Philip Elmer-DeWitt for Fortune.com on how many Kindle Fire tablets are being returned based on Amazon reviews:

There were 3,678 write-ups in all, nearly half of them (47%) glowing five-star reviews that basically said the same thing (Typical headline: “Outstanding value at $199”).

What interested us, however, were the 491 (13.3%) one-star reviews. They are relevant because the number of Kindle Fires being returned to the store is likely to be an undisclosed material factor in Amazon’s results this quarter

Amazon got the media ecosystem aspect right with the Fire, but as I mentioned in my brief review, everything else was a big letdown for me. But I’m also someone used to the smooth, well-thought out user interface found on iOS.
Which leads me to speculate if many of the negative reviews of the Fire are from iPad owners who have higher expectations than from people who are buying their first tablets.

Jonathan Zitttrain for Havard Law School:

The PC is dead. Rising numbers of mobile, lightweight, cloud-centric devices don’t merely represent a change in form factor. Rather, we’re seeing an unprecedented shift of power from end users and software developers on the one hand, to operating system vendors on the other–and even those who keep their PCs are being swept along. This is a little for the better, and much for the worse.

Hey mister bigtime Harvard guy, being a bit hyperbolic with our title, aren’t we? It’s link bait and I bit, big deal.
I love how the article is just a recap of every step Apple has made in the last 5 years.
And the truck metaphor is more accurate.

It’s bad enough your email application-less tablet is selling so poorly you have to give it multiple price slashes, but then developers jailbreak it and call it Dingleberry.

I’m not a sports guy.
I love going to live games in big stadiums but following football, baseball and basketball on a day-to-day basis is not my bag. My sports are technology and design and Apple is my team. I love when they win.
Apple wins when they create awesome products I love to use, products better than any other company can make.
Apple wins when they show the world that while consumer electronics products are impossible without the brilliance of enginners, you need designers to make them so fun and intuitive to use, you don’t even a need a manual.
I won’t lie, though. Apple also wins when they kick Microsoft’s ass. It was a great, symbolic moment last year when it was announced that Apple was worth more than Microsoft in market capitalization. It also feels good to know how successful the iPhone has become, especially after Steve Ballmer laughed at it in 2007. Oh, Steve. You big, bald dummy. Hold on while I do my touchdown dance in your face.
Apple wins when they own a small fraction of the mobile market, but taking home two-thirds of the profits. It adds insult to injury when they take all this money in the face of all their competitors copying the smartphone paradigm they established with the introduction of the iPhone in 2007. Hey guys, you’re copying my team and you’re still losing (They still don’t understand Design is not skin deep).
Speaking of shamelessly copying, it seems Samsung never bothered to make their own playbook, they decided to just copy Apple’s.
But I have to be honest – I’m really tired of writing about Apple.
I want to write about other amazing competitors. It’s fun when your team wins, but it’s even better when they win against a worthy adversary. Would you rather watch your favorite football team score touchdown after touchdown, against a team with a horrible defense? Sure, the first few are fun, but it gets old. What’s great is competition. Real competition.
What’s great is when your team wins, but in the last 5 seconds of the game. Triple overtime. Sudden death. Winning against a rival who fights until the end and who you can look at and say, ‘We might have beat you, but you played awesome.’
In the last few years, there have been very few moments where it looked as though a company besides Apple was going to start making consumer electronic devices people would love to use.
The first one I got excited about was the Palm Pre and webOS. Jon Rubenstein left Apple as senior VP of the iPod devision in 2007 to join Palm. When he unveiled the Palm Pre running webOS in 2009, the Apple DNA was obvious, but webOS was fresh brought a unique perspective to mobile operating systems. ‘Yes,’ I said to myself. ‘Apple has some real competition.’
Then HP bought Palm in 2010 and things got bumpy. The Pre was a solid smartphone but when the time came for HP to create a tablet to compete with the iPad, it wasn’t all it could have been. I wanted to love the TouchPad, but it was clear HP blew it. Then HP’s CEO, Leo Apotheker, gets ousted by HP’s board of directors Now it’s not even clear if HP wants to play the mobile computing game anymore.
Then there was news RIM was launching a tablet called the Playbook. The preview videos made it look as though RIM had executed things well. Oh, but then they shipped it without an email client. Not to mention providing no good way to get content on to or off of the device.
Sigh.
Earlier this month, Amazon enveiled their new lineup of Kindles, including the top-of-the-line Kindle Fire. The Fire uses a custom build of Android, has a color, multi-touch screen and an integrated marketplace to buy applications and movies and books and music. And a web browser which caches frequently visited sites for faster loading. Yes! Now we’re talking!
Then I got my hands on the Fire and was let down. Like the HP Touchpad, so close, but so very, very far from winning.
Now, most recently, John Paczkowski over at AllThingsD reports that Apple, with help from Sharp, is cooking up some Apple TVs — actual televisions — not what Apple TV is in it’s current incarnation.
It’s the logical next step for Apple’s goal of a fully-integrated entertainment ecosystem. These plans are not surprising. The question really is, why wouldn’t Apple redesign the television experience?
This is exciting news. Imagine a television experience that doesn’t involve convoluted remote controls and overly complex on-screen menus.
What isn’t exciting is this piece from Paczkowski’s post (my emphasis):

But what form it will take remains a mystery — one that the entire TV industry is evidently eager to solve. “Based on our discussions, interestingly other TV manufacturers have begun a scrambling search to identify what iTV will be and do,” says Misek. “They hope to avoid the fate of other industries and manufacturers who were caught flat footed by Apple.”
What would be great is if these other TV manufacturers weren’t ‘scrambling’ to cobble together something half-assed, but had a clear vision for a fun and intuitive television experience. Something they personally would love to use in their own homes.
It brings to mind a great quote by Steve Jobs (in his biography by Walter Isaacson):
The older I get, the more I see how much motivations matter. The Zune was crappy because the people at Microsoft don’t really love music or art the way we do. We won because we personally loved music. We made the iPod for ourselves, and when you’re doing something for yourself, or your best friend or family, you’re not going to cheese out. If you don’t love something, your not going to go the extra mile, work the extra weekend, challenge the status quo as much.
History keeps repeating itself and it’s getting annoying. Apple introduces a new product, the industry reacts, they copy, but by the time they turn their enormous ships in the right direction, it’s too late.
Repeat ad infinitum.
It’s getting old.

A couple days ago, the New York Times published a post on its Bits blog by Nick Bilton about the disruptive effects 3-D printers are set to have on product design. From the post:

It won’t be long before people have a 3-D printer sitting at home alongside its old inkjet counterpart. These 3-D printers, some already costing less than a computer did in 1999, can print objects by spraying layers of plastic, metal or ceramics into shapes. People can download plans for an object, hit print, and a few minutes later have it in their hands.

The thought of being able to torrent household objects is a game changer not only in design, but also in retail, ownership and copyright, Bilton feels. Is this the death of manufacturing? The death of stores? Will refills for a 3-D printer’s jets be the only physical thing we will need to buy in the near future? In many ways it’s a chilling prospect.
We’re already seeing the deleterious effects on creativity that digital conversion of music, books, movies, etc., has wrought. It’s harder to make a living these days being creative. If it can be disseminated, it will. Money that would normally go to a creator instead never enters into the transaction. This is less of a problem for big time projects like blockbuster movies, but pirating has cut off much of the funds that smaller projects need to keep their creators out of an office.
But all that is kid stuff compared to what Bilton hinted at. The death of retail and the death of ownership, while not inherently bad things on their own, represent a fundamental shift in how we’ve ordered capitalism and western society. This shift will alter the interrelations we have that keep us fed, sheltered, and prosperous. We are a people that trade. First goods and services, then metal and paper money, then zeros and ones. That could all go away.
Once upon a time, it was pure science fiction to think that we could get whatever we wanted out of a box on a shelf. It seemed like a little bit of paradise. In the future, there would be no war, no prejudice, no injustice, and no want of either material necessities or food. It’s a compelling pastiche. Will our reality be so enlightened? I hate to be a pessimist, but war, prejudice, and injustice look like they are here to stay. And want? 3-D printers, on their face, look like a sure fire way to tackle the problems of deprivation. But before we get too far ahead, remember that these printers do not spin objects out of whole cloth. Even the most advanced 3-D printers that are realistically possible require raw materials to function.
So we’re on the cusp of a new way of life. Will 3-D printers mean the end of want? Will they mean the major economies of the world will move completely into the digital realm? Will they mean control of raw materials will pass to a small power elite? Will they result in a lack of motivation among the populace to produce anything at all for themselves? We will not know the answers for decades, but home manufacturing will change how we live more than anything that has come out of the information revolution before it.

via Modern Mechanix

In 1968 Alan Kay concepted the Dynabook, a device we would today consider a laptop/tablet computer.

ZDNet: Adobe ceases development on mobile browser Flash (via MG Siegler)
It was only a matter of time:

Our future work with Flash on mobile devices will be focused on enabling Flash developers to package native apps with Adobe AIR for all the major app stores. We will no longer adapt Flash Player for mobile devices to new browser, OS version or device configurations. Some of our source code licensees may opt to continue working on and releasing their own implementations. We will continue to support the current Android and PlayBook configurations with critical bug fixes and security updates.

I know. Adobe wanted to prove Steve Jobs wrong after Apple made their technical decision not to support Flash on the iPhone. Instead of seeing Steve’s point of view, they decided to act like a teenage girl, screaming and crying about this atrocity. In addition to all the money they pissed away trying to shoe-horn Flash onto Android phones, they took out full-page ads saying “We ♥ Apple”. Very cute.
Now here we are, four years after the debut of the iPhone and Adobe finally concedes defeat. Imagine all the money and resources they could have saved if they had managed things differently. Perhaps they could have avoided the 2,000+ layoffs they’ve had in the last 3 years.
I’m indulging in some schadenfreude at Adobe’s expense, but it doesn’t change the fact that Flash has been an extremely powerful tool which has allowed me and many other interactive designers to express ourselves and create truly immersive experiences and applications.
Even today, HTML5 still does not provide the level of granular control and fluidity that Flash does for desktop experiences.
It’s necessary we as interactive professionals keep up with technologies and frameworks like HTML5, but it’s also just as necessary companies like Adobe lower the barrier for entry by making tools that allow creative people to focus on creating experiences and not getting bogged down in the minutia of code.
The web is an amazing canvas to work on. If you’re taking away our Flash paint brush, you have to replace it with a tool of equal power for expression.

Motorola is launching an Android-based TV controller and it’s called the … Corvair?
As in the rear-engined, proned-to-spinout, Chevrolet model that Time magazine voted one of the 50 Worst Cars of All Time?
As in the car Ralph Nader included in his book, Unsafe at Any Speed?
The Verge says this is the codename, implying they’ll launch with a different name. Let’s hope so.
*Next thing you know, Samsung will be launching a new Android tablet called the Pinto.

Dan Frommer asks the key ‘why’ questions about Windows Mobile phones from Nokia:

• Why should any person buy this instead of an iPhone or the preferred Android phone du jour?
• Why should carriers favor Windows phones over Android or Apple phones, in either their in-store sales techniques and marketing?
• Why should carriers or consumers favor Nokia Windows phones over similar Windows phones from Samsung, HTC, etc.?
• Why should developers make apps for Windows or Nokia phones?

Windows Mobile phones are swimming a red ocean. So what is a ‘red ocean’ you ask? From Wikipedia:

Red Oceans are all the industries in existence today–the known market space. In the red oceans, industry boundaries are defined and accepted, and the competitive rules of the game are known. Here companies try to outperform their rivals to grab a greater share of product or service demand. As the market space gets crowded, prospects for profits and growth are reduced. Products become commodities or niche, and cutthroat competition turns the ocean bloody. Hence, the term red oceans.
Red oceans are the opposite of blue oceans:

Blue oceans, in contrast, denote all the industries not in existence today–the unknown market space, untainted by competition. In blue oceans, demand is created rather than fought over. There is ample opportunity for growth that is both profitable and rapid. In blue oceans, competition is irrelevant because the rules of the game are waiting to be set. Blue ocean is an analogy to describe the wider, deeper potential of market space that is not yet explored.

Apple established the new smartphone paradigm (full touchscreen, no keyboard, multitouch UI) with the launch of the iPhone in 2007 that Google subsequently copied with Android. Apple’s modus operandi since Jobs returned has been about focusing on blue oceans. Untapped markets.

Now Microsoft and Nokia are entering the market with the Windows Phone 7 platform, a platform that introduces a unique approach to the user interface.

Despite their fresh approach, they’re still in a red ocean. Boundaries and known and rules are understood and as Frommer notes, they’re going to continue to have a hard time distinguishing themselves in this already crowded market.

Randy Murray thinks about cloud computing and the end of updates:

We’ve already gone past the point where we have to go out and buy updates on discs. Now we download and update. And soon your device will update itself as it sits unused.

For some this may be frightening. We need to think long and hard about trusting all of our data to others. We need to think seriously about maintaining our own media and backups.

While he expresses caution, overall he’s excited about the freedom such a move to the cloud affords us.
I too am pro-cloud, and currently use iCloud and DropBox on a regular basis, but I’m also cognizant of what I sync. I’m also not a criminal, so I don’t worry about being caught doing something.
As I’ve written about before, though, I’m also I strong believer in keeping things on the Ground as well as in the Cloud. My music files, my photos, my videos, my documents, my designs — all my stuff is in my possession on my own external hard drives. On the ground.

Microsoft is a company run by engineers. Engineers love science fiction, right? (ok, I do too)
So instead of focusing on the technology issues of today they make movies about possible tomorrows.
It’s fun, but it doesn’t pay the bills.
No, that ugly, bloated non-future-y Office and Windows pay the bills.
* see also Daring Fireball, here, here and here.

This is why I always wait to buy my latest gadgets, even from Apple:

Today, my iPhone died after about 8 hours–not even enough to get me through a full day without recharging (and this is typical). This was not 8 hours of constant use (unless you count the constant pinging of notifications, which may be the culprit). It was 8 hours total from the time I unplugged it in the morning and took it with me until the screen went black at around 4 PM. According to the specs, the iPhone 4S is supposed to get 200 hours of standby time, 8 hours of talk time, and “up to 6 hours” of Internet use on 3g. During the day, I made half a dozen calls less than 5 minutes each, used the Internet for an hour on the train (email, Twitter, light Web browsing), and then maybe another 90 minutes throughout the day.

My rule of thumb when upgrading operating systems for my desktop Mac and my iPhone and when buying new hardware is to just wait. There’s no correct number, but most of the time this means waiting 3-6 months.
Usually in that timeframe bugs have been fixed software patches have been released.
Most of my non-techie friends automatically assume I’m first to get any new Apple product. While I’m aware of the latest developments in the tech industry on a daily basis, I wouldn’t call myself bleeding edge when it comes to purchasing gadgets.