Opinion | Cheryl Waller

I/Overload?

May 18, 2013 by Josh Constine Leave a Comment

Did Google’s conference succeed? It launched dozens of products and services in its 205-minute keynote, but did the world understand them? I saw some of the smartest journalists in technology struggling to handle the information density. But what’s the alternative? Break it up across multiple days, or even multiple conferences? Google’s breadth presents it with a challenge unique among the tech giants.

Apple? Its launches center around a discrete set of devices. That’s why WWDC works. There might be one radically new product, but then just a set of iterations on what we already know. The screen is bigger, the tablet is thinner, the software gets a new sheen. And since Apple is all about hardware you need to touch to believe, it has to do it all in-person. Journalists and pundits can easily digest the news and offer their insights to the world.

Facebook? It prefers the rolling thunder approach that works because it’s mostly a software company. Releasing things when they’re ready rather than waiting months for an event embodies its “move fast and break things” ideal. It reaches out to journalists almost daily about new updates. When it has something big, it throws a laser-focused, dedicated event like it did this year for content-specific news feeds, Graph Search, and Home. Even when it threw its last f8 developer conference 20 months ago, it kept it tight to just Timeline and Open Graph. The media could wrap its head around the social network’s plans.

Those conferences serve their purposes because they align with the identities of producers. Some see Microsoft’s events as a fragmented mess, as they too embody their producer. Microsost has Build for Windows and developers, TechEd for enterprise, a partner conference, a management summit, and a whole event for SharePoint. By splitting them all up, it never feels like there’s one day where Microsoft rules the world.

But Google has its own identity and it’s causing I/O growing pains. The conference certainly captures the spotlight. The problem is that Google’s vast ambitions have left I/O bursting at the seams. This year’s mega-keynote tried to combine search, maps, Google+, YouTube, Google Now, Google Play, music, games, Chrome, Android, and a new phone. And that was just the consumer facing stuff! Then there were a huge set of developer announcements like a native client for C++, location APIs, game services APIs, cloud messaging for notifications, and a suite of mobile app building tools called Android Studio.

Did you watch the keynote? If so, did you remember all these things? Did you have time to read insightful analysis about them? Did journalists even have the bandwidth to write intelligently about it all? It could take a while to unpack everything from I/O. I know I have at least five stories I want to write. And inevitably things will fall through the cracks as a new week will bring new news from elsewhere.

And it’s only going to get more intense. Google employees I’ve talked to say Larry Page is really pushing his 10X innovation mantra and speedier product cycles. They explain that Google could have saved some stuff for another conference later this year, but by then it’ll already have whole slew of new things ready to show off. Plus, developers and futurists might not be willing to come from around the world for two events a year.

The single, 3+ hour keynote with no intermission did symbolized Google’s big theme of unification. Google wants to show it isn’t just a grab bag of different products. They all piggy-back on each other. Android ties mobile together. Google+ ties people together no matter what other Google products they’re using.

But I/O may be too dense and rich. Like a chunk of chocolate fudge, it overwhelms the senses and leaves you struggling to chew up Google’s vision. It was so mind-boggling it put Wired’s Mat Honan into a psychedelic trance.

The three days of developer sessions that followed the keynote were a success, in that they helped developers develop. But perhaps splitting the keynote into two bite-size sessions would make it all easier to swallow. One consumer keynote (Search, Maps, Google+, Hangouts, Music, phone) and one developer keynote (Android, Chrome, APIs, developer tools). They could be split across two days. Alternatively, it could be one keynote with announcements sorted into these two categories with an intermission in the middle. Either would go a long way to making I/O more comprehensible.

But for now, sticking with a single, epic conference may be the best route for Google to create momentum, convey unification, bring its community together, and impress the globe. Google is determined to innovate faster and deliver the future. The duty falls on us to keep up.

Filed Under: Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: Blogging, Facebook, Google, io2013, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, Social Networking, TC

Google’s Cloud Is Eating Apple’s Lunch

May 4, 2013 by Jon Evans Leave a Comment

A new front has opened in the smartphone war, and for the first time in many years, Apple is both outnumbered and outgunned.

I’m not talking about the phones themselves. iOS is still better than Android, although the gap has narrowed. The next iPhone will doubtless be the best phone in the world when it’s released, as ever. It won’t be as customizable – no Swype, no Facebook Home – but those remain relatively minor inferiorities.

The new battlefront is different. The new battlefront is the cloud: Google Maps vs. Apple Maps, Siri vs. Google voice search, iCloud vs. Dropbox et al, and Google Now vs…well, nothing at all, yet. This is a big deal. As we grow accustomed to an always-online world of ubiquitous computing, your phone becomes less a device in and of itself and more a gateway to its cloud services. And it’s very hard to argue that Apple is anything but the serious underdog here.

You know they have a problem when even die-hard Apple supporter John Gruber is linking to pieces like “Apple’s Broken Promise: iCloud and Core Data,” which is replete with quotes like “If they couldn’t get iCloud working, who can?” … “It just doesn’t work” … “Many of these issues take hours to resolve and some can permanently corrupt your account” … “A developer’s worst nightmare.”

Remember when Siri was introduced, and people were pronouncing it a serious threat to Google Search itself? No, really. Haven’t heard that one in a while, have you? And not without reason; Siri seems to have stagnated, while over in Mountain View, Google is doing some truly phenomenal things with many-layered neural networks — and superior voice search is just one of the applications.

Can Apple match that? Who knows — but it’s safe to say that this kind of thing, cutting-edge technology beyond great hardware and superb design, isn’t their core strength. It’s Google’s. As is shown by Google Now, which is inexplicably treated as nothing more than Google’s answer to Siri by hordes of writers who apparently can’t think beyond simple dichotomies. It’s much more than that; until Siri tells you what you should do before you ask, there’s really no comparison.

Meanwhile, Google Now has been released to iOS, continuing Google’s ongoing battle to dominate the iPhone app space. (They’ve been quite successful; the two most-downloaded iOS apps are YouTube and Google Maps.) As TC’s Semil Shah has pointed out, thanks to Apple’s iOS restrictions, no third party could build a true iOS competitor to Google Now on Android. Only Apple itself has that power.

But will they succeed? And by the time they do, will Google have outstripped them again? Again, nobody has a crystal ball; but Google has a long history of building superb, scalable, reliable, (mostly) developer-friendly, and technically groundbreaking web services. Apple…does not.

That said, I wouldn’t bet against them is by no means a guaranteed win. Consider Apple Maps, which has taken great strides since its initial stumbles. And as my friend Lunatic (no, really) pointed out while debating this post with me on Twitter, it’s a bit rich to call Apple overmatched while iOS’s share of the American smartphone market still seems to be increasing, and

@rezendi At least it's actual data, rather than anecdotes. & more adept at skating to where the puck is going to be: Apple/Google? Arguable.—
Lun Esex (@LunaticSX) April 30, 2013

But at the very least, on this new cloud-services battlefront, Apple is in the unfamiliar position of underachieving underdog up against the mighty Google war machine. With Google I/O and Apple WWDC both only weeks away, we can expect to find out soon whether either has a new secret weapon. Let’s hope they both do, because the great thing about this war is that when these two giants do battle, everyone else usually wins.

Image credit: Clouds over SoMa, by yours truly, on Flickr.

Filed Under: Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: apple, Apple Maps, Blogging, cloud computing, Column, Facebook, Google, Google Maps, google now, iCloud, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, siri, Social Networking, TC

We’ve Heard A Similar Reaction To Google Glass Somewhere Before

May 3, 2013 by Drew Olanoff Leave a Comment

Google Glass is finding its way to developers and others and the reaction has been, well, predictable.

So far, there are those who think that Glass will absolutely change the world, that it’s our version of the flying car. Those people are full of shit. On the other side of the coin, there are those who say that Glass will never find a place in the hearts of consumers, that it’s unnecessary and that Google is just trying to be cool. Those people are also full of shit.

The problem is that when new things are introduced, people don’t know how to react, so they go to what they know. There’s either delirious glee or there’s immediate doom and gloom. The fact of the matter is that nobody knows what the future of Glass looks like. Not even Google. This is the very reason why the device was seeded with developers first: Their applications will be what makes the product interesting or not. If iPhone developers had been the only ones with an iPhone, then they would have been called names, too. It’s just the nature of the tech beast.

I was around for the launch of the iPhone, the device that some, including Steve Jobs, said would revolutionize the way we do everything. For the most part, it has in many ways. When it launched, I remember handing my precious cellular device to people who couldn’t wait to take it for a spin. They spent about five minutes tapping around and then handed it back, saying things like “Oh, well I guess that’s cool.” It wasn’t until the App Store was introduced until the real power of the iPhone came into play. Surfing the web, checking stock and weather information and reading your email wasn’t all that amazing and magical.

Here’s CNET’s “Bottom Line” on the original iPhone in 2007:

Despite some important missing features, a slow data network, and call quality that doesn’t always deliver, the Apple iPhone sets a new benchmark for an integrated cell phone and MP3 player.

Is that how you’d explain the iPhone now? Not really.

Then, you had this wonderful moment…

During that clip, Steve Ballmer showed himself to lack the vision to even think about creating a device that could unlock the potential of so many different people, be it developers or consumers. That’s exactly the reaction I’m seeing on the doom-and-gloom side of the coin for Glass.

Just today, Business Insider wrote “The Verdict Is In: Nobody Likes Google Glass.” There were some fair points raised in that piece, but like most things that have been written about Glass, the broader points are being missed. What will Glass do for developers who are looking to stretch their brains, and talents, on a platform that could be on the face of consumers in the next year or so? It’s too early to tell, of course.

There will be a killer app for Glass, mark my words. I have no idea what it will be. There was a killer app for the iPhone very early on, one called Urbanspoon. Get this, you could shake your phone and you’d get a random suggestion on where to eat. That action and experience could never be done on a phone until the iPhone. You’re going to see the same types of applications pop up for Glass, ones that we’ve never imagined.

Until these apps start being built, we’re stuck with people trying to get attention by wearing the device in the shower and swearing to never take them off, or people trying to predict how it will completely bomb and never see store shelves at all. It’s a time that we went through once before, with the iPhone. Apple stayed the course, navigated its way through those bumpy times and came out on the other side. Will Google be able to do the same? There’s no reason to think they can’t, and there’s no reason to think they can.

We’re just going to have to wait.

If you haven’t noticed, waiting isn’t a strong suit of those in the tech space. However, Ballmer should have waited until he shared his opinion on the iPhone publicly, but then again…it was pretty predictable.

Filed Under: Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: Ballmer, Blogging, Facebook, glass, Google, iphone, Opinion, Scoble, search engine optimization, SEO, Social Networking, TC

A Day With Glass: First Impressions Of The Early Days Of Google’s Latest Moonshot

April 17, 2013 by Drew Olanoff Leave a Comment

As we shared yesterday, the process to actually pay for the Glass Explorer Edition was quite simple. The next step in the process is picking up your device at either the Mountain View, Los Angeles or New York City Google Campus. Of course, you can opt to have them shipped to you if you’re not in one of those areas, but what’s the fun in that?

I picked up my Google Glass today in Mountain View and was told only that I would receive a bit of a walkthrough and proper fitting. I want to warn you, this isn’t a review, there won’t be any unboxing videos, you can find the technical specs here and there will be no pass or fail grade on this first iteration of Google Glass. If you buy into the potential for the device, and, more importantly the platform, then you know that this will be a true exploration into what Google has come up with here.

Some will see this device as a fad, something that isn’t really “necessary” in today’s world, and others will see this as the beginning of an adventure for users, developers and Google, of course. I tend to lean towards the adventure side, as it’s not fully known what impact Glass will have on society, your day-to-day activities, or the future of technology and hardware.

The setup

I arrived at the Googleplex and a few members of the Glass team greeted me. It’s been almost a year since Google’s last I/O conference where 2,000 developers signed up to be a part of the Glass Explorer program, and this is naturally the day that they’ve been waiting for.

When I sat down to unbox my Glass, I was shown the proper way that they should sit on my face. The glass itself, where the screen is projected, should sit above your right eye and not in front of it. It’s easy to mess around with the nose pads to get the right fit. The second step is to pair your Glass with your device, using the MyGlass app that recently shipped. Since Glass pairs to your phone through Bluetooth, the device is pretty much useless until that’s done.

You log into the app using your consumer, not business, Gmail account, and then you’re off to the races once you’ve paired:

Something to note, all of these screenshots are coming from the handy “screencast” tool within the MyGlass app. It shows everything that you’re seeing on Glass. You’re paired, account is connected, Wi-Fi or mobile network is chosen, and you’re ready to use Glass.

As you swipe your way through some of the screens on the touchpad with your finger, you’ll notice Google Now cards (if you choose to turn them on), a settings screen, and of course, the all-important command screen that pops up after you say the magic phrase “Ok Glass.”

With these voice commands, you can Google things, find directions, send someone a message shoot a video or take a picture. There’s also a button on the top of Glass that lets you snap photos and shoot video as well. The audio, which comes out right by your ear, is crisp and not too loud.

The Glass team tells me that looking at the screen takes some time to get used to. Some of the folks who work at Google say it took them up to a week to be able to focus on the screen properly. Let’s be honest, looking up and to the right isn’t a natural movement for our eyes. I’ve found that as I’ve worn them longer, I can glance up pretty quickly and see what I need to see and go back to what I was doing.

One trick is to use the screencast function of the app so that you can understand fully where each screen goes and what it does.

What Glass is and isn’t

Let’s start with what Glass isn’t. Glass isn’t a replacement for your cell phone, since you have to pair the device with the one you have for cellular functionality. It’s not a device for watching movies or YouTube videos and it’s not going to replace your computer. You won’t be able to read full search results on the tiny screen, but you’ll be able to get to really relevant information quickly.

What Glass seems to be, in the few hours that I’ve spent with it, is a device that picks up some of the things you do throughout your day and makes that information more easily accessible. Currently, the only built-in integration for a third-party service is Path.

For example, how many times a day do you pick up your phone to check the time or to see if you have any missed calls or text messages? I couldn’t count the times that I’ve wasted that arm motion, in the sense that it has taken attention away from things around me. Every single time you take your phone out, you’re telling the people that are around you that you have no interest in interacting with them for at least 30 seconds while you dive into your phone. Now, am I saying that having a screen above your eye is any less socially awkward? No. But it lets you access the same information quicker without having to stop what you’re doing.

If you look at Glass in its existing state, it’s quite impressive that all of this was fit into a tiny package that sits on your face. Will I get weird stares for a while when I’m out wearing them? Probably. Do I care? Not really. But I do care how it affects others, and that’s something that nobody will be able to talk about for sure until these things are in the wild for a few weeks.

Now mind you, this is the Explorer Edition of Glass, and it comes with the barest bones of “apps.” The real magic is going to be what developers start building on the platform.

What Glass could be

This is where things get really interesting. As we covered last week, there are already investors that are chomping at the bit to put money into developers who are building apps on top of Glass. The possibilities are actually quite endless, starting from potential uses in hospitals for doctors to a new way for teachers to interact with their students.

As far as how we interact with the world around us, being able to take pictures from our own vantage point, without setting up a shot for perfect light or shade, is something that has yet to be uncovered. Glass can do that. Being able to join a Google+ Hangout and talk to your friends with nothing more than a device that sits on your nose is pretty cool, too.

It all goes back to the developers, though. They have the minds to push Glass forward as not just a geeky novelty, but as a platform to enhance our lives. I’m not going to sugarcoat it — this product has a lot of bumpy roads ahead of it. We have to assume that there are developers who can come up with big ideas, that consumers are ready for it and whether it can be at a price point that middle-America can afford. In its current developer-only state, it’s not that hard to grasp how to use it once you get past having something new on your face.

This is only a first step, and it’s going to be an interesting ride. Not only can I not wait to build my hands-free recipe app, I’m looking forward to speaking with developers who are forward-thinking enough to see Glass for what it is — not a futuristic gadget, but something that can help us explore the world in a new way. It’s going to take time, though. I mean, even my dog thinks it’s weird:

If you’re a developer who is working on, thinking about or are interested in building Glass apps, feel free to reach out to me, as we tell the story of the platform together.

Filed Under: Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: Blogging, Facebook, Gadgets, glass, Google, google glass, mobile, now, Opinion, Project Glass, search engine optimization, SEO, Social Networking, TC

The Power And Weakness That Come With Being The Default

April 7, 2013 by Drew Olanoff Leave a Comment

Facebook had its big coming-out party for mobile on Wednesday, and its Home launcher will soon start shipping exclusively on an HTC device. This is the social network’s first crack at being the default experience on any device. Until now, using Facebook has been a completely optional and background experience, meaning you’d have to visit its website or download one of its apps. After nine years, that approach worked rather well, to the tune of over a billion users. To get to the next level, Facebook had to start dipping its toes into uncharted territory…being the default.

Creating a situation where you are the default, out-of-the-box experience certainly has many advantages. For example, HTC is putting all of its marketing power behind the HTC First, and Facebook probably didn’t have to pay a dime for any of this. The phone manufacturer is hoping that even though this isn’t a true “Facebook Phone,” that the fantasy of it being that, along with a manageable $99 price tag, will be enough to sell a slew of them. AT&T is certainly helping the cause on their site with this massive advertisement, which is of course what you see by default when you surf there:

On April 12, when people start opening their new devices, they will see a Facebook screen asking them to log in. Yes, Facebook has reached default status. If for some odd reason the person with the phone doesn’t have a Facebook account, they can simply sign up for one. Sounds crazy, but there are still many people without a Facebook account and might not have had a reason to have one before. They might have never had a smartphone before either, which means that the Facebook Home experience will be their guide.

The importance, and potential negatives involved, cannot be overstated.

The Power Of Default

Talk to Microsoft about defaults. It worked quite well for its Internet Explorer browser until it got them into hot water. We’ll get to the hot water later, but Internet Explorer was a beast, because it shipped as the only browsing experience for Windows machines. Was it the best web browser out there? For a while, yes it was. Installing another browser used to be seen as something only really geeky, or adventurous, people would do. I remember tweaking my old Windows machine every chance I could get, downloading any other interface to the web that I could download. For most, though, the idea of using something not blessed by Microsoft was risky and not worth the time.

During the early “browser war” days, the only other viable options to Internet Explorer were Opera and Netscape Navigator. There were plusses to both, but nothing overwhelming. Web surfers simply wanted to use the web, so they used the interface that was given to them, and it worked. For its operating system, Microsoft stole the enterprise market because they were the only option, and once one big company became a Windows shop, everyone else had to if they wanted to compete.

Facebook is now in a similar situation with Facebook Home. They are the most popular experience for interacting with your friends online. The lure of Facebook is just that — all of your friends and family are on it. Why would you use something else to talk to them if that’s where they spend their time? Every app developer is trying to conjure up a “Facebook Hook” because it’s the easiest way to attract more people to your product.

The power that comes along with that is just mind-boggling. Zuckerberg knows that after going public, Facebook is in a position where it can put its foot on the gas to get to 2 billion users. To get there, you have to pull out all of the stops. Will Facebook ever create its own phone? Maybe, once they see how the HTC test goes and how many people install Facebook Home onto their Android devices. It’s doubtful that Apple will ever open up enough for Facebook to take over iOS, so if all goes well with Home, there has to be a next phase of the plan.

That plan would be its own phone and hardware. Another company, that starts with a G, has gone through similar testing phases with hardware products, only to start building ones in-house. That same company has its own software bundled with a mobile operating system, but they’ve gotten around any issues by making that operating system open source and modifiable. Or in their words, “flexible.”

The Weakness Of Default

After Microsoft had cornered the browser market with its genius plan of shipping every copy of its Windows operating system with it pre-installed, other players cried foul. At the time, Microsoft saw its distribution methods as its No. 1 asset, because they were. But how could Microsoft not be open and let people choose which browser they used before being thrust into Microsoft’s idea of what browsing the web should be like.

Choice. For users? Crazy.

It was alleged that uninstalling Internet Explorer slowed down PCs using Windows, and that Microsoft didn’t provide users with the proper tools to completely rid themselves of the web browser and move onto another one. Accusations flew about monopolies, but Microsoft contested that Internet Explorer wasn’t a product, but just a feature.

It got ugly, and in case you’ve never seen Bill Gates’ deposition from 1998, here are some of the greatest hits:

If you ever have a lot of time to research this, listening to the deposition or reading through the transcripts are a hoot.

All of this was awkward because Microsoft had helped pioneer home computing, so cases like this had never happened. The questions for Microsoft and the answers that the court received were firsts. It wasn’t a perfect case or remedy, but Microsoft’s stronghold on the browser market soon came to an end. Users don’t have a problem downloading Chrome, Firefox or any other flavor of a web browser anymore. Personal choice is king on the Internet.

The problem here for Facebook is that it will soon find a day where its lock on all of your friends and their data will be seen as a monopoly. Moves like becoming the default experience, even though it can be reversed, for a smartphone, could easily be seen as a move similar to Microsoft’s Windows distribution tactics. Does it mean they’re evil? No, it means they’re smart.

Being smart catches up with you, though, because other smart people find all of the flaws with your product and build alternatives. Now that choice is commonplace for consumers, especially on the web, Facebook for the first time has really opened itself up to someone building a competitive service and becoming the sexy alternative the ugly, old default.

Thinking Ahead

Naturally, Facebook is full of really smart people, people that have worked with Microsoft’s finest for years, since they were an early investor. The social network can of course learn from the software company’s mistakes, but it will be once again heading into uncharted territory. There will come a day, maybe sometime soon, where Mark Zuckerberg is being deposed over what is seen as monopolistic behavior. There will be companies like Netscape and Opera who are crying foul, putting all of their efforts behind breaking down everything that Facebook had built over the years with its distribution methods.

It’s all cyclical, there has to be a big guy. Facebook is the big guy in the social space, but when you have that target on your back, you know that others will come after you. Facebook will have a Pepsi to its Coke, and some predict that the true Facebook alternative will be a place for younger people. Only thing is, Zuckerberg already thought about it and that’s why it partnered with HTC for the Home launch and why it acquired Instagram. If it goes where the younger people are and captures that market, it will take longer for a competitor to unwind what Facebook has wound over the past nine years. Facebook is already an operating system, but you and I are the bits and bytes that make it up.

For consumers, once they see the same thing every day, even though Facebook promises to update Home every month, they will start seeking out alternatives. Sure, Facebook allows you to take your data with you, but there isn’t anyone that properly handles all of that data just yet to disrupt Facebook’s position. There will be, though. It isn’t Twitter or Google+ alone, but it will probably be a combination of a few services, some of which haven’t been invented yet.

In the same way as bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, selling its own phone with nothing more than a login screen for the social network would be seen as anti-competitive, Home could be seen as slightly anti-competitive, cutting off apps that have similar functionality to Facebook could be seen as anti-competitive. After all, being the first thing people see when they interact with their phone is more invasive than being the default browser, right?

The only problem is, there is no real competitor. Yet. There will be, though, and it won’t be pretty once this cycle happens all over again.

Filed Under: Facebook, Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: Blogging, choice, default, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, mobile, monopoly, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, social, Social Networking, TC, Twitter

Zuckerberg’s Big Mistake: Launching Facebook Home in the U.S.

April 4, 2013 by Pete Pachal Leave a Comment

Whatever you may think about Facebook Home, you can't question its intent — to put Facebook at the core of your mobile experience, not just another app. Everything about Home and the new HTC First is about making Facebook even more dominant than it already is on people's phones.

That idea might by appealing if you either: A). Have a digital life that is completely dominated by Facebook. Or B). Don't yet have a smartphone and have no sense of the value that goes hand in hand with having a variety of apps.

People who fit into those two categories exist, but the thing is, they're typically not Americans. That's why I find it perplexing that Facebook is choosing to limit Facebook Home to the U.S. at launch "in the spirit of a slow rollout." Read more...

More about Facebook, Opinion, Facebook Phone, Tech, and Apps Software

Filed Under: Facebook, search engine optimization, Social Networking Tagged With: Apps & Software, Blogging, Facebook, Facebook Phone, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, Social Networking, tech

Sorry, A Facebook Phone Doesn’t Make Sense

March 29, 2013 by Christina Warren Leave a Comment

Facebook is holding an Android-related press event next week and already the Internet is in a tizzy. Could this be the rumored, mythical, magical Facebook phone?

The truth is, I don't know. For nearly 18 months, rumors of a Facebook phone — developed by HTC and running a customized version of Android — have continued to persist. And for nearly 18 months, Facebook has publicly denied its interest in building its own phone.

Last September at TechCrunch Disrupt, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg went on at length about why a Facebook phone wasn't right for the company.

He said:

"Let’s say we build a phone. We’re not, but if we did, we could maybe get 10 to 20 million people to use it … It doesn’t move the needle for us."

"The strategy we have is different from every other tech company [like Apple] that’s building their own hardware system — we’re going in the opposite direction.." Read more...

More about Facebook, Android, Smartphone, Opinion, and Ios

Filed Under: Facebook, search engine optimization, Social Networking Tagged With: android, Apps and Software, Blogging, Facebook, iOS, mobile, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, smartphone, Social Networking, tech, Uncategorized

Google’s New Nexus 10 Tablet Commercial Focuses On Its Multiple Account Feature, And That’s An Advantage

March 18, 2013 by Drew Olanoff Leave a Comment

Google has been on a bit of a roll with its commercials lately, especially for its gadgets. Today, the company unleashed its latest commercial for the Nexus 10, its iPad ~~killer~~ competitor. The video tells the story of a couple who has just found out that they’re having a baby. Google has woven the Nexus 10 Wi-Fi-only device into the story quaintly.

The feature that Google decided to focus the commercial around? Its multi-user Android one. Yes, Google’s competitive advantage is apparently the fact that you can share the device with someone else. Is that enough? Have a look at the commercial:

We’ve talked about Apple needing a “kid-only” and “guest” mode for the iPad, but are these very personal devices something that we want everyone’s grubby little hands on? It sounds good on paper and perhaps in a well-produced commercial. But alas, the answer is yes, people really do want to purchase a device like this and let other members of their family have a play, too.

The great part about having multiple-account capability is that you can pick up the device, log in and then instantly have access to your own home screen and apps. Since Google’s syncing capabilities are pretty robust, you could have a few of these devices sitting around and just log into whichever one is closest to you. Plus, the 10 costs about $399.

Now that Google is settling into its role as a player in the mobile and tablet space, it’s interesting to watch what they pick to focus on. In the video above, you’ll see how they fit Google Play in, watching movies, searches with Google Now, doing Hangouts on Google+ and reading a book. The story is starting to develop for Google’s devices and services.

It’s not all hearts and hugs for Google, as Apple could, and probably will, roll something like this out in the near future. For now it’s an advantage, but Google has to continually roll out features within its OS that are just a bit better than iOS. A complete side-by-side war won’t work; it’s going to have to be incremental upgrades and changes that catch your eye…like sharing your device seamlessly with anyone who wants to use it. This time, you won’t get your iPad back with tabs full of porn on it. Not that it has happened to any of us. Much.

Will we see upgrades at the I/O conference this year for Google’s 10-inch tablet? One can hope. The only problem for me with the Nexus 10 is that outside of my home, it’s pretty useless. Is the 10 perfect? Not even close. Is it better than the iPad? That’s a matter of personal preference. Google just wants to nudge you with some of its own unique features, and that’s smart.

Filed Under: Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: Blogging, Facebook, Google, mobile, multi-user, nexus, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, Social Networking, TC

God Damn It, Google

March 17, 2013 by Devin Coldewey Leave a Comment

A couple years ago, I wrote a post called Google, Rome, and Empire. The gist of the article, of which I was very proud at the time, was that Google’s grand plan mirrored the structure of Roman roads in their build-out period, and that Google would unify its dozens of small properties with its five or six big ones by means of a single meta-service.

I envisioned this rich tapestry of services, obscure to monolithic, hooking in through engines and tools to a vastness of data and users, and, at the other end of the telescope, a single point of entry through which one would have instant access to everything from maps to obscure scientific results to the current price of tea. A bit like the real (or rather, idealized) empire, really: An assemblage of hamlets and metropoli, farms and academies, every citizen knowing that their via vicinale led to a via rustica, which led to a via publica, which led to Rome.

This constellation of services, this web of empowerment, resources, and variety. This bright future.

I’m feeling let down.

I’d like to think that I was at least not wrong the whole time. I think my optimism was warranted, just as I think their ambition was real. In a way, that ambition is intact. But it has been perverted. Google was like the Library of Babel: As near as infinite as the Internet age was likely to get. This mind-blowing edifice, bricks of information, mortared together with context, and gilded with accessibility. And they’re building it all so you’ll go to the gift shop.

I suppose I’m criticizing them for deciding to become a business rather than a public service. That was their choice to make, of course, but I think it’s safe to say their choice was a poor one. The Google of the early 2000s, globe-spanning and yet delighting in esoterica, was on its way to becoming a historic framework, Standard Oil crossed with Bell Labs. Not only that, it was crazy, starry-eyed: It was an asylum by and for the lunatics, a padded room big enough to hold the world.

What was it about being the connective tissue of the net that became so distasteful to Google? What was it that made them shutter project after project, things that could have lived out their natural lives for years on minimal resources, supported by a thankful and loving community in happy allegiance to the Google Empire?

Google+ was, as I saw it, a huge misstep, albeit a high-quality one. But other products, other “sunsets” (each less scenic than the last) hinted at a company growing not just sloppy, but callous. More wood behind fewer arrows, when the whole point of Google was that its quiver runneth over. Now, with the senseless shutdown of Reader (I won’t bore you with my own analysis; there’s plenty already (but take this)), I’m faced with how deliberate and tawdry the whole thing has become. God damn it, Google.

It’s not that we can’t move on from Reader — maybe its demise will even help with the rebirth of RSS, or whatever comes next, and make us really look at how ideas move around the Internet. And it’s not that I hate Google+, although I sure as hell don’t have to like it, either.

It’s like seeing your favorite fighter (I was going to say Ali, but Google doesn’t deserve him, even in simile) throw a match for the money. He’s no worse a fighter for it, but could you ever cheer for him again?

How can I be excited for Google Glass now? How can I be pumped for I/O or 3D Google Earth or a partnership with the Library of Congress, or anything they come up with? They’ve poisoned the well in the worst way; they made it clear that Google is worse than mercenary — it’s banal.

I can still be happy for what they’ve given us, and that’s not a little. They led the data-voracious of the world, spurred sluggish markets into action, and truly revolutionized (I don’t use the word lightly) the way we navigate data by changing what we think of as data (namely, everything). I can still follow the good works of the Maps and Books teams with approval or marvel a bit at the technical accomplishment of Glass, or thank them for their advocacy in Washington, though now it is without positive sentiment, like looking at the drawings some other person’s kids did at school.

Google’s greatest legacy may be in the lesson that they have given the next generation of companies and visionaries. Google said “Don’t be Evil,” and they meant it, but they found what others have found: it’s easier said than done, not because of temptation, but because nobody is quite sure what evil is. Luckily, those that are to come may be guided by a simpler principle:

Don’t be Google.

Filed Under: Google, Search Engine Marketing Tagged With: Blogging, Column, Facebook, Google, Opinion, search engine optimization, SEO, Social Networking, TC

Google’s Chromebook Pixel Looks Like A Pricey Boondoggle, Or The Platypus Of The Notebook World

February 21, 2013 by Darrell Etherington Leave a Comment

Google unveiled is fabled Pixel Chromebook today, and the thing does indeed have what looks to be a gorgeous, high-resolution display. It also has a touchscreen, as rumored, and the list gets more confusing from there. 32GB (or 64GB) of onboard storage? ChromeOS? A 3:2 screen ratio? A $1299 starting price tag? Huh?

The device is meant to be upscale, Google admits, but for a machine aiming at power users, it’s a device surprisingly devoid of power features. ChromeOS is, for all its strengths, still essentially a browser, after all. This thing can’t run Photoshop, which you’d be able to do no problem if you spend $100 less and get a 13-inch MacBook Air. It can play back movies on that gorgeous screen, but not in as many file formats or with as much ease as you could manage with a Lenovo Yoga 13, also cheaper at $1,049. It can accept touch input, which could be exciting, but then again might not, and that’s hardly a feature worth risking a cool $1300 for.

Which isn’t to say the Pixel isn’t attractive. It’s a looker, to be sure, and something I’d definitely be interested in owning myself. The 1TB of Google Drive storage and the LTE radio on the $1449 model make for an attractive package, so long as you’re already deeply committed to Google’s cloud storage ecosystem. But a gadget blogger wanting something and an everyday consumer being willing to cough up over $1,000 for it are two entirely different things, and the Pixel has too many of those moments that make you tilt your head slightly to provide any chance at success in that regard.

ChromeOS is a risky proposition on a $249 laptop for most people. It’s still just too new, and too untested in a world where you’ll attract far fewer headaches just going with OS X or Windows. With a price tag that makes it almost an impulse buy, it’s an understandable risk. At $1299, it’s not.

ChromeOS is a risky proposition on a $249 laptop for most people

Google doesn’t always care about marketability for its first generation devices. It originally tried to sell the Nexus One direct for $529, a price many felt was too high, contributing to the eventual failure of that experiment. The Pixel is also introduced as “a laptop that brings together the best in hardware, software, and design to inspire future innovation” on Google’s website, meaning it probably isn’t intended to fly off the shelves, but more to light a fire under hardware partners and developers.

Still, announcing a consumer launch (including a retail partnership with Best Buy) for the Chromebook Pixel (a device that looks like the notebook world’s equivalent of a hastily assembled Lego project built from memory) just comes off as weird. I once lauded Google’s strategy in going for cheap, ubiquitous data network access with previous hardware launches, and I’m all for technical innovation that explores new territory. But I see no answer to the question of “Why?” when it comes to the Pixel.