Apple sells the iPad like a computer not like a cell phone

by Yutaka Tsutano

Why operators will find it hard to sell tablets
[Via asymco]

On the eve of iPad 2.0, it’s time to think again about this curious new computer. My intuition tells me that this product category will behave very differently from the iPhone and will not be subject to the same sales ramp.

The iPad has been on the market for less than a year but it’s still a puzzle for many. It’s a product that’s often seen as an iPhone product line extension. From a hardware point of view, it certainly seems to be. It has an almost identical internal architecture and uses almost the same software. An engineer would look at it and reasonably say it’s the same thing.

However, from the way it’s used and the way it’s sold, it has very little in common with its smaller cousin. There are plenty of experts who can detail how the products are used differently, but I would highlight the portability of the iPhone makes it suitable for a completely different set of tasks than the less portable but more immersive iPad.

But what I want to dwell on here is how differently the products are sold.

I’ll build the case from evidence that Apple provides. The most important observation is that the iPad is an unlocked product. Although you can hire an operator to provide you with data services for it, the product is designed not to rely on that. As a result the product is effectively “divorced” from the operator channel. This means it does not typically benefit (or suffer) from subsidy.

[More]

All the other tablet manufacturers seem to require a telecom channel to sell them. They do not have the same penetration ability that the iPad has.

One can only be found in carrier stores. The other can be sold anywhere. One is retailed similarly to a computer. One is marketed just like a big phone.

Since the tablet, and particularly the iPad, really is a lightweight small computer, which sales strategy works with the marketing strategy?

Not only can Apple command a large portion of the market for the hardware needed, they also command the delivery channels to sell all of these. Many tablet makers are much more constrained in both their hardware and points of sale.

I have a Wifi iPad because I can get data without Wifi through my iPhone. Why pay for both? I have not yet entered a situation where I could get data on my iPhone but could not get this vital data immediately over to my iPad.

And with the ability to tether, I should have nothing to worry about.

Conspiracy theory #3 for climate denialists – researchers are in it for the money

by RDECOM

If climate scientists are in it for the money, they’re doing it wrong
[Via Ars Technica]

One of the more unfortunate memes that makes an appearance whenever climate science is discussed is the accusation that, by hyping their results, climate scientists are ensuring themselves steady paychecks, and may even be enriching themselves. A Google search for “global warming gravy train” pulls out over 50,000 results (six of them from our forums).

It’s tempting to respond with indignation; after all, researchers generally are doing something they love without a focus on compensation. But, more significantly, the accusation simply makes no sense on any level.

[More]

Only people with little connection to research would say that the 10s of thousands of people worldwide working on these problems are in it for financial benefits.

This article is a good start to debunking that view. But, as can be sen from the comments, facts do not really matter. Ad hominems and anecdotal data are much more important to them. And it demonstrates very little real understanding of how the research is funded or done.

This sort of thing has been true for other denialists – such as  creationists – as long as I have been alive. Facts and data seldom have any effect. All those do is confirm the strength of the conspiracy against their denialist belief.

Cargo Cult Worlds are very hard to destroy.

The very slow return of jobs

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
[Via Calculated Risk]

As a reminder, the weak payroll report for January was blamed on the snow. Usually I don’t buy the weather excuses, but it did appear weather played a role this time. When the report was released, I wrote:

The 36,000 payroll jobs added was far below expectations of 150,000 jobs, however this was probably impacted by bad weather during the survey reference period. If so, there should be a strong bounce back in the February report.

That is a key reason the consensus is so high for February. Bloomberg has the consensus at 180,000, MarketWatch has 200,000, Goldman’s forecast is 200,000, and I heard ISI is at 230,000).

It will be useful to average the two months to estimate the current pace of payroll growth – especially if weather played a role in January and there is a strong bounce back in February.

And we have to remember the numbers are grim:
• There are 7.7 million fewer payroll jobs now than before the recession started in December 2007.
• Almost 14 million Americans are unemployed.
• Of those unemployed, 6.2 million have been unemployed for six months or more.
• Another 8.4 million are working part time for economic reasons,
• About 4 million more have left the labor force since the start of the recession (we can see this in the dramatic drop in the labor force participation rate),
• of those who have left the labor force, about 1 million are available for work, but are discouraged and have given up.

[More]

At this rate, it will take 5 years just to replace the 7.7 million jobs. But that does not take into account the increasing labor market as young people enter. Here is a nice graphical comparison, from last year, from the Center for Economic and Policy Research:

This is how long it would take to get back to even. As you can see, last July it was going to take 4 years. Now we are talking 5 years. So, instead of 2014 it will be 2016.

But here is the same graph including the increase in the labor market:

Last year, it was going to take until 2021 to get back to the same employment levels we had in 2007! Now we are looking more to 2023.

This all assumes that the jobs recovery rates do not change. we have to hope we see a large increase in jobs sometime soon. Otherwise we are talking 15 years just to get back to what we used to have.

That is why job creation should be number one. If we do not start to really tackle this problem now, an entire generation of workers will be lost.

The deficit won’t matter because too many people will not have any jobs.

Could the app economy be changing the gaming industry?

by digitpedia

It’s unofficial: dedicated gaming devices may be losing out to phones
[Via Ars Technica]

Here’s a good weather vane for the gaming industry: ask people what they’ll be taking on the plane as they fly to the Game Developers Conference, or GDC. This year, the amount of DS’s and PSPs may be at an all-time low as people are simply playing games on their mobile phones or tablets. We no longer have to carry a dedicated gaming device to play a first-person shooter, real-time strategy game, or even a dungeon crawler, and many of us are moving on.

It’s not that games on phones or tablets are better than what you see on Sony and Nintendo’s handheld systems—it’s that for many travelers they’re good enough. People need to justify the weight and bulk when they pack things, and if they are already carrying something that can play games, why bring a second gaming-only device? Before every big conference the call goes out on Twitter, asking what iPhone games should people buy for the plane.

These games can be both casual or hardcore, they usually cost under $10, and they play on a device that you’re already packing. New DS games cost around $30, and you’re going to need to bring yet another device, and perhaps a charging cable. The 3DS isn’t helping things, with a system that offers limited battery life and games that are even more expensive.

I’ll be the first to admit that this is a trend that’s hard to track, and is largely anecdotal, but at this year’s DICE everyone was talking about smaller games that play on devices that are not primarily gaming devices. Even those who make the larger, higher-budget games for our consoles—such as the executives behind Blizzard and Bioware—are spending their time playing games on their phones, not a gaming device. One of the founders of Bioware lauded iPhone games when asked what he’s been playing. “Every week it’s like what’s new? It has become so easy to play them. Trying to play Scott Adam’s Pirate Adventure on an Apple II with a tape drive, that was hard to do. It’s very easy to play on the iPhone,” Dr. Greg Zeschuk said at DICE.

[More]

Not only are apps much cheaper for the iOS devices, they get new upgrades much more rapidly. Angry Birds has had close to 100 new puzzles added. When they come out with a new version, I’ll buy it. I can download it quickly and have days worth of fun with something I am already carrying.

And the App Store allows more apps to  be sold in 20 days than had been sold in a year before.

And it is possible to create a game that can easily be used on mobile devices, laptops and desktop devices, allowing income to be made at each stage. Again, Angry birds is the leader here, with a version for phones, a version for the iPad and a version for the Mac. With about a month’s worth of development time.

The handheld gaming devices depend on a gaming development cycle that is much longer and more expensive. As stated, often their battery life is abysmal.

I’d be vey worried if I were them. The market is changing and they need to adapt. They’ll still make a  lot of money selling their dedicated hardware, but I wonder how many games will still be developed for them and how large that market is?

Facts only confuse denialists and confirm the existence of massive conspiracies

by eutrophication&hypoxia

Climate science vindicated for umpteenth time – Deniers still demand Inquisition
[Via Climate Progress]

Inspector General’s Review of Stolen Emails Confirms No Evidence of Wrong-Doing by NOAA Climate Scientists

Report is the latest independent analysis to clear climate scientists of allegations of mishandling of climate information

Another day, another independent review finds that emails of climate science do nothing to undermine the overwhelming data-driven understanding that humans are changing the climate and that if we keep listening to the deniers, unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases will bring multiple catastrophes to countless future generations.

What a surprise (see “The first rule of vindicating climate scientists is you do not talk about vindicating climate scientists“).

The headlines are from the NOAA release, which continues:

[More]

Thingslike this will have no effect on the denialists:

At the request of U.S. Sen. Inhofe, the Department of Commerce Inspector General conducted an independent review of the emails stolen in November 2009 from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, and found no evidence of impropriety or reason to doubt NOAA’s handling of its climate data.

or this:

The Inspector General’s report states specifically:

• “We found no evidence in the CRU emails that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data comprising the [Global Historical Climatology Network – monthly] GHCN-M dataset.” (Page 11)
• “We found no evidence in the CRU emails to suggest that NOAA failed to adhere to its peer review procedures prior to its dissemination of information.” (Page 11)
• “We found no evidence in the CRU emails to suggest that NOAA violated its obligations under the IQA.” (Page 12)
• “We found no evidence in the CRU emails to suggest that NOAA violated its obligations under the Shelby Amendment.” (Page 16)

Climategate will continue to be an article of the denialist’s faith for some time. It sustains their Cargo Cult World.

An Irishman explain the problems

I don’t know who he is – probably a set-up or an actor – but he nails it. Not just what happened in Ireland. He could have been describing the US where bankers and others took advantage of lax regulation to steal from all of us.

And none have gone to jail. Maybe if a few of them did, people would be more willing to make some sacrifice.

But who wants sacrifice when the guys who made this all happen get bigger bonuses?

I really think the corrupting power of money concentrated in the hands of a few will be the main narrative behind this period in history. Mubarak openly stole from the people. Many of these bankers have done the same thing. And then they want us to give them even more.

Plus, I just love the way curse words sound with an Irish brogue.

My social graph on LinkedIn

LinkedIn has this nice little project that creates a map of you connections on LinkedIn. Here is mine. You can see that the Researchers (Blue) is pretty tightly linked to one another. Next comes the Biotech/Medical executives (Green).

They really don’t tell you what each group should be. Some of the connections are a little odd or hard to categorize but most of them seem to fit in easily defined groups. Looks kind of nice.

What a laughable process for upgrading the Xoom

Official Details of the 4G LTE Upgrade Process for the Motorola Xoom
[Via Daring Fireball]

Droid Life:

As expected, the upgrade will be free to everyone and will be available approximately 90 days after launch, so we’re looking at May before this thing will be cooking up those 4G speeds. And as we were told by Motorola at CES, you will have to send in your device and will be without it for 6 days while they upgrade the hardware and software.

Come on. They’re just making this up, right?

[More]

So, instead of waiting until they could sell and upgraded version, and also waiting until Flash was available, they sell a 0.8 version and expect people to send it back in 3 months for a week or so.

They have enough problems with this. If I wanted a Xoom, why not wait 90 days until I can get it with 4G? Assuming 4G is really available where I live.

This does not sound like a user-friendly way to run a company.  Why would people buy a Xoom in the first place, instead of an iPad? The Xoom is more expensive, has many fewer apps and is not fa fully realized mobile device.

 

Why books of paper will alway be with us

HarperCollins to libraries: we will nuke your ebooks after 26 checkouts
[Via Boing Boing]

LibraryGoblin sez, “HarperCollins has decided to change their agreement with e-book distributor OverDrive. They forced OverDrive, which is a main e-book distributor for libraries, to agree to terms so that HarperCollins e-books will only be licensed for checkout 26 times. Librarians have blown up over this, calling for a boycott of HarperCollins, breaking the DRM on e-books–basically doing anything to let HarperCollins and other publishers know they consider this abuse.”

I’ve talked to a lot of librarians about why they buy DRM books for their collections, and they generally emphasize that buying ebooks with DRM works pretty well, generates few complaints, and gets the books their patrons want on the devices their patrons use. And it’s absolutely true: on the whole, DRM ebooks, like DRM movies and DRM games work pretty well.

But they fail really badly. No matter how crappy a library’s relationship with a print publisher might be, the publisher couldn’t force them to destroy the books in their collections after 26 checkouts. DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it’s a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day.

[More]

Any digital form of a book with such onerous rights management should be boycotted. How would you feel if an ebook disappeared after being opened 26 times?

I’m waiting for the time when every book is rented and if we want to reread it we have to pay again.  We never again own the book.

Digital publishing i all about the publishers controlling who can read a book. First they’ll get the libraries, Then they’ll go after used books.

22% live in a fantasy world. No wonder our system is broken.

by AlexPro

Pulling it Together: Forget Math and Science, Teach Civics (Or why we need to bring back School House Rock) – Kaiser Family Foundation
[Via Kaiser Family Foundation]

I am seldom surprised by our poll findings, but this month’s tracking poll produced a doozy.  Twenty-two percent of the American people think the Affordable Care Act has been repealed, and another 26 percent aren’t sure.  Those are surprisingly large numbers even with the 52 percent who still know it is the law of the land.

How could a repeal “vote” in the House — however dramatic but still, only symbolic — be misunderstood as an actual repeal by so many Americans?

[More]

Amazing that over 20% think it has already been repealed. Like the blogger said, they need to watch more Schoolhouse Rock. “I’m just a bill. Yes, I’m only a bill. And I’m sitting here on Capitol Hill.”

Not surprisingly, the major emotion felt about healthcare reform is confusion.

I am one of those weird people who looks at the details (yeah, I read the instructions first also).

30% of those calling themselves Republicans think it has been repealed, to only 12% of the Democrats. 70% of those with a college education  knew it is still the law of the land while only 44 % of those who did not attend college knew.

This is not due to being totally ignorant of what is going on. In the same poll, only 14% said they knew nothing at all about Republican efforts to repeal the health reform law.

The rest of the poll has some interesting numbers. 30% want to expand healthcare reform and only 20% want to get rid of it entirely. 35% call themselves conservative and 23% call themselves liberals.

61% do not want to cut off funding, with most believing that using the budget process to stop a law is just not the way the government should work.

And here is the really important stuff. 70% of all responders think not enough attention is being paid to jobs. And everyone thinks that there are several things more important than repealing healthcare – the economy, budget deficits, immigration, energy policy, taxes.

Yet, to hear the media and politicians talk about it, repealing healthcare is one of the biggest concerns in politics.  Who is living in the fantasy world?

Science moving forward

by adamsofen

Genomic analysis shows humans evolved with few sweeping changes
[Via Ars Technica]

Humans and chimpanzees split around five million years ago. Ever since then, we (and they) have changed a bit to adapt to the different environments we invaded and created, and the “classic selective sweep” model was widely thought to account for these changes at the molecular level. In this scenario, a new, strongly beneficial mutation increases in frequency so rapidly that it “sweeps” away all other variants at that gene and nearby sites.

Yet it is difficult to detect the evidence of such sweeps in genomic data. After analyzing 179 human genomes, an international team of researchers have concluded that these sweeps were much rarer than previously thought, and were therefore probably not a huge influence on human adaptation over the past 250,000 years. Their work is reported in Science.

[More]

Science creates models to explain the natural world. Often those models do not have all the data needed to sustain them. So we do more research.

In this case, further research indicates that the model is not correct and a new model will have to be constructed. New data often does that – reduces a model to rubble.

But the next model will be a better representation of the world around us. It may not be perfect and may be destroyed in its turn but each iteration makes the next model better.

This post says it well:

This is the scientific method at its best. The classic sweep model seemed consistent with the available data until the recent technological advances allowed the sequencing of many human genomes. The authors used this new information to reveal the inadequacies of the current model, and note that new tests must be devised to detect the actual genetic mechanisms that drove human adaptation. They suggest that Genome Wide Association studies should be immensely useful in this regard.

Democracy in Wisconsin?

WI Assembly GOP Passes Walker Budget In Surprise Vote — Dems Chant “Shame!” | TPMDC
[Via Talking Points Memo]

The Wisconsin State Assembly has just passed Gov. Scott Walker’s budget repair bill, including its controversial provisions to eliminate almost all collective bargaining rights for public employee unions as well as many other provisions to weaken union organizing.

After much buildup in the 61-hour debate — of Republicans wanting things to be over, and Democrats railing against Republicans who they said would cut off debate — at about 1 AM Speaker Pro Tempore Bill Kramer (R) announced that he would hear a voice vote for a roll call on final passage. Immediately, the majority Republicans shouted their ayes, and the Democrats were booing, as they tried to be recognized to demand a separate motion to cut off debate.

Then Kramer called the vote. Within seconds, the digital vote system on the wall announced 51 ayes and 17 nays, and voting was suddenly closed. With a total of 96 members, that got to a majority for the bill but left 28 members who hadn’t had a chance yet to vote.

At that point, the Democrats got up, chanting “Shame! Shame! Shame!” and similar exclamations, as the Republicans filed out of the room.

[More]

Four of the nays were actually Republican votes, so only 13 Democrats even had a chance to vote. Twenty-five Democrats were not even allowed to vote.

There were consistently 36-38 nays on every vote during the day. 58-38 was pretty standard. Interestingly, the vote to suspend the rules passed 57-5 but there is no listing of the recorded vote. Is that the supposed voice vote?

Even when the Republicans are assured a win, they have to disenfranchise the other side. It may have even been illegal. I can see why this could get ugly soon, with legislators booing and throwing things.

This is what representative government is becoming. Those with power abuse it and those without get very, very angry.

The beating of Senator Sumner on the floor of the Senate is a reminder of what can happen when things get ugly. As seen then, little effective government gets accomplished when passions run that high.

The really amazing thing about this bill is not only the union-busting aspect but the sell-off of state assets. The bill states that they can be sold without bidding for any price the state determines. And in a nice Orwellian twist, any price the state determines is, by definition, in the best interests of the state.

So, they could sell their power plants to business interests, say Koch Industries, for $100 and it would be okay. Of course, they would be really stupid to do that, as the public might see that as unethical. But it would not be illegal.

This is what we get when the bandits are leading the stupid.

I was wondering when this would happen – Xoom Corp Sues Motorola

Xoom Corp sues Motorola Mobility for trademark infringement over iPad wannabe
[Via MacDailyNews]

Xoom Corp., operator of a money- transfer website, sued Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. for trademark infringement for naming its new tablet computer that went on sale today the Xoom,” Don Jeffrey and Hugo Miller report for Bloomberg. “Xoom Corp., based in San Francisco, said it has been offering its online service since 2003 and registered the trademark for the name in 2004, according to a complaint filed yesterday in federal court in San Francisco.”

[More]

Trademark litigation is always fun. I expect Mototola may have to make some financial payments here. xoom.com takes you to the Xoom Corp. site.

This should all be good for the lawyers.

Art from my DNA

DNA Ancestry Portrait: from saliva in your mouth to wall art
[Via Ars Technica]

What would you do with a giant QR code—you know, the kind of URL you can scan with your phone—of your DNA ancestry? When I was asked this question, I didn’t know the answer. Does anyone really have a need or want for a huge QR code that lets people see details about your family history? And for $440 (or more) a pop?

Balk at the price all you want, but someone is apparently buying these things. The company behind them, DNA 11, creates a number of different personalized portraits (some of which Ars has given away in the past, in fact), including standard DNA portraits, fingerprint portraits, and kiss portraits. Once you send in your required sample and choose a color, the company prints it out on canvas for you to hang anywhere or give as a gift. Does it seem a little self-centered to hang a portrait of your own DNA structure on the wall of your own home? Yes, yes it does.

But the DNA Ancestry portrait, which differs from the DNA portrait, is a slightly different story. After placing your order for a DNA kit and sending back your sample, DNA 11 creates an art piece that represents your maternal lineage “dating back thousands of years.” Okay, that’s kind of interesting. Ever since genetic testing company 23andMe became popular, people with a few hundred dollars to burn have been getting more interested in learning about their lineage, so why not do that in a colorful piece of wall art?

[More]

While they do not actually sequence all your DNA, this is a cute idea. They figure out what your mitochondrial haplotype is. This essentiually tracks your maternal family line back.

There are limited number of haplotypes. Once they identify your, they combine it with a specific web site address and create a 2D barcode, specific to you, and print the barcode onto a canvas for your art.

Whenever this barcode is scanned, it’ll take you to the specific web page created and you can find out about the haplotype.

While not as extensive a DNA check as 23 and Me does, this is a cute way to make art from your DNA.

Tiny Wings – what is it with iOS games and birds

by Martina Rathgens

Tiny Wings is everything perfect about iPhone games
[Via Ars Technica]

The world is filled with people who take pride in never having played Angry Birds, or who turn their noses up at iPhone games in general. Let them. There was a legitimate case to be made for the possibility of Angry Birds winning game of the year from the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences, no matter how simple or limited the concept. Now, Tiny Wings is the latest gaming success on the iPhone: $1 can buy you a little drop of happy for your iPhone.

Tiny Wings is a download small enough that you don’t need to be on WiFi, and the price tag is low enough that it’s the easiest of impulse buys. The gameplay takes one finger, and the game is mostly a matter of timing. This is why it’s so magical.

[More]

I’ve just about run my way through all 3 star levels of Angry Birds when this nifty game comes out.  It is a very short download but boy does it pack a punch.

It is a perfect game for spending a few – or more – minutes wasting time. It is so simple in execution but so difficult to get just right.

Angry Birds was the perfect game for sitting on the john. Looks like Tiny Wings will be filling that need now.

I wonder when the merchandising will be sold (eg cushy bird pillows)