AppleInsider: Acer suffers first-ever quarterly loss, predicts iPad ‘fever’ will recede

Acer Chairman J.T. Wang chalked up his company’s poor second-quarter performance as a “correction period,” according to Reuters. His company has seen numerous struggles since the launch of Apple’s iPad, which has cut into the sales of low-cost, low-power netbooks.

Wang reportedly added that he expects the “fever” for tablets to recede, and for consumers to regain interest in traditional style notebooks. Though he did not mention the iPad by name, Apple’s touchscreen device has dominated the tablet market since it first went on sale in 2010.

Keep telling yourself that.
Reminds me of that Newsweek article from 1995 declaring the Internet a passing fad too.

NYTimes: Sell Big or Die Fast

These days, big technology companies — particularly those in the hypercompetitive smartphone and tablet industries — are starting to resemble Hollywood film studios. Every release needs to be a blockbuster, and the only measure of success is the opening-weekend gross. There is little to no room for the sleeper indie hit that builds good word of mouth to become a solid performer over time.

This is unfortunate. As I’ve mentioned before, HP’s TouchPad has had a lot of potential and could very well have been one of those ‘sleeper’ hits. A cult favorite, if you will.
As I mentioned in my mini-review, there’s a lot to like with TouchPad, even though it’s not on par with the iPad. But all the bugs and missed details are clearly fixable.
Remember all the shit the iPhone was missing in the early days? Multi-tasking, video recording, front-facing camera, MMS, third party app development, GPS. Remember how they took baby steps each month of each year for the last 4 years releasing updates to address all the bugs and deficiencies?
As John Gruber said, once leadership changed at HP, the TouchPad had no chance of surviving.

Ars Technica: HP to follow IBM, ditch its PC business

Hewlett-Packard is scheduled to hold its third quarter earnings call later this afternoon, but if a report from Bloomberg is to believed, dollars will be the least interesting topic of the call. Bloomberg is saying that multiple sources are indicating that HP will spin off its PC business to focus on enterprise services. As part of that change in focus, it will be acquiring the Cambridge, UK-based data analysis company Autonomy for about $10 billion, a healthy premium over the company’s current market cap.

What was all that bullshit Steve Jobs was spewing last year about post-PC era and PC’s becoming trucks?
Man Steve, you’re crazy.
I like you, but you’re crazy.

Here’s a great piece by MG Siegler on Google’s acquisition of Motorola Mobilility.
This is my favorite chunk regarding design:

Here’s another, more straight-forward scenario for you. What happens when the iPhone 5 launches and everyone wants it? That includes many people currently using Android phones. After a few months of this, Google grows frustrated that none of their OEMs can release a device that matches the build-quality that Apple puts out there. But wait, they now have their own company they can at the very least use to apply to pressure the other OEMs to force them to do better work! Does Google also not play that card? Are you really telling me that they won’t try to get Motorola to make the best products possible? Why the hell wouldn’t they? This is a business, after all.

Maybe the iPhone 5 doesn’t trigger that, but maybe the iPhone 6 does. Or maybe the iPad 3 does. Or maybe a Windows Phone does. At some point down the line, Google is going to run into this scenario. And there’s nothing wrong with that. The tight control over both hardware and software is what allows Apple products to be Apple products. And now with webOS, HP appears to be moving in the same direction.

In the same way that Google used to not care about design, but now is starting to, I suspect they’ll start to care more about full control over their products — both hardware and software. They’ll see that the overall consumer experience is tied to both — they’re not mutually exclusive. And Motorola gives them the opportunity to fully explore this. Why not use it?

It’s taken a over 30 years in the history of the personal computer for companies to catch on what Apple has been doing from Day 1 – designing their own software for their hardware products. For Apple, software and hardware are 2 sides to the same coin, and it’s a very valuable coin now.
It’s a philosophy first put into words by Alan Kay in 1982:

People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware.

Some PC vendors have taken note on how effective Apple’s tight integration of hardware and software can be, but since we’re in the post-PC era, this integrated approach to computing isn’t happening with the personal computer – it’s happening with phones and tablets.
We have Microsoft (software) forming an alliance with Nokia for their Windows Phone 7 OS.
We have HP (hardware) acquiring Palm (software) and continuing to develop webOS for their phones and tablets.
And now we have Google (software) buying Motorola Mobility (hardware) for $12.4 billion. Yes, the patents are crucial but you can’t ignore the integration benefits Siegler mentions in the above quote.
There’s dozens of analogies to this situation, but since this is Daily Exhaust, I’ll give a car example.
Building a computer (read: laptop, smartphone, tablet) without having control over the software is like building a Formula 1 car without any say over how the engine is built. So you run into problems. Maybe the engine doesn’t fit right in the chassis. Maybe there’s controls and wires and valves you hadn’t accounted for. Maybe the engine throws off the weight distribution on your car so everything has to be reengineered. Now think for a second, that in our hypothetical race car world, every other team on the track has the very same engine and the very same (or very different) problems.
Can anyone say fragmentation?
While I’m not sure I’m advocating for every PC vendor to develop their own operating system (or if it’s even sustainable) I’m just asking, if you want to make the best computers why wouldn’t you want control over hardware and software?

I’ve been following MySpace co-founder Tom Anderson on Google Plus (yeah, it’s the Tom who used to show up as your first friend on MySpace) and he’s been on a roll lately with some insightful and witty posts.
This one was particularly interesting. It’s a slide presentation by Vincent Wong on what Google Plus is really about:

So HP says Apple is not TouchPad’s target. So says Richard Kerris, HP’s vice president of Worldwide Developer Relations, to The Loop’s Jim Dalrymple:

HP acknowledged Apple’s dominance in the tablet market, but said Apple wasn’t its target with the TouchPad.

“We think there’s a better opportunity for us to go after the enterprise space and those consumers that use PCs,” said Kerris. “This market is in its infancy and there is plenty of room for both of us to grow.”

John Gruber over at Daring Fireball agrees:

Smart. Reminds me of that Steve Jobs mantra from the late ’90s: “We have to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose. We have to embrace the notion that for Apple to win, Apple has to do a really good job.”

Bullshit.

HP is a company who’s senior Vice President and General Manager of the Palm Global Business Unit (formerly the CEO of Palm, replacing dipshit Ed Colligan) helped develop the iPod at Apple as a senior vice president. Apple’s influence at HP, through Rubenstein, can be seen all over HP’s product design, advertising and marketing. Rubenstein knows the important parts of Apple’s business to copy and he has.

HP even based the price points on TouchPad models with the iPad. I can’t find the link, but I believe it was Gruber who also pointed out even the name, TouchPad, contains the names of two of Apple’s most popular products.

As Sherlock Holmes said, “No, Watson, this was not done by accident, but by design.”

Aside from the part about not going after Apple, the other point of bullshit in Kerris’ statement was about the “better opportunity for us to go after the enterprise space and those consumers that use PCs”. If the iPad has proven anything, it’s people in the corporate space love the iPad.

HP is clearlying being smart about webOS. They’re focusing on what matters to people – the experience, the software, the Human Experience, but make no mistake, not only are they watching Apple’s every move, but Apple’s and HP’s target markets for tablets very much align.

A “high level RIM employee” shot off an open letter the co-CEO’s of RIM pleading for them to get their heads out of their asses (in so many words). Although the points this person makes I’ve read elsewhere and thought myself, it’s still sound advice:

Rather than constantly mocking iPhone and Android, we should encourage key decision makers across the board to use these products as their primary device for a week or so at a time — yes, on Exchange! This way we can understand why our users are switching and get inspiration as to how we can build our next-gen products even better! It’s incomprehensible that our top software engineers and executives aren’t using or deeply familiar with our competitor’s products.

I also enjoyed the comparison of RIM’s SDK to a “rundown 1990′s Ford Explorer”. Odd choice of vehicle, but it works. I would have picked something uglier, like a 90’s Buick Skylark. My coworker Victor suggested a 90’s Chevrolet Cavalier.

So yes, Google is now in the social networking game with their new Google+. Some people have written about how well-designed it is from a UI perspective. Others have bashed them and dismissed the project.
Here’s the deal. Google, as a company must do at some point, has to evolve. If they don’t they’ll end up like Alta Vista and all the other search engines from the 90’s. This doesn’t mean they’ll succeed or that you have to join their club.
The problem is, they’ll really not trying to evolve as much as they’re growing like a cancer.
Apple has changed their focus and now makes more profit off of iPads, iPhones and iPods than they do on desktops. They also have no problem killing their darlings in the name of innovation and progress.
Google won’t let go of search, search is their equivalent to Microsoft’s Windows/Office cash cow.

Sometimes I feel like the guys at 37Signals are the only voices of reason in the realms of business, design and technology.
With everyone saying the platform is the end-all, David says fuck the platform:

For all the 200,000 apps in Apple’s app store, I use two on a regular basis: Echofon and Bloomberg. Once in a while, I use Instapaper and play Civilization. And yet I use my iPhone all the time. It’s my favorite piece of technology and has been for years.

Do you know why? Because Apple nailed the basics. Safari, Camera, iPod, Clock, Weather, Photos, Messages, Mail, and Maps are the apps that I use 95% of the time. Those are the ones that made me buy the phone and stick with it. If I had to read Bloomberg on the web and couldn’t play Civilization, I’d be sad, but my day would surely go on.

I know I’m not alone. The pattern I’ve seen for many people new to iOS is a rush to try a bunch of apps and then never use most of them again. There’s a large market for people who just want the core ten apps executed even better. I’d be happy to trade my iPhone for a N9, if that core experience was stronger.

I agree 100% with David. While I admittedly have more than 10 apps on my iPhone, I rarely use more than 10 on a regular basis (I can’t delete Shazam, you never know what you’ll need to find a track, dude!). Update: I hear where David is coming from, but his essential apps are different from my essential apps which are different than your essential apps. Platforms are important.
I also find his easy dismissal of platforms ironic, given the company he works for has built a great platform for collaboration, project management and communication.
For me, I use the basics: Safari, Mail, iPod, Messages, Camera, Maps
As far as 3rd party apps: Instapaper, Reeder, Twitter
It really is a shame companies like RIM and Nokia are dropping like flies in the face of Apple. We need competition to have a healthly mobile market. As Victor Brunetti points out, a lot of time and attention went into designing the N9 experience.
During a race, there’s a different between turning your head to watch the other cars and keeping your eyes on the road (and watching the other cars in your peripheral vision).
Make a great product, don’t try and make an iPhone killer, you won’t be able to.

People Consume Apps Like Tapas.

—Ingrid Lunden, via the title to her article on PaidContent

I think that’s a perfect phrase to describe the consumption of apps by people.

So everyone has a big hard-on for Nokia’s new N9 and they’re even flaunting it on their site.
One of the videos is the SVP of Design talking, and the other video features a well-produced, simulated N9 interface.
Are they planning on showing the real thing?
And what about that broad, strategic partnership with those guys in Redmond? The N9 doesn’t look to be running Windows Phone 7 based on that introduction video.
Update: Engadget has a few hands-on videos of the N9 and the interface looks pretty polished.

BusinessInsider tells us the real reason there was no email on the Blackberry Playbook:

Turns out it had to skip native email support on the PlayBook because its architecture can’t support two devices with one person’s account, according to a source.

Here’s how our source explains it: “The Blackberry email system is the BES — which is the source/focus of all the famous BB security. The BES email server has the concept of one user = one device (or they call it PIN).”

Sorry, that’s hilarious. It reminds me of the Y2K scare where much the software running the nation’s essential systems used two digits for the year instead of four when they were created in the 60’s and 70’s.
The difference is the date stamp ‘shortcut’ of the Y2K scare was the result of technological and budgetary limits of the time (remember, computers used paper punch cards and saving two digits for memory was a big deal), while RIM’s lack of support for multiple devices for an email account is both extremely lazy and shortsighted.
The more I read about RIM, the more dire their future looks.

From First Today, Then Tomorrow:

How will this come about? Hardware, for what it is, will sometime soon become irrelevant. Your will have secure access to your personal data and your media from anywhere you are. You may buy a device, like a phone or a tablet, but they will be very inexpensive, almost disposable (and certainly recyclable). There will be no benefit from buying newer hardware. It will not be faster or have more storage. It will not offer new features. All that will matter is the software and the net and the net will be everywhere. For that matter, the word “software” will fall out of fashion. You will have apps, you will use features and tools. You will also stop using the word “computer.”

Sounds pretty possible to me.

Timothy B. Lee over at Ars Technica has a smart take on why Apple hasn’t been successful with online products and services:

Apple’s perennial difficulty with creating scalable online services is not a coincidence. Apple has a corporate culture that emphasizes centralized, designer-led product development. This process has produced user-friendly devices that are the envy of the tech world. But developing fast, reliable online services requires a more decentralized, engineering-driven corporate culture like that found at Google.

One of the many things I thought was great about Steve Jobs’ keynote at WWDC on Monday was how he openly admitted MobileMe was a failure. This got a big laugh from the audience and rightly so.
How often do we see CEOs of other technology companies openly admit when they’re wrong?
I see it occasionally, but I rarely see admissions of failure during a keynote for an event or product unveiling.