonder if the pilot knows about this” I’ll bet you could sell parachutes (even tiny ones that don’t work will help people overcome the fear you instilled). There was a lot of money made on Y2K, some of it was put to good use.But what everyone missed during the whole Y2K debacle is that your life depends on programmers honesty, intelligence and diligence. Yes, your life. That was true in 1999, it’s still true and everyone still misses the point.Geoffrey Feldman is now a software developer and senior problem solver at Seabase Consulting.We Learned NothingWe were hearing that Y2K was the end of the world, computers would crash, critical systems would fail, planes would fall out of the sky and we’d swiftly devolve to, at best, a pre-industrial age lifestyle. The newspapers were filled with stories about how people were building bomb shelters and stocking up on water and canned goods.And then Y2k happened but there was no meltdown because we fixed the issues beforehand. There were some minor problems around the world, passwords that thought they were expired, programs that figured their licensing period was up -- but no major issues. It made some people wonder if the superbug that they first created and then they fixed was worth all that money. Some people point to it as a problem that didn't exist. It existed, and we did a good job of fixing it. At the time I was dealing with Y2K planning for several years at IBM as a Development Manager and Certified IT Architect, focusing on their products and customers’ systems. IBM was taking Y2K quite seriously as far back as 1995. We had a local conversion center with more than 1,000 professionals working with IBM mainframe systems to solve the customers Y2K problem.I saw many IT executives inflating their budgets, under the umbrella of preparing for Y2K issues. This was the only time that I remember when IT executives were strongly encouraged to spend money. Suddenly there was a way to get the hardware and software you needed or wanted if you used Y2K to justify it. And as anxiety levels ramped up once the general public started hearing about Y2K you could justify buying almost anything by chanting those magic three letters.There was definitely a lot of cynicism after the fact, and some of it was justified.The whole thing reminded me about how important computers had become in our daily lives and how a small problem could have really big consequences. It sharpened my focus on doing quality work. Overall though, we really learned nothing because only failure teaches. It was one of the only times in recent memory that the world has come together and spent a ton of money and time to prevent disaster. We can't seem to do this now with other impending crises like dangerous economic bubbles, resource scarcity and climate change. I guess it’s because those deadlines can’t be clearly marked on a calendar.Ulf Mattsson is now the CTO at Protegrity.Got an interesting or funny Y2K story? Drop it in the comments below.
-
Gizmodo, the iPhone 4th Gen, and Beer
Image via Gizmodo Well, as much as I hate talking about rumors, fact is, this is a mammoth story, and it needs to be addressed here on Apple Gazette. This is going to recap the saga that is the 4th-Gen iPhone, Engadget, Gizmodo, Apple, and everything in between. But before we can talk about what it is and why it's so important, let's first discuss how this all shook out. On April 17, Engadget reported that they had been sent pics of the prototype iPhone. It had been left at a bar in San Jose, and the pictures were now being mailed to various tech outlets. It wasn't said specifically, but at the time the owner of said pics may have been shopping for a price on the device, which was alluded to in the post: There may be a chance to get some more face-time with the handset, but we wanted to get these photos to you guys ASAP. Stay tuned, we're working on more details as we type — for now, enjoy the gallery below! Well, Engadget didn't get the device. But someone else did, and is rumored to have paid $10k for it. Gizmodo. This topic has been pretty hot on the interwebs. So much so that Ken Sweet wondered about it aloud on Twitter: I'm waiting for the backstory on @gizmodo's #iphone exclusive. How was it lost/found? I think @nicknotned has said he'll pay for exclusives. Denton's response was just part of the answer: @kensweet Yes, we're proud practitioners of checkbook journalism. Anything for the story! So Gizmodo buys the supposed iPhone, then on April 19 – must have overnighted that thing – they posted up on the site with the title: “This is Apple's Next iPhone.” Sounded arrogant to me, and frankly, like a load. So I decided to read it, determine that it was probably another hyped up thing to garner pageviews, and went on my way. Except that I may have been wrong. Yesterday, Gizmodo released the story on how they came to acquire the device, and how it came to be found in that bar in San Jose. A software engineer named Gray Powell went to The Gourmet Haus Staudt to enjoy a beer or two, and along with him came his prototype iPhone. As it turns out, Gray works for Apple and is responsible for developing iPhone Baseband Software, which is how the iPhone can make a phone call. He went to the bar, had a few, and left the iPhone on the stool. A drunk guy found it, handed it to a less inebriated gentleman, who decided to hang onto it and give it back to the owner. He flipped it on, looked through some apps and found the owner's Facebook profile, and planned on calling him the next day. Except that he didn't. When he went to fire up the phone, it was now turned off – according to Gizmodo, probably via MobileMe – and now it was a useless piece of junk. So he decided to take off the case on the device and see what was doin. Turns out, it wasn't an iPhone 3G like the case said, it was something different. That's when things proceeded to go a bit differently. We don't know how it all broke down from there exactly, but we do know the end result: Gizmodo paid this guy to buy the iPhone from him, and then they published the results. What they found seems to be the next iPhone, and it's pretty hard to deny that it's at the bare minimum, a functioning prototype. You could ignore all this of course, and just say it's crap. That's what I did. But then Gizmodo called Gray at Apple to get a response: Gray Powell: Hello? John Herrman: Is this Gray? G: Yeah. J: Hi, this is John Herrman from Gizmodo.com. G: Hey! J: You work at Apple, right? G: Um, I mean I can't really talk too much right now. J: I understand. We have a device, and we think that maybe you misplaced it at a bar, and we would like to give it back. G: Yeah, I forwarded your email [asking him if it was his iPhone], someone should be contacting you. J: OK. G: Can I send this phone number along? J: [Contact information] At this point, I don't know how this isn't the next iPhone, or at the bare minimum, a really close prototype. So now the question becomes, what happens from here? From Apple's standpoint, this is a big f-ing deal. An employee took an Apple prototype out into the wild, acted irresponsibly, then lost the device. Now the whole world knows what's coming out sometime in June, and they have no big reveal. No iPad moment. No time to build up suspense about what the device is going to be and get customers lined up for hours to buy it. Instead, all the pomp and circumstance is taken out of the event, and people will walk into that conference center on June 22 with smug looks on their faces and tight-lipped smiles. No applause, no “one more thing,” nothing fancy. This has got to be eating Steve alive. There's been speculation as well that this is a controlled leak, designed to stir up hype about the iPhone and get people in line to make a purchase. I disagree. Apple leaks things to reputable companies like the Wall Street Journal, and does so in a very controlled way. Look at the iPad, for example. At first, you could make the argument that there was nothing but leaks around the device, since everyone out there from CEOs to newspapers were talking about the Apple Tablet. But no one had the device in hand – at least not that we say prior to the big reveal – and no pictures were taken. Every single photoshopped image of the iPad was fraudulent, and just an educated guess as to what could be. It was a bit chaotic, but it drummed up hype for the iPad, which was Apple's intent all along. Were this a leak, I imagine it would've gone down a bit differently. There's no way to tell that the person who found the phone would leak it to the press. It was only after Mister X got the case off of the phone that he discovered what it really was, and that's all by chance. I don't see it being possible that this was a controlled leak in any way, and fact is, we'll never know for sure. So what does Apple do? They sue the crap out of Gizmodo. They fire Gray. They lock down the building even more than before and maybe – just maybe – they delay the launch so they have time to redesign the device in some new way so that Gizmodo looks like an ass. I think it's very likely that the first two will happen, if the ball isn't rolling already. The rest is still unclear. We'll just have to wait until June to show the world. Gizmodo had better buckle down for a fight. When it comes down to brass tax, they purchased stolen property. Sure, Gray “lost” it, and that's how they'll defend it in court. But the mysterious person who found it should've returned it to him right away. Instead, he sold it to the highest bidder – and that's a problem. If Gizmodo is a reputable organization, then they'll claim that they can't reveal their source and will hide behind the constitution. If they're not, they'll rat out their Mister X and he'll go to jail, get fined, or sued himself. No matter what, Gizmodo is going to meet Apple's legal team. Of course, Apple could go another route with Gizmodo, as mentioned in the comments on their very post: You guys better be prepared for the mighty God hammer that will fall after June's unveiling. After that, it's going to hurt, A LOT! For 10k, the thief will lose a lot more than that defending himself in court. Gizmodo may be ban hammered for life from Apple events. This is Not going to end well. The reason that Apple's been quiet now is because they want plausible deniability that this is the next iPhone. Once it's announced however, Jobs will unleash the hounds of war. All those who are responsible for this betrayal will be punished. If Gizmodo is banned from Apple events, that could hurt their bottom line. Apple fanboys might leave the site because Gizmodo would have nothing to offer them. Of course, they would have lots of other things to post about – Apple isn't everything, remember – but it could be a kick in the junk to them at the minimum. But this story is developing quickly, too. Late last night, Gizmodo posted up a letter from Apple. The interesting part though is the response from Gizmodo: Happy to have you pick this thing up. Was burning a hole in our pockets. Just so you know, we didn't know this was stolen [as they might have claimed. meaning, real and truly from Apple. It was found, and to be of unproven origin] when we bought it. Now that we definitely know it's not some knockoff, and it really is Apple's, I'm happy to see it returned to its rightful owner. Followed by commentary about the legal ramifications, per their lawyers: (Our legal team told us that in California the law states, “If it is lost, the owner has three years to reclaim or title passes to the owner of the premises where the property was found. The person who found it had the duty to report it.” Which, actually, the guys who found it tried to do, but were pretty much ignored by Apple. ) Except that's not how it was portrayed in their first post. At least, not at first. I can't confirm this is any way, so I'm not going to make a blatant accusation. And frankly, I could be wrong. But I've spent a lot of time pouring through their post, and in the time period between putting draft 1 of this to bed along with myself, and waking up the next morning, something's been updated. I have no recollection of this passage: He reached for a phone and called a lot of Apple numbers and tried to find someone who was at least willing to transfer his call to the right person, but no luck. No one took him seriously and all he got for his troubles was a ticket number. He thought that eventually the ticket would move up high enough and that he would receive a call back, but his phone never rang. What should he be expected to do then? Walk into an Apple store and give the shiny, new device to a 20-year-old who might just end up selling it on eBay? That sounds like a big case of CYA if I'm correct, which could be verified with Apple at some point, I'm sure. If I'm not, apologies to all around. Regardless, Mister X did know who had the phone at the bar, and could've given it back to him directly just by sending him a message via Facebook. He had his name, after all. So even if this passage was added after the fact, Mister X is still in the wrong and could have – and should have – returned the phone. This may come across at first like it's the score of the century, and a huge scoop for Gizmodo. But the way the device was acquired, from start to finish, is shady and I think that there will be more revealed on this topic in the days ahead. I think at the end of it all though, this might be a lesson about how to deal with Apple and how not to deal with them.
-
Rumor Has It: Next-Gen iPhone Named, Dated and Described in Korean Newspaper
The rumor mill surrounding the Apple tablet is so intense as to possibly beat out the hype surrounding any other Apple product to date, but that doesn't mean it's the only one being talked about. Today, a Korean source reported details about the upcoming iPhone revision, which many expect to arrive in late June or July. Telecoms Korea reported on a story by South Korean local newspaper ETNews that details the hardware capabilities and some new software features of the upgraded device. The story also maintains that the iPhone will indeed by named the “iPhone 4G,” despite it not looking like it will support 4G network connectivity. The newspaper article cites internal sources at both KT, the exclusive iPhone carrier in South Korea, and Apple Korea as having provided the information. I suppose it's possible that Apple is more willing to authorize product leaks from internal sources in the Asian market, where competition from established veterans like Samsung can be especially fierce. While the list of new features doesn't get into specific detail about things like megapixels or processing power, it still provides a tantalizing glance at the future of Apple's little smartphone that could. According to ETNews, the iPhone 4G will offer up to twice the battery life of the 3GS, something that will come as welcome news to those of us who seem to have their devices plugged into the wall more often than not. Two camera modules will also be used, one of which will be front-facing to make video calling a reality, and not just the one-way kind currently made possible by Fring. Video calling will initially be introduced in the Korean market, according to the paper's sources, probably because the network infrastructure already exists there to use it, so it makes sense as a test market. The phone will also possibly support mobile TV, which is popular in Asia but has yet to truly appear here in North American markets. Hopefully Apple is also working to bring this feature to handsets on our side of the world, as I would really love to have TV access while enduring especially long commutes. Lastly, the article claims that KT will be offering test models of the new device to corporate customers in April or May, prior to the official launch. This is the one detail in this particular rumor report that strikes me as odd. As far as I know, Apple keeps a very tight leash on its pre-release devices, limiting their distribution mostly (if not exclusively) to internal testers and executives. I doubt very highly that it'd authorize one of its carrier partners to go handing out the hardware before it hits the street, whatever the intended reason.
-
★ Regarding the Verizon and ‘iPhone Lite’ Rumors
There’s been much speculation this week regarding reports in BusinessWeek and The Wall Street Journal of talks between Apple and Verizon. To wit: that Apple is considering Verizon for a future iPhone and/or its mythical forthcoming tablet. This is not too complicated. Let’s just play “What’s in it for them?” Verizon — Would they want to sell some sort of iPhone model? Yes, of course. The iPhone has undeniably turned into a big deal. Verizon has nothing to do with it, and it is the single best competitive advantage held by AT&T, Verizon’s biggest rival. None of the iPhone rival devices Verizon has offered so far is any good or very popular (cf. the BlackBerry Storm), and the Palm Pre is exclusive to Sprint. AT&T — The iPhone means more to AT&T than any other phone it carries. Most people decide which carrier to buy a phone from, go there, then pick a phone. With the iPhone, people decide they want to buy one, and then they go to AT&T. Some number of iPhone owners switched to AT&T specifically and only because of the iPhone. In fact, there are some who switched to AT&T to get the iPhone despite the fact that, all things considered, they’d prefer to buy a phone from another carrier — often Verizon, which is widely regarded as having the best overall U.S. network coverage. It is very much in AT&T’s interests to keep the iPhone as an exclusive AT&T device for as long as it can. Apple — The iPhone matters to AT&T, but AT&T doesn’t really matter much to Apple. The U.S. is Apple’s (and the iPhone’s) biggest market, but it’s still just one country in a big world. In the just reported quarter, AT&T reported activating 1.6 million iPhones. But Apple reported selling just under 3.8 million total iPhones — so 58 percent were sold outside the U.S. AT&T isn’t Apple’s iPhone partner. They’re just Apple’s iPhone partner in the U.S. I think the U.S. tech press often overlooks this, hence some of knee-jerk skepticism that Apple would even talk to Verizon. Apple wants profit and they want market share. The trick is balancing the two. Surely Apple makes more money per iPhone with an exclusive deal, but they would sell more total devices if iPhones were available on both AT&T and Verizon. Yes, Verizon’s network is CDMA, not GSM, and so it would require Apple to produce different hardware. But there are some number of Verizon customers who won’t switch to AT&T but who would buy an iPhone from Verizon, and my guess is that that number is high enough for Apple to at least consider producing Verizon-compatible hardware. So, even if Apple would prefer to stick with AT&T exclusively, at least for another year, I’d find it surprising if they didn’t at least talk to Verizon just to hear an offer, and perhaps more importantly, to leak the flirtation to the press so as to keep the pressure on AT&T to offer Apple the best possible terms. But as for whether I think an iPhone on Verizon is actually imminent — as in “coming in the next few months” imminent — I doubt it. During Apple’s quarterly finance call last week, analyst Gene Munster asked why Apple has maintained its exclusive agreement with AT&T. COO Tim Cook said: On AT&T, Gene, we view AT&T as a very good partner. We believe that they’re the best wireless provider in the U.S. and we are very happy to be doing business with them. They have done a very good job with iPhone, they’ve put the full force and weight of their company behind it, it’s a major strategic thrust for them and so we’re very happy with the relationship that we have and do not have a plan to change it. And then Cook again, responding to a follow-up question regarding any “technical hurdles”: Well from a technology point of view as you know, Verizon is on CDMA and we’ve shown from the beginning of the iPhone to focus on one phone for the whole of the world and when you do that, you really go down the GSM route, because CDMA doesn’t really have a life to it after a point in time. Steve Jobs, famously, is known for pooh-poohing ideas or features only to turn around months or years later and declare them to be the best ideas or features ever, now that Apple has embraced them. Apple doesn’t announce big changes until it is ready to announce them, direct questions be damned. And so I wouldn’t count on Apple’s “not having a plan to change” the AT&T exclusivity lasting forever.1 But the CDMA comment does not sound like misdirection from a company planning to unveil CDMA phones this summer. That comment was specific, and it wasn’t something along the lines of we’re not going to do CDMA, but rather more along the lines of CDMA is on its way out industry-wide. That’s just not something Cook would say if Apple were planning to announce a CDMA phone in June — and without a CDMA iPhone, there’s no iPhone for Verizon.2 Ask again when Verizon’s next-generation LTE network is running, though. But that’s just the iPhone. If Apple is preparing to soon announce its supposed tablet / mediapad / whatever, and if said tablet / mediapad / whatever is going to support mobile broadband, it could well use EVDO from Verizon without contradicting anything Cook said about CDMA or the iPhone remaining exclusively on AT&T. (Brief Interpolation Regarding the Proper Perspective Regarding Any Rumored New Devices: Keep in mind that these tablet / mediapad / whatever rumors are growing to the point where if the WWDC keynote comes and goes without any mention of this device, the jackass contingent is going to blame Apple for not releasing it rather than blame the rumor reporters for being wrong. BusinessWeek’s report had the most details about purported new devices, but in terms of timing, only said “One of these devices may be introduced as early as this summer.” Point of this interpolation being that if — and this is a very real if — this really is a device Apple is preparing to release, fever-pitched rumors won’t make it appear any sooner than when Apple deems it ready.) Erring on the Side of Increased Market Share It’s my assumption that Apple’s long-term plan for the iPhone platform is patterned after Apple’s long-term plan for the iPod. Apple’s iPod strategy has been phenomenally successful, and there are many obvious parallels. The biggest difference is that the iPhone has succeeded far faster than the iPod did — Apple didn’t release the Windows version of iTunes until two years after the original iPod was released as a Mac-only peripheral. One of the key points in the history of the iPod was the release of the iPod Mini in January 2004. That’s when Apple expanded the iPod from a single product to a family of products, and the Mini proved to be a smash hit. The formula behind the iPod Mini was simple: Apple made a smaller, cheaper device with more or less the same technical specs as the original iPod from October 2001. Apple went on to repeatedly improve upon the iPod in two ways: on the high end by producing new devices with the same shape and price but with new features (additional storage, color screens, larger screens, video, etc.); on the low end by taking the existing features and making them smaller and cheaper. So here’s how I see Apple applying its iPod strategy to the iPhone. At some point the iPhone will expand to two form factors: A high-end iPhone with the same basic size and price as previous iPhones, but with significant new features. Obvious potential new features would be things like more storage space, more RAM, a faster CPU, an improved (and eventually video-capable) camera, 802.11n Wi-Fi, and superior battery technology. A new, lower-priced, smaller, and more adorable iPhone, with more or less the same technical specs as the original iPhone. Given that those specs include the 320  480 display, I wouldn’t expect something tiny, but remember that the original iPod Mini was “just” 35 percent smaller by volume than the then-current full-sized iPod. Shrink the iPhone’s forehead and chin and make it thinner — maybe a lot thinner — is what I’m thinking. Existing iPhone apps would run just fine on the new device, as it’d have similar, if not identical, CPU performance and RAM to previous full-sized iPhones. Such an iPhone sounds much like the “iPhone Lite” that BusinessWeek reported its source saw. The only question is when. Could be this year. Could be next year. But put me on the record for predicting it’ll happen before the end of 2010. The reason why Apple did this with the iPod, and why I’m convinced they’ll do it again with the iPhone, is that when it comes to managing the balance between per-unit profit and overall market share, Apple is determined to err on the side of market share. (Not as much with the Mac, however — the difference being that PCs are now a firmly established market.) Most gadget companies, when they have a smash hit on their hands, try to milk it. A typical company that found itself selling millions of $400 hard-drive-based digital music players would try its best to continue selling the same $400 hard-drive-based digital music players for as long as it could. Apple, despite an overwhelming 70 percent market share, aggressively added features and drove down its own prices, year after year after year. I’ve previously quoted the following passage from Steven Levy’s 2004 Newsweek interview with Steve Jobs, but it’s worth repeating here. The topic was the Mac’s long-stagnant (at the time) market share. If that’s so, then why is the Mac market share, even after Apple’s recent revival, sputtering at a measly 5 percent? Jobs has a theory about that, too. Once a company devises a great product, he says, it has a monopoly in that realm, and concentrates less on innovation than protecting its turf. “The Mac user interface was a 10-year monopoly,” says Jobs. “Who ended up running the company? Sales guys. At the critical juncture in the late ’80s, when they should have gone for market share, they went for profits. They made obscene profits for several years. And their products became mediocre. And then their monopoly ended with Windows 95. They behaved like a monopoly, and it came back to bite them, which always happens.” In the near term, Apple could fuel explosive iPhone unit sale growth just by reducing the entry price. But at some point, looking a handful of years down the line, expanding the iPhone’s U.S. market share is going to require going beyond AT&T. The only question is when. Worth a footnote: Munster never mentioned Verizon by name. He simply asked about maintaining exclusivity with AT&T. Cook brought up Verizon on his own.↩ The CDMA/GSM schism has blocked Verizon users from even unlocked iPhones. I’ve long wondered how much more prevalent iPhone unlocking would be if Verizon had a GSM network.↩
-
How to Use Your Mac and Your iPhone to Completely Automate Your Home
Modernize your home and simplify your life with these painless products and strategies that automate your house, apartment, castle, or whatever keeps the roof over your head. Illustrations by Hanoch Piven Still using jagged little strips of metal to unlock your front door? Paying someone to feed your pets while you’re away for a weekend? Then it’s time to truly enter the second decade of the 21st century. Setting up home-control automation that runs from your Mac and iPhone is surprisingly simple, and the results can feel like magic. We kick things off with a primer that takes the hassle and jargon out of home control, then dive straight into showing you the best possibilities for managing your home’s lights, entertainment, security, and loads more. Just wait until you check out the washing machine that tweets when it’s finished a load…What Exactly is Home Control?You might’ve also heard it called “home automation,” and you might be a bit reluctant to slog through all the jargon and devices that the phrase brings to mind. But really, it’s simple. There are two types of home-control systems: the fantasy technology you see at Disney’s Tomorrowland and the gear you can actually deploy in the real world. Unfortunately, manufacturers of home-control systems have overpromised and under-delivered for so many years that many people have just stopped listening.Good news: It’s safe to start listening again. There’s still a yawning chasm between fantasy and reality--we’re a long way from having a robot butler greet us with our smoking jacket and a perfectly muddled mojito as we step out of our flying car. But we can manage nearly every system in and around the home: lighting, heating and cooling, home theater, security, even irrigation.Why bother? Home-control systems are appealing for many reasons: They deliver unparalleled convenience and efficiency, they add value to your home, they strengthen your home’s physical security, and they help reduce your impact on the environment. With the right tools, you can monitor and manage all your home systems whether you’re on the couch, in the car, or at work. We’ll discuss those specific applications in the following pages, but first, it’s important to begin with an overview of the basics. Which home-control standard do you want to use? There are four major ecosystems to choose from, and naturally, they’re mutually exclusive (at least for the time being)…X10/InsteonIntroduced by Pico Electronics way back in the 1970s, X10 is the granddaddy of home-control technology. The passage of time and the long absence of significant competition helped X10 amass the largest installed base of any home-control technology, despite a reputation for being as reliable as a British sports car from the same era.X10 devices use a primitive form of power-line networking, meaning commands travel over your home’s existing electrical wiring. The X10 protocol doesn’t include a feedback loop, so there’s no way for devices sending commands to know whether those commands have been received and executed. The technology is also highly susceptible to electrical noise, which X10 devices sometimes interpret as valid commands. This can result not only in false negatives (a light or an appliance doesn’t turn on or off in response to a command), but also false positives (turning on or off in the absence of a command).Insteon, developed by SmartLabs (a major distributor of X10 products) in 2001, builds and improves on the X10 protocol without rendering X10 devices obsolete. Like the ZigBee and Z-Wave standards we’ll discuss next, every node on the Insteon network is capable of receiving information and passing on the command to the next node if it’s not the intended target. Unlike those two standards, Insteon devices use both radio frequencies (RF) and power lines to communicate (this retains X10 compatibility and reaches devices where radio waves can’t penetrate).SmartLabs' Insteon uses radio frequencies and power lines to communicate.SmartLabs maintains its own online retail operation and sells directly to the do-it-yourself market. The Insteon ecosystem is extremely robust in terms of the systems it can manage. You can buy plug-in and in-the-wall lighting controls; thermostats; motion, door, and window sensors; irrigation controllers; and more. Third-party support is very good in some respects and surprisingly limited in others. For instance, you’ll find a number of Mac software controllers (see below), but none of the major lighting-control manufacturers in the U.S. (Cooper Wiring Devices, GE, Intermatic, or Leviton) build Insteon-compatible switches, dimmers, or receptacles.Insteon’s failure to gain support from other manufacturers will likely limit its long-term prospects. The development of a bridge (a device capable of translating commands from one standard to another) would save Insteon customers from getting hosed if the market ultimately embraces one of the other competing standards. ZigBeeZigBee is the only home-control specification based on an IEEE standard (IEEE is the leading standards organization for device manufacturers; you’ve likely heard of its 802.11 standard for wireless networking). And you might think ZigBee’s designation as an international standard would automatically render it the marketplace winner (after all, how many wireless-networking products buck 802.11?), but far fewer ZigBee products are available to the do-it-yourself crowd than either Insteon or Z-Wave.Part of the problem is that early versions of the ZigBee standard didn’t guarantee interoperability; companies were allowed to develop products that worked only within their own proprietary systems. ZigBee does have a strong presence in the energy-consumption and -management market, where it’s embedded in thermostats inside the home and in utility smart meters outside it. One of the largest home-control manufacturers, Control4, builds complete ZigBee-based systems; but you must acquire it from a contractor who will handle the installation (charging you handsomely and limiting your expansion options in the process).Few ZigBee devices are sold at retail today, and none of the Mac home-control software programs we looked at are capable of operating a ZigBee network yet. Still, ZigBee’s status as an IEEE standard carries a lot of weight, and that could make it a major contender down the road.Z-WaveZ-Wave is a proprietary wireless home-control standard developed by Zensys, and it enjoys robust support from more third-party manufacturers than either Insteon or ZigBee. Cooper, GE, Intermatic, and Leviton offer comprehensive Z-Wave lighting controls; Wayne-Dalton builds garage-door openers; Schlage manufactures door locks; and so on.Control your home's temperature with this Z-Wave thermostat from Trane. You can buy nearly all these products at retail, but Wayne-Dalton’s HousePort and TrickleStar’s Z-Wave widget are the only Mac-compatible home-control programs we’re aware of, and they’re both very rudimentary. But Z-Wave has gathered more industry-wide momentum than either Insteon or ZigBee (including a critical endorsement from Intel), which could help it become the eventual home-control standard. Hybrid ZigBee/Z-Wave systems are also an option--Control4, for instance, introduced a bridge device late last year that enables its ZigBee system to control Z-Wave devices. Handy.The Future Awaits… Even more good news: There’s no need to make a decision just yet. In the next few pages, we’ll outline the most useful automation options for everything from automatically turning on your lights to amazingly simple webcam security to streaming video servers. Once you decide what’s right for your home, refer back to this primer to decide which hardware standard and corresponding software is right for you. Then it’s time to get your DIY on… even if doing it yourself amounts to Googling “professional home automation installers.”Home-Control SoftwareYou'll need to manage your entire home-control system by running software on your Mac that "talks" to your various interfaced devices. The major software players are:Indigo: Perceptive Automation’s Indigo Lite ($89.95) is compatible with Insteon and X10 modules, but not ZigBee or Z-Wave. It includes both a built-in web server and client/server architecture, so you can control the entire system locally or remotely. You can also schedule events (turn on the outside lights at dusk), set up triggers (send an email message if a door sensor is activated; monitor and program your Insteon thermostat), and more. Indigo Pro ($179.95) adds a host of advanced features, such as voice-command response. You can also control Indigo with your iPhone using the free app Indigo Touch.Indigo's software enables you to control your system remotely.XTension: Sand Hill Engineering’s XTension ($149.95) is compatible with X10 devices, several RF and niche interfaces, and certain wireless weather-monitoring products manufactured by Oregon Scientific. A technically savvy audience--even home automation contractors--will find a lot to like, but the software doesn’t support ZigBee, Z-Wave, or Insteon modules, which is… odd.Thinking Home: Always Thinking’s Thinking Home ($79) works with X10 and Insteon modules, but not ZigBee or Z-Wave devices. It’s not as sophisticated as Indigo, but it covers the basics and boasts an easy-to-learn user interface. Next Page: Lights, Power, Heating, Actions! >>Utilities: Lights, Power, Heating, Actions!Play puppetmaster with your home's utilities from your Mac and iPhone, and reap the benefits of convenience and efficiency.Light Your WayLighting automation puts the “utilitarian” into home-utility automation. These upgrades are flashy only on a literal level; you probably won’t go bragging to coworkers about how your House of the Future can turn its lights on and off. But these techniques form the foundation of home automation and make a great place to kick things off.For starters, try teaching your house to turn on the lights as you pull into the driveway. In addition to a basic home-control setup with Mac software and a hardware interface, you can add driveway-sensor modules ($169.99) or an automation-savvy garage-door retrofit ($71.99). Or just get a new garage-door opener ($189) with a Z-Wave interface to both control and monitor the door. With your Mac software, you can then build an if-then script that ties into your home lighting. If a car pulls into the driveway, activate the exterior house lighting. If you open the garage door, turn on the entryway lights inside.XTension lets you graphically assign icons that match your home setting.More sensors can create additional options. An outdoor motion sensor with floodlights ($54.88) can turn on when someone passes by. Your Mac could then log the time it happened and snap a webcam picture of your yard.You can take the process indoors, activating room lighting based on a motion sensor ($34.99). Full indoor automation can be harder since you might want to lounge around, but sitting without moving would turn the lights off. Still, it can work well in certain situations, such as lighting up a party as it moves around into different rooms.Control Utilities and Devices Over the InternetMost home automation software can connect online, letting you control devices from anywhere. Cancel your sprinkler schedule on a rainy day, open the shades in your teenager’s room at noon, adjust your thermostat when away, and otherwise tap into your setup over the Internet. Indigo and Thinking Home (see above for details) enable a web server within the automation interface. XTension uses an optional plug-in, X2Web ($39.95), to connect online.Indigo Touch, a free iPhone app, lets you change home-heating conditions from wherever you are. You could also remotely connect to an online Mac and control the whole computer as if you were sitting at home, directly using the automation software of your choice. Several remote-access tools enable this approach, including GoToMyPC ($19.95/month) and LogMeIn Free (free). LogMeIn even offers an iPhone version of the app, LogMeIn Ignition ($29.99). Or if you’re on MobileMe ($99/year), the Back to My Mac feature does the same thing. These tools might also be easier alternatives to setting up online components in the automation software because you shouldn’t have to make special network configurations on your home router to allow access.Open-ended plugs, such as the EZ102X4 (top) and the ApplianceLink V2, let you connect any device to your automation network.And many iPhone apps offer another way to connect to your hardware over the Internet. Indigo Touch (free) is a companion for that desktop software. Otherwise, just search for “X10,” “Insteon,” or “home automation” to browse the App Store. Be sure to read the requirements closely--some interface with software on your home Mac, while others talk directly to certain Internet-enabled automation controllers.Create Your Own Animal HouseYou can more easily take good care of your pets in an automated house, especially if you’re coming home late or taking a short vacation. Some hardware ties directly into your setup, while you might have to creatively hack other devices.For occasional meals, consider an internet-connected device, such as the Petwatch feeder ($269.99). The hardware includes a webcam so you can view your pet wherever you are.With this Petwatch feeder, you can watch and feed your pets remotely.If you’re technically minded--or you can draft someone who is--get creative with other home automation devices for great pet combinations. Some pet doors unlock when Fido or Whiskers get close; their collars hold a key. For one option, try a Solo Pet Door ($395 and up). This device retracts when it senses a magnet that your pet wears.We couldn’t track down any pet doors that talk to home automation systems, but you can combine a door like this with your own sensors. Add a proximity sensor and webcam to track and record your pet movement; you could even have your Mac email or SMS a picture. If you add a power relay to the mix, such as the EZIO2X4 ($134.99) or Insteon ApplianceLink V2 ($34.99), you can lock the door remotely. Maybe you want to give your pets access depending on the time of day. Or you could lock the door after a cat returns from a night of carousing. (There’re loads of creative options out there; for a few more, see Top Ten Wonders of the Home Automation World below.)Use Home Control To Live GreenerA home-control system can also help you to reduce your carbon footprint and use previous resources more efficiently. Here are six ways to get started:>> Rather than leaving your exterior lights on all day so your home isn’t dark when you get home, retrofit your light switches and use home-control software to turn them on when the sun sets.>> Conserve water by installing programmable sprinkler controllers that can adjust their irrigation schedules in response to weather conditions and forecasts.>> Create a vacation “scene” that turns your HVAC system off while you’re away. The system can also turn various lights on in the evening and off at night, using a randomized pattern that will fool prospective thieves into thinking the house is occupied.>> Install a programmable thermostat that turns your climate-control system off 30 minutes before you leave and 30 minutes before you’re scheduled to return home. Use your iPhone to remotely update the routine should your plans change.>> Reduce your electrical consumption and improve your media-room ambience by installing a dimmer that brings down the lights when you press Play on your remote control.>> Add an Insteon-enabled 220-volt control to your current high-voltage electrical appliances, such as a water heater (a notorious energy-waster), and conserve money and power by shutting them down during the day or when you’re away from home for extended periods.Next Page: Become Master of All You Survey >> Security: Become Master of All You SurveyYou install software updates to keep your Mac and iPhone secure. Let them return the favor by keeping tabs on your home while you're away.Keep an iSight on ThingsMac has a built-in iSight--or almost any QuickTime-compatible camera attached--you’re one step away from a surveillance system. All you need is software like Security Spy ($50) or EvoCam ($30), and you’re in the counterespionage business. Each application records pictures and video to your Mac continuously, according to schedules you define, or when it detects motion in a camera’s field of view. Just launch the app, point your iSight where you expect snoops to sneak (like a doorway or maybe the desk holding your plans for world domination), then leave your computer running. When the camera picks up movement, the software can start recording, email you a photo of the suspicious event, or alert the Mac running your home automation system to trigger a larger security plan. If you’re more curious than concerned, both applications can upload pictures to an FTP site and serve video to the internet, letting you view your camera’s feed from a browser. You can even log in remotely and tweak your security camera’s settings.EvoCam's surveillance system indulges your counterespionage fantasies.An iSight or webcam is fine for a small room, but Security Spy and EvoCam can monitor and control multiple video sources simultaneously. If your need to know extends to several rooms or even outdoors, you’ll want to weave a larger web of spies... er, cameras.Expand Your HorizonsStepping up from a single-camera system doesn’t have to be difficult. The same software and principles apply; you’ll just add additional cameras, video servers, or network cameras to view and control it all from a central Mac. Video servers send footage from multiple cameras to your wired or wireless network. If your cameras are digital, other Macs running surveillance software can do the job of the server. But if you’re using analog cameras like Q-See’s night-vision-capable QSC48030 ($199.99), you’ll want a dedicated server like Axis’ 240Q ($499.99) to digitize the signals so they can be seen by your Mac.Monitor from afar with Axis's 214 PTZ camera.Network cameras have built-in web servers that can join networks without the need for extra gear. A wide range of network cameras is available for every budget, from Panasonic’s webcam-style, 802.11g-enabled BL-C131A ($299.95) to the Axis 214 PTZ ($1299.00), which wouldn’t look out of place in a villain’s lair (or on a department-store ceiling). These and many other network cameras also sport lenses that can remotely pan, tilt, or zoom in to give you a better view of the action.There are endless varieties of hardware to consider, but the good news is there’s plenty of gear out there to fit your needs. Both Security Spy and EvoCam’s sites offer lists of compatible equipment that make good starting points for building a home-surveillance network.Sensor YourselfHandy as video surveillance is, it probably won’t be a good fit for every room in your house. For places where cameras are impractical, obtrusive, or just plain weird, Insteon motion sensors and magnetic door switches can keep tabs on who goes there when you’ve gone out.SmartLabs Design’s battery-powered Wireless Motion/Occupancy Sensor ($34.99) installs almost anywhere to detect motion in a 110-degree arc at a range of 40 feet. When an intruder is discovered, the Mac running your Insteon system can send you an email, turn on lights, or release the hounds. Because these motion detectors work by sensing heat, you’ll want to install yours in places without extreme fluctuations in temperature. That includes areas near heating grates, fireplaces, or large windows that get lots of sun.SmartLabs' wireless motion sensor alerts you to intruders.If motion detectors won’t do the job, guard your perimeter with SmartLabs’ TriggerLinc Wireless Open/Close Sensor ($34.99). Half the sensor attaches to a door, and the other half installs beside it on the door frame. Opening the door breaks the magnetic contact between the halves, letting your network know a would-be 007 has entered the room or found the hidden compartment in your desk. Since the TriggerLinc is compact and wireless, it installs on just about anything that opens: windows, drawers, server closets, you name it. You’ll never wonder if the babysitter has raided your liquor cabinet again.Unlock the PossibilitiesSecurity isn’t just about keeping people out. It’s also about letting the right people in, and the internet can help. The web lets you access secure information... why can’t it open your front door? For a monthly fee of $12.99, that’s just what Schlage’s LiNK Starter Kit ($299) can do. Its lever lock (also available in a dead bolt model) replaces the one already installed in your door, and ten buttons above its traditional keyhole allow entry with a programmable access code. But the lock also sports a battery-powered transmitter that talks to the included Bridge, a base station that connects to the internet and creates a wireless network for other LiNK devices, like the lamp controller that rounds out the kit.Schlange's LiNK Starter Kit remotely opens your front door.Once you’re a LiNK subscriber, you can log in to Schlage’s site and control your lock from anywhere. Need a friend to check your house while you’re away? No problem--remotely program your lock with a custom access code. The in-laws arrived while you’re stuck at work? Just open the door for ’em (or don’t, we won’t judge). You can even use the free Schlage LiNK iPhone app to manage access while you’re on the go. If you’re worried about being locked out when the internet is down, Schlage claims its locks’ batteries will last up to three years... but keeping a spare key on hand never hurt anybody.Put Professional Security a Touch AwaySchlage’s LiNK is one of several commercial packages that combine home security, automation, and the iPhone to monitor and control your home without fuss. Even if you’re not the DIY type, you can bring your peace of mind into this century.Commercial security companies offer plans and products designed to work together seamlessly. Products can include motion detectors, cameras, and other sensors run from a central control panel on a wall instead of your computer. While the basic idea is the same as a home-built system--devices monitor your house and warn you in case of trouble--commercial systems can offer integrated fire detection and alerts to personnel who will contact the authorities in an emergency. Plans cost anywhere from $30 to $50 a month (plus installation fees), but their features and simplicity may be worth the expense.For a monthly fee, commercial security companies can provide more than peace of mind.Alarm.com, CPI Security Systems, and Platinum Protection each offer free applications that let iPhone users control their security systems. These apps let you arm and disarm your system, monitor camera feeds, receive notifications when sensors detect something, and view a history of recent security events. Want to know what time your teenager really got home from his friend’s house? There’s an app for that.Next Page: Just Stream It >> Entertainment: Just Stream ItYour entertainment wants to be set free... and you want it to be too. These four easy setups will help you get the most out of your music, movies, and TV.Enjoy Your Music EverywhereSetting up a streaming audio system for the first time is like that day when you switched to a DVR to watch TV--you’ll wonder how you ever enjoyed your tunes without it. Once all your music’s on a home network, you can listen to your songs from any computer or standalone music-playing device. Whether you’re unwinding, waking up in the morning, or broadcasting beats throughout your house for a party, you don’t have to fuss with issues like which Mac has which MP3 or where that blasted CD got to--all your music is where you want it to be.Mac fans typically choose between three major music-streaming systems: Apple AirPort Express ($99), Sonos hardware ($349 and up), or Logitech Squeezebox devices ($149 and up). Each system has its own infrastructure, including ways to control everything from an iPhone or iPod touch. And each one has benefits and drawbacks in certain situations.Apple's AirPort Express wirelessly connects your Mac to your stereo.As expected, Apple’s AirPort Express is the best match for iTunes… and little else. These little boxes connect to a small set of computer-style speakers or into a home stereo, so factor those costs into your budgeting. You’ll need one AirPort Express and speaker set for each room you want to play music in. An Apple TV ($229) can also do double duty, streaming music even when your TV is off.While AirPort Express scores with simplicity, there are a few drawbacks. One or more Macs will have to be left on to play music, and extra features that the other systems pack--such as alarms and online services beyond basic streaming radio--don’t work without additional software.Next up: the Logitech Squeezebox devices. They work well once set up, but they feel more complicated than the other choices. Their server software runs off one of your Macs, telling Squeezeboxes where to find your songs. Like the AirPort Express, you’ll have to have a Mac running to access home audio.Sonos Bundle--along with the Sonos app--turns your iPhone or iPod into a remote control.Unlike Apple’s option, Squeezebox devices can play back more internet choices, including Rhapsody and Napster subscriptions. And you won’t have to keep a Mac running when playing online sources--woot! Logitech also offers several Squeezebox devices, from a clock radio–style box with a built-in speaker to hardware that connects to an entertainment center. Consider the Squeezebox if you can sacrifice some of the AirPort Express’s simplicity for better internet features.Last but not least, Sonos rules high-end audio streaming because of the care put into its hardware and interfaces. And audiophiles can really hear the difference between a Sonos device and its competitors. Like Logitech, Sonos hardware comes in a few packages, some designed to attach to a home stereo, one with built-in speakers, and some that connect to speakers. Sonos devices lack an interface beyond volume/mute buttons, so you’ll typically control everything with the excellent standalone remote ($349) or iPhone app. Sonos’ internet streaming choices match the Squeezebox, but unlike either competitor, Sonos hardware can play music directly from a network hard drive, so you don’t need to keep a Mac running. But Sonos might K.O. your budget as much as it does its competitors. You can pick and choose which gear you want, but plan for roughly $500 or more per room. Yowza.Share a Single iTunes Library with Multiple MacsYou’re probably thinking, wait… iTunes works well to share libraries and stream audio over a network. And if you’re happy with that method, there’s no harm in sticking with it. But iTunes sharing doesn’t let you sync music from any system to an iPod or compile ripped songs in a single location--and again, your main Mac needs to be left on for it to work. Fortunately, you can show your music who’s boss and let all of your Macs access a consolidated iTunes library.Before you begin, consider using TuneRanger ($29.99) to sync different libraries together into one master audio source. Then transfer that combined music folder to a network server or always-on Mac that everyone can reach. Launch iTunes on one Mac while holding Option, pick Choose Library, and navigate to the library file on your network.This time, the dreaded can't-find-library box is a good thing.On the other Macs, hold Option when launching iTunes, but make a new library on the local hard drive when prompted. On those systems, change the media folder location in the advanced iTunes preferences to point to the music shared on the network. Within the advanced iTunes preferences on all Macs, be sure to enable the checkbox to copy files to the media folder when adding to the library.Now install Syncopation ($24.95) on each Mac to keep the iTunes libraries synced. Check the setup documents for details, but be sure to click the option to Import Tracks Without Copying in the Advanced preferences.Breathe Music into Old Macs and iPodsIf you’ve got an old Mac sitting around, you can dust it off and turn it into an audio client. Translation: You’ll be able to control it from another computer, pushing songs over your network as if it were Squeezebox or AirPort Express hardware.You’ll never have to turn on--or even connect--a display, either. Try Airfoil on your host computer ($25) with Airfoil Speakers for Mac (free) on the old-Mac-turned-audio-client. You can even duplicate results on an iPhone or iPod touch with Airfoil Speakers for Touch (free).Stream MP3s and internet radio to your stereo with Softsqueeze.Even if you have no Squeezebox hardware, you can install the basic Squeezebox Server (free) software on your main computer to stream audio. Then add Softsqueeze (free) to your old networked Mac, and the Squeezebox software will treat it just like standalone hardware from Logitech.Get Started on Streaming VideoYes, your screen-viewing time can get better. Instead of sharing videos directly between various Macs, you can streamline your consumption of movies and TV by creating a central server that holds all your video. With this method, you’ll leave the server running instead of having to keep various Macs online. You’ll be better organized too.Don’t overthink the biggest piece of hardware in this process: the server. Just repurpose nearly any Mac sitting around. Even a five-year-old laptop or iMac will do the trick. Or for bonus points, turn an old PC into a Linux server.Once you scrounge up an old computer, consider its drives. For a moderate video collection, you’ll want about 60GB of free space. If you gobble down video like Wimpy takes to cheeseburgers, plan for 120GB or even more. Also aim for a speedy drive interface; essentially, just avoid connecting over original USB, which you might find on old systems. And be sure you’ve got a DVD drive if you’re going to transfer over movies. Check out this article for tips.Your network makes up the other biggest factor for streaming success. 100BASE-T is a must; if you have any old 10BASE-T devices between the server and clients, video will stutter. Ideally, consider gigabit (1000BASE-T) devices. If you must have a wireless client or server, get at least 802.11g or 802.11n Wi-Fi, and keep 802.11b devices--the original AirPort standard--off the network. In many situations, old devices slow down the network to maintain compatibility. That said, more than 10 years after Apple introduced AirPort, we still prefer an all-wired connection because it’s more reliable and faster than most wireless networks.Once you connect everything, you’ll just store all video files on the server and play them from client Macs or other devices. Again, iTunes provides the simplest way to manage everything: Run it on both systems, and use shared libraries to stream the video.iTunes can also help you get started with video streaming.But several other software options deliver fine alternatives. Bundled with OS X, Front Row’s big interface is ideal for watching shows across the room. Plex (free) and Boxee (free) are also built around long-distance interfaces and add more internet features than Apple’s software. Check out this article for even more tips, including additional TV-connected devices that can stream shows and directions to hack an AppleTV to run Boxee. Have fun!Next Page: Top Ten Wonders of the Home Automation World >> Top Ten Wonders of the Home Automation WorldYou've seen home automation by the book--now check out home automation off the hook. These labors of love take the good life to a level even the Jetsons never imagined.10. Grass Has a New Enemy We’re all about using the right tool to make a job easier, especially when that job is mowing the lawn in the summer heat. Terry Creer must agree--his remote-controlled lawn mower grafts an electric lawn mower to the wheels of a motorized wheelchair operated with a hobby-store radio controller. Swapping out the wheelchair’s original joystick for a wireless receiver keeps the mow-bot on the right path, and a fail-safe mechanism kills the motor if the controller’s signal is ever lost. Total cost for the project was less than $500. Sipping a cold drink while the lawn mower does all the work? Priceless.9. Tweets, Shoots, and LeavesWant to make the world a greener place? The Botanicalls tweeting plant monitor lets you do just that, one plant at a time. It’s a $99.99 kit that, along with a soldering iron and a little patience, lets you build a leaf-shaped moisture sensor that you stick into a plant’s soil. Once installed in your plant’s pot, the Botanicalls runs on AC power and plugs into your router’s Ethernet port to tweet when your leafy friend is feeling a little dry. With Botanicalls, you can embrace the DIY spirit, expand your techie know-how, and keep the flora in your life happy. What could be better?8. "Alcohol? Why, It's My Primary Function, Sir."When you sense the need to party, Jamie Price’s Bar2D2 is definitely the droid you’re looking for. Built in eight months from plywood, polycarbonate, and a used electric scooter, Bar2 works the room by remote control, serving drinks wherever he’s needed. A beer elevator brings cold bottles to any partygoer’s reach, and six onboard mixers let Bar2 make a galaxy of cocktails with the push of a button. And when the music starts, his sound-activated neon lights help make the party fully armed and operational. Maybe the Empire would have been cooler about that whole rebellion thing with a few of these guys scooting around the Death Star.7. Dryer Sheets and Washer TweetsGetting clothes dirty is fun, but washing ’em is a drag. Who needs the stress of waiting for the spin cycle to end? That’s why we wish we had Ryan Rose’s tweeting washing machine. The limit switch installed on its timer lets a simple microcontroller know when the washer is on or off. Red LEDs added to the washer’s controls show when it’s waiting for a wash to start, and a green LED shows when a wash has begun. When the load is finished, the washer tweets an update and displays an alert on a wall-mounted screen. It’s the coolest thing to happen to cleanliness since the bubble bath!6. The World Will Tweet a Path To Your Door You might think a wireless doorbell would be convenient enough, but not Roo Reynolds. His tweeting doorbell transforms an everyday wireless doorbell and ringer into an internet-connected chatterbox that gets two alerts for the price of one. The doorbell works like any other, but the ringer mechanism--squeezed into an Altoids can carefully cut to expose the ringer’s wireless antenna--sports a tiny circuit board that’s attached by a USB cable to a nearby computer. When visitors drop by and ring the doorbell, the computer tweets a simultaneous alert. Now that’s a curiously refreshing idea!5. Just the Cats, Ma'am When the neighborhood critters started sneaking through Ioan Ghip’s cat door for free meals, he took matters into his own hands, DIY-style, to make a tweeting cat door. First he outfitted the collars of his cats Gus and Penny with RFID (radio frequency identification) tags. Then he added an RFID reader and computer-controlled servo to the cat door so it would recognize only his two cats--no squirrels, raccoons, or bears allowed. Now when the spare laptop that monitors the cat door detects the lucky kitties nearby, it opens the door and tweets an update, while a webcam snaps a shot of them coming or going. Say cheese, guys!4. And We Thought Kernel Panics Were Scary Who says all automated homes have to be convenient and relaxing? Not automation contractor Jeffrey Lehman. Years ago he teamed with Halloween Park, a haunted-house attraction in Strinestown, Pennsylvania, to turn the spook show into a fully interactive, living videogame. Fiendishly clever use of motion detectors and other sensors guides victi… er, visitors through 26 rooms of creepy interactive puzzles that must be solved to escape the park… alive! Doors creak, lights flicker, and the terrifying Dead Fred leaps out of nowhere--all in response to people’s actions. Amazing what you can do with the right gear, ingenuity, and a healthy desire to scare the crap out of folks.3. "Incoming Romulan Ship! Fire Blu-ray!" Maybe it’s the big screen, but doesn’t it seem natural to mix Star Trek with a home theater? Yet that’s only half of what’s so cool about Gary Reighn’s entertainment command station, The Bridge. Sure, it’s packed with a starfleet of gear: a video projector, media players, and X10-powered lights--all under remote control. But what makes The Bridge so appealing isn’t its slick final-frontier technology--it’s that it looks like a fun place to hang out, just like the original Enterprise. Gary didn’t forget the home when he set out to build himself the ultimate home entertainment center on a budget, and it sure looks like he got his money’s worth.2. Now U Can Automate Cheezburger? The problem: feeding Mathew Newton’s cats Frankie and Elmo while he’s away. The solution: the internet-controlled cat feeder. A cereal dispenser stores the cat food, and a motor turns a flap to drop food into a splitter that sends the kibble to each kitty’s bowl in roughly the same portions. Here’s the trick: The feeder is controlled by the port status lights in an old Ethernet switch. Remote commands from a browser activate the lights, and their signals tell the feeder when to let Frankie and Elmo get their nom-nom on. Wow. No one can say these cats don’t have a well-trained owner.1. Push-Button Party Palace Each Wonder uses home automation in cool, creative ways, but the sheer excess of Zack Anderson’s MIDAS--ahem… that’s a Multifunction In-Dorm Automation System--deserves special notice. Made from a mini ITX motherboard and a battery of X10-controlled sensors, appliances, and displays, MIDAS transforms the room with the tap of a touchscreen (or even voice commands). There’s a work mode for studying and a relax mode for chilling, but when it’s time to party, swatting a big red panic button dims the lights, draws shades that serve as projection screens, and kicks out the techno jams. Sound-activated strobes, laser lights, and a fog machine do the rest. Surveillance cameras and a fingerprint-scanning security system keep everything safe while Zack’s away, but we have to wonder--why leave?
-
New Apple Products--as Imagined by the Elite Gadget Press
What will be Apple's next super-product--its next spectacular, game-changing "one more thing"? We asked five Apple experts to brainstorm with abandon and then brought their ideas to life.Apple doesn’t develop category-creating products. Instead, it enters categories that already exist, deconstructs the competition, burrows deep into R&D mode, and returns with gear so dominant, you’d think Apple invented the category in the first place. This approach doesn’t require rocket science. It only requires a commitment to push the boundaries of what’s possible--and not release a product until it offers enough innovative new features and clever design to make people switch away from the competition.Consider: The iPod has become a synonym for any portable music player. The iPhone has redefined what a smartphone can be. The MacBook enjoys near complete control of the $1,000-plus notebook market. And iTunes? It’s the world’s largest music retailer.Apple watchers are well aware that the company is planning to release some sort of tablet computer, and given Apple’s recent history of making surprise announcements, that could very well happen between the day we put this issue to bed and the day you read this article. But what if the tablet rumors are bunkum? And even if the tablet is announced, what comes next? Jaw-dropping products can take years to develop, and Apple surely has tablet-eclipsing wonders brewing in its labs.For answers, we turned to five tech journalists, people who follow Apple every day and are straight-A students of its products. Each expert was asked to fill out the same worksheet, wherein we requested details on the features, specs, wow elements, and essential “Appleness” of the gear they envision Apple making. We then took their worksheets and turned their ideas into the fully rendered fauxtotypes you see on the following pages. We did our best to stay faithful to our experts’ visions, but sometimes we did add elements of our own. But, of course, this entire little game is an exercise in interpretation: We asked our experts to interpret Apple’s magic mojo, and then we interpreted what our experts gave us. We hope we served our experts well.Want to play too? You can enter our "Apple Fauxtotype Challenge" in January. But for now, please begin your tour of Apple’s future vision.The Fauxtotypes iReadThe Internet's everywhere-at-once tech reporter envisions the first mainstream application of full-color electronic paper.Veronica BelmontOmnipresent Video Host & BloggerBona Fides: Belmont was a producer/reporter for CNET and now hosts Sony's Qore video magazine and cohosts the Tekzilla video podcast. She is also a columnist for MaximumPC.com, regularly updates her own tech blog (veronicabelmont.com), and has 1,442,554 Twitter followers as of this writing--making her Twitter's most-followed tech journalist.With its Kindle device, Amazon proved that e-readers aren’t lame pieces of junk. You just have to use eye-soothing “electronic paper” (aka e-paper) instead of not-so-reading-friendly LCD displays. And just this October, Barnes & Noble released the nook, an e-reader with two screens: a grayscale e-paper screen for reading and a smaller color LCD screen for navigation.Yes, e-books are hot, and its against this backdrop that Belmont conceived the iRead--because you didn’t think Apple would pin all its e-book aspirations on the upcoming tablet, did you?Click to embiggen for more details.Belmont’s iRead concept uses two screens, but they’re nearly identical in their generous specs: 8 inches high, multitouch-enabled, and full-color-capable. That’s right: full color. The left-side reading screen uses e-paper, but it’s color e-paper--the first available in a consumer device. The right-hand screen, meanwhile, uses a regular LCD to display movies, games, and other traditional digital content. Belmont explains: “You can hold it open like a book to view rich media alongside corresponding text, or you can place it like an easel on your table top to watch videos or read hands-free.”Click to embiggen for more details.E-reader on one side, full-featured media player on the other. Sounds like the iRead could boost sales on iTunes, right? Indeed, Belmont envisions downloadable e-books that complement text with video snippets, author interviews, and other treats that only digital technology can provide. For example, “premium edition” e-books could have an audiobook component that syncs automatically to your text--so you could segue from reading a novel in a café to listening to that same novel in your car, all without missing a word.Click to embiggen for more details.Think your iTunes bills are getting expensive? Just wait until the iRead arrives, and you begin downloading e-books with abandon. It’s a pricey proposition, but if it reverses our descent into illiteracy, it’s a price worth paying.The Fauxtotypes iTennaGizmodo's top gadget expert posits a cynical response to the AT&T clusterfrick.Brian LamEditorial Director, Gizmodo.comBona Fides: As the editorial boss of the gadget site Gizmodo, Lam enjoys unparalleled hands-on access to the product developments of Apple, a company that makes early looks of new gear as rare and valuable as Wonka’s golden tickets. Lam is often awarded “first seat” at Apple press events and has established Gizmodo.com as the world’s fastest live-blogging source of breaking Apple news.The year is 2011. Apple is still locked in its suicide pact with AT&T. The reliability of voice and text-messaging service over the iPhone is as reliable as electricity service in Pyongyang. Anti-Apple protest rallies are a weekly occurrence, complete with cries of “No more telecom totalitarianism!” and placards of Steve Jobs bedecked in Kim Jong-il’s pompadour and glasses. Apple can no longer wait for AT&T to fix its network crisis, so it does an end-run around the iPhone’s greatest threat--it releases the iTenna, an add-on that allows users to tap into any cell network other than AT&T’s.Click to embiggen for more details.Or at least that’s the vision we saw when Brian Lam provided a bare-bones overview of his concept. Here’s Lam in his own words: “It’s a repeater. Perhaps an antenna, or a set of mini bunny ears. The thing could be attached. Or not. It connects to Sprint, Verizon, or T-Mobile, and routes everything over the iPhone’s Wi-Fi or Bluetooth or perhaps a dock connector.”Click to embiggen for more details.From this product brief, we extracted two features that really caught our fancy. First, we decided that connectivity over the dock connector made the most sense, so our fauxtotype integrates iTenna technology into a slide-on case. Second, we were smitten by the allusion to VHF rabbit ears, and thus begat the twin nubbins at the top of the device. The whimsy of the design matches the whimsy of the entire iTenna concept. As Lam himself states, “I’m perfectly aware that this product makes no sense, given the way Apple works. But, hey, neither does an iPhone that gets no reception in a major metropolitan city like San Francisco. Hello, I live four blocks from Haight Street--why do I have a zero percent call success rate for anything even resembling a human voice?”The Fauxtotypes iVision The internationally focused gadget guru sees augmented reality making a quantum leap forward.Michael BrookEditor, T3 Bona Fides: One of Mac|Life’s sister magazines from across the pond, T3 (“Tomorrow’s Technology Today”) not only publishes in the UK, but also has 21 country-specific international editions, making it one of the world’s premier sources for gadget news and reviews. With 10 years experience reporting on technology, Michael Brook leads this formidable charge.Augmented reality apps bring science-fictiony data overlays to the iPhone--which isn’t a terribly ideal place for them, as the iPhone keeps reality (augmented or otherwise) at arm’s length from our eyes. Brook’s iVision concept fixes all that by placing augmented reality mere millimeters from our corneas, letting it integrate perfectly with our natural vision. Viewing life through iVision--with digital data served directly on top of all that we see--completes the promise of everything augmented reality technology has to offer.Click to embiggen for more details.“Each lens will have a built-in HUD,” Brook says, “so you’ll be able to view the output of your augmented reality apps directly on your glasses. No need to hold up the iPhone. It will use Bluetooth, or a more advanced wireless standard, for connectivity. Low power, no need for constant charging. GPS positioning, etcetera, will be done on the iPhone with info relayed to the glasses for processing within the unit. Features like caller ID will naturally be viewed on the glasses, and when listening to music, track data will also appear on the head-up display.”Click to embiggen for more details.And then there’s the curious Oakley/Apple logo on the iVision frames. We told our experts that it’s common for Mac|Life fauxtotypes to imagine a marriage between Apple and some equally iconographic megabrand. In years past, we conjectured Apple synergizing with LEGO and Audi, and we were thrilled when Brook followed our lead, and used Oakley in his product brief.Click to embiggen for more details.“Apple has most areas of tech covered with the iPhone and computing products,” Brook says. “The glasses idea brings them squarely into the world of fashion, which, let’s face it, they’re already knee deep in from a tech point of view. Teaming up with a forward-thinking brand like Oakley allows them to be first to market with a groundbreaking product that makes more of existing tech.”The Fauxtotypes exerPod The maven of mobility wants his exercise data completely bespoke.Mark McClusky Products Editor, WIREDBona Fides: As the senior editor in charge of products at Wired, McClusky is the magazine’s gear and gadget gatekeeper, leading the charge in covering technology that’s actually shipping today. He was also an editor on Mobile (a former sister magazine of Mac|Life), where he honed his expertise in handheld technology.There once was a day when just a single iPod ruled the portable audio universe. It had everything we needed in a music player--or so we thought. Now there are four iPods, with each version offering a form factor, feature set, and price point skewed to specific consumer needs. Could this same type of fragmentation and specialization be applied to the iPhone line? After reading McClusky’s exerPod brief, we’re excited by the possibilities.Click to embiggen for more details.The exerPod is an Apple handheld devoted wholly to physical fitness. As McClusky says, “It makes the act of tracking your exercise and health totally transparent--it’s a thing you throw in your pocket, and it just does it, if you’ll pardon the Nike reference.”Click to embiggen for more details.Actually, we like the Nike reference, because with the exerPod, we see more companies teaming up with Apple to create highly integrated telemetry systems that marry real-world gear (shoes, bikes, home gyms, and so on) with custom apps--much like the existing Nike+ system. But let’s let McClusky explain how this works:“It’s the ultimate tracking device for athletes, and other folks looking to monitor their health and performance. For example, using built-in accelerometers and GPS, it tracks speed and distance for runners. There’s also ANT+ wireless support to hook up to heart-rate monitors, bike-speed sensors and power meters, and gym equipment like treadmills. Any time you’re doing anything active, it’s tracking and capturing the associated data. Bluetooth and Wi-Fi let it beam information to your computer, as well as the ecosystem of sites that will spring up to let you slice and dice the data.”Click to embiggen for more details.Some might scoff that the iPhone can already do much of what McClusky envisions. Well, it can but at a hefty price--and not nearly as well. The exerPod is an inexpensive device (we see it costing $99) for folks who don’t want an Apple cell phone and simply need a small, rugged gadget that includes a battery of special features dedicated to a fitness lifestyle.The Fauxtotypes iMake The mischievous master of DIY sees us making our own Apple gear in the future.Mark FrauenfelderEditor-in-Chief, MAKEBona Fides: As the founder of BoingBoing.net, one of the world’s first tech-culture websites, Frauenfelder has the longest career in tech journalism of all our five experts. He was also the founding editor of Wired Online, and today he’s the top editor of MAKE, a quarterly devoted to creating DIY tech projects.Good googamaloo, what has Frauenfelder asked us to imagine here?! His iMake concept came to us exceedingly well fleshed out, so we’ll turn the podium over to him:“iMake is a desktop manufacturing system based on the RepRap (reprap.org), an open-source 3D rapid prototyping technology. Apple led the way in the desktop publishing revolution, and now it’s leading the way in the desktop manufacturing revolution. With iMake, you can make your own small products at home, such as Bluetooth headsets, iPods with unique form factors, wristwatches, eyeglasses, door knobs, and more.Click to embiggen for more details.“To create a product, you visit the iTunes Store to choose from among tens of thousands of product designs--prices range from free to $9.99--purchasing one just as you would a song, video, or app. The 3D data is sent to the iMake, which builds the parts, layer by layer, out of high-quality plastic. The iMake will also make the circuit boards. Then, all you do is snap the pieces together! After purchasing a 3D model from the iTunes Store, it takes about 15 minutes to print a 3D part.Click to embiggen for more details. “It seems counter-intuitive that Apple would allow its customers to have a hand in designing its products, but after witnessing the runaway success of its iTunes App Store--which has thousands of apps created by third parties--Apple realized that quality rises to the top and that enabling people to design and create their things is even cooler than giving them the tools to design and create their own media, as Apple did when it put the power of publishing in the hands of everyone.”Thank you for this fascinating glimpse at the future, Herr Frauenfelder. And thank you for not spec’ing the iMake to have the ability to make its own parts, a feature of the RepRap.Uh, hello?! Skynet?! Anyone?!The Fauxtotypes