After the introduction of the Apple iPadmost of the blogosphere filled with critiques and rants, specked here and there with some praising stories. I must admit that my very first reaction was also skeptical, but when I took time to view Jobs’s iPad presentation (‘the day after’) and thought a little bit about what this product was about, my opinion started to shift, … big time!
As usual, this post is quite long, so I listed URLs to the sections below for easy navigation:
Robert Scoble wrote an interesting post, asking: ‘Is the mobile tech press wrong in positioning Apple vs. Google?’ He poses that, although, Apple and Google are competitors it’s currently actually about the divide between Web-and-app-friendly devices and non-web-and-app-friendly devices. His thesis is that companies that make web-and-app friendly devices ‘will steal market share from those that do not and a confused strategy, like Nokia has, is going to look mixed because consumers will go with a company like Apple or Google who has said “we’re all in.”’
I think Scoble could be right that there is a divide. On one side there are the innovative Google (Nexus One + Droid) smartphones and Apple iPhone, providing very user friendly access to-, and development for web browsing and applications, and on the other side the other smart phones out there, notably Nokia, Windows Mobile OS based and RIM (Research-In-Motion) BlackBerry phones, that perform less in this respect.
However, looking at numbers calculated by AppleInsider.com on smart phone market shares (see chart below), I don’t think it will be a matter of Apple and Google stealing market share from other parties, but of low-growth or loss of market share in a growing market: in other words, other parties will lose some of their relevance. With this conclusion, the mobile tech press isn’t wrong in positioning Apple vs. Google, but some might indeed forget the shift in relevance from Nokia, Microsoft, and to lesser extent RIM BlackBerry, to Apple and Google.
Fantastic image, published at Wired.com, of connected neurons in the cereberal cortex that are involved in higher-thought processes and perception of different senses. Image: Tamily A. Weissman
MyFord touch interface as shown on Mashable. Having a set of Internet applications is probably more useful than standard web browsing in cars.
This story on Mashable (’The Connected Car: Ford Introduces MyFord Touch’) got me thinking: when will we see the first store for Internet car applications?
Car manufacturers could provide an open platform for (approved) car Internet application that provides access to in-car functionalities and features in a safe way. Applications, developed by third parties, can be sold through a web store, for instance, via the in-car interface.
I must be honest to say that I didn’t follow the whole Nexus One hype too much. Maybe that’s why I was surprised to read on the Engadet’s live blog of the Google Android press conference that Google is launching an online store where (in the future) you can buy more devices, with service plans of different operators.
Since my comments on his post became to long I decided to publish it as a post (point taken Stowe :). Although my response is directed to Stowe, I’m interested in anyones comments and feedback.
