Archives

I just finished looking at a couple of live blogs on Apple’s big iPad event, flipping back and forth between Macworld and Ubergizmo’s coverage.

While initial reaction has been all over the map, mine is overwhelmingly positive. I think they hit a grand slam.

Here’s why:

1. There are lots of reasons why a tablet is a better mobile device than a laptop or a netbook.
2. The price is right (Starts at $499, goes to $829)
3. The data plans are right (Wifi, 3G $14.95 to $29.95 for data plan coverage from AT&T, use at all wifi hotspots, no contract.)
4. iWork for $30. Web browsing, photos, vidoes, reading, games, email, word processing, spreadsheets and presentations – that’s 95% of what 90% of people do with a computer.
5. Dock and Keyboard. Use it like a desktop, if you must.
6. iPhone and iPod Touch software works on it now, the SDK (iPhone OS) and emulator are released the same day, and units will ship in 60 days. That means iPhone developers like us will be pushing out new versions of those 100,000 apps as well as brand new apps out there as fast as we can design and code.
7. The app store model makes installing new apps a one click affair. I don’t get any “Honey, can you help me” shouts from my wife with the iPhone, and I wont get them with the iPad either (especially since it doesn’t have a camera;-)

In short, this is great news for those people yearning to trade away technical complexity for vastly increased simplicity and ease of use.

Sure there are things that a lot of people (smart, tech savvy analysts and developers all) will bemoan* and think are missing, but the same thing could be said of the iPhone. It’s Apple’s way (only release it if it kicks ass and makes them money) it works, and it will work here as well.

* I of course was hoping for front facing video camera for video phone support.

Share/Bookmark

Anther interesting item from yesterday’s earnings call:

Over 90% of iPhone apps are approved within 14 days of submission.

Given over 100,000 apps in the store from a wide variety of developers (from amateurs to experts) and a wide variety of topics, that’s actually pretty good. Apple claims that most rejections are actually for bugs in code, which makes sense given the wide disparity in development quality and test coverage.*

* For example, are you testing your software for ipod touch as well? You should – applications have been rejected for working on the iPhone, but not the iPod touch.

Share/Bookmark

Macworld’s Coverage of Apple’s Quarterly Results and Finance Call had some interesting news on continued enterprise iPhone adoption:

• The iPhone is ranked #1 in customer satisfaction in J.D. Powers’ survey.
• Corporate clients have doubled.
• 70% of Fortune 100 are actively piloting or deploying iPhone. About 50% of FT 100 are doing the same.

Not bad given that Apple has only been in this business for 2.5 years.

This certainly jibes with a lot of what we are seeing from our customers, that the iPhone is the first choice for mobile application development and the first choice among consumers and corporate customers when given a chance. It also validates our recommendations from last year on which mobile platform to develop for.

Let’s see what tomorrow’s big announcement brings.

Share/Bookmark

photo credit: Hugo90

This morning I sat through two pitches by two startups looking for funding. I won’t get into the details, but they both had clever ideas at their root. But while one company was attractive and poised for success, the other was mediocre and not getting much traction. Why was that? They both had clever ideas, no?

Over the years I’ve looked at a lot of business plans for Venture Funds. The first lesson that I learned was that cool ideas didn’t equal successful companies. While I would get all hot and bothered by a particularly elegant software solution, the VC’s I was consulting to preferred the plans that understood the market and the customers in it (and had a kick ass management team, natch).

Share/Bookmark

photo credit: NIOSH

Academic research is incredibly inefficient when it comes to producing products and services. Grad students, post-docs and professors work on “problems” that some collection of graybeards has deemed “interesting.” Their “solutions” — sometimes successful, sometimes not — are published as research and then, occasionally, if the stars align, is turned into a product or service through the application of venture capital via a startup.

The only thing less efficient in producing innovative products and service is the corporate R&D department. In most places you have a phase-gate process (waterfall under a different name) of conceptualization, feasibility testing, definition/specification, development and launch. They are typically bloated, bureaucratic monstrosities with huge documentation requirements and endless committee meetings that do more to stifle innovation than promote it.

There is a way, however, of applying Agile principles to the concept phase, and it relies on two of the basic tennets of Agile: failing fast and self organizing teams.

Share/Bookmark

As an answer to those asking why we need a tablet anyway, there’s a very funny set of pictures and comments at WTF Is Wrong with Laptop Users in the Media. The author went through the first 400 images (out of 28,886) he got on a search at Getty Images of “Using a laptop” and compiled the highlights. My favorites:

Now ask yourself, in which of those pictures would (a sealed, always on, always connected) tablet make more sense?

In all of them (although the beach one still seems like a bad idea.)

Share/Bookmark

As January 26th, the rumored date for Apple’s rumored tablet unveiling draws near, the hype and anti-hype keeps getting more and more over the top:

Five Ways Apple’s Tablet May Change the World

The world doesn’t need an Apple tablet, or any other

and the inevitable

3 Reasons A Microsoft-HP Tablet PC Would Trump Apple

If you want to keep up to date on the rumors, Gizmodo has a regularly updated run-down here.

There are a couple of places that have more informed speculation and insightful commentary – I’d recommend these three in particular:

Antacid Tablet by ars technica’s John Siracusa:

… There’s also the popular notion that Apple has to do something entirely new or totally amazing in order for the tablet to succeed. After all, tablets have been tried before, with dismal results. It seems absurd to some people that Apple can succeed simply by using existing technologies and software techniques in the right combination. And yet that’s exactly what Apple has done with all of its most recent hit products—and what I predict Apple will do with the tablet. …

So how will an Apple tablet distinguish itself without any headline technological marvels? It’ll do so by leveraging all of Apple’s strategic strengths. Now you’re expecting me to say something about tight hardware/software integration, user experience, or “design,” but I’m talking about even more obvious factors:

• Customers – Apple has over 100 million credit-card-bearing customer accounts thanks to the success of iTunes.
• Developers – Over 125,000 developers have put over 100,000 iPhone OS applications up for sale on the App Store. Then there are the Mac OS X developers (though of course there’s some overlap). Apple’s got developers ready and able to come at the tablet from both directions.
• Relationships – Apple has lucrative and successful relationships with the most important content owners in the music and movie businesses.

These are Apple’s most important assets when it comes to the tablet, and you can bet your bottom dollar that Apple will lean heavily on them. This, combined with Apple’s traditional strength in design and user experience, is what will distinguish Apple’s tablet in the market. It will provide an easy way for people to find, purchase, and consume all kinds of media and applications right from the device. It’s that simple.

Thoughts on what an Apple tablet should be – or not by Andy Ihnatko

Apple always asks themselves simple and stupid questions like “How will this device be used?” and “Will this be used by human beings with, I mean, arms and hands and fingers?” and stuff like that.

The iPhone UI isn’t a desktop user interface where a pen takes the place of a mouse … which is the model that previous smartphones followed. It was designed to be held in one hand and tapped with your thumb. Occasionally you’d use the index finger of the right hand to key things in.

You want to try to figure out the UI of the RAT? Go get yourself a comic book, or any other rectangle that measures roughly 10” on the diagonal. Hold it as though you’re reading what’s on the surface.

You see the problem? Your fingers get in the way. Think about how big that surface is, too. That’s a lot of acreage to scan, looking for the right buttons to push.

While you’ve got it in your hands, imagine that it’s a sheet of thin steel. That’s heavy, isn’t it? Hard to hold up for long periods of time.

Think about how a user interface would have to incorporate those observations. Now imagine that you’ve been doing this experiment for four years and not four minutes.

That’s a very long list of observations. If you didn’t come up with a workable solution, don’t worry: I think Apple has.

and

The Tablet by Daring Fireball’s John Gruber.

… The way Apple made one device [the iPhone] that did a credible job of all these widely-varying features was by making it a general-purpose computer with minimal specificity in the hardware and maximal specificity in the software. And, now, through the App Store and third-party developers, it does much more: serving as everything from a game player to a medical device.

Do I think The Tablet is an e-reader? A video player? A web browser? A document viewer? It’s not a matter of or but rather and. I say it is all of these things. It’s a computer.

And so in answer to my central question, regarding why buy The Tablet if you already have an iPhone and a MacBook, my best guess is that ultimately, The Tablet is something you’ll buy instead of a MacBook.

Gruber’s a bit more gung ho than Ihnatko or Siracusa, but they both make a pretty compelling case that something very interesting is about to happen over the next year.

Share/Bookmark

I often meet peers who ask what Agile practices Pathfinder utilizes. From the outside we pretty much use all of XP’s practices. However, if you take a deeper look we do some things a little differently (especially how to use and calculate velocity). For Agile purists, one might question if we are really doing Agile. They would claim changing practices is slippery slope. For example, a team will start altering Agile practices to create a “home grown” version only to find they are using only some practices and not seeing the benefits they hoped for. I feel questioning if we are really doing Agile based on exactly what practices one uses shows how familiar and mature one is with Agile principals. A better question would be to ask why we changed them. Agile is not meant to be a methodology, but a set of principals. In my opinion, using things like Velocity to estimate whether a team will finish a project within a certain time frame is a hack at best. This always was hard to explain to customers. While I was reading Leading Lean Software Development I discovered something that helps. The Poppendieck’s point out that the engineering practices of Agile (TDD, collective code ownership, etc…) are solid and not likely to change. But, the project management practices implement a system on top of another system – a hack.

Once you have sufficient experience managing projects with Agile practices you should feel comfortable adapting those practices to your own teams and projects. As long as you are still following Agile principals this is okay. In general, this is what’s going on in smaller companies. Having coached a number of large organizations transitioning to Agile I can say this isn’t how they look at things. The problems start when you adapt the practices, but try to deliver all projects in an identical manner. This makes sense for waterfall-like delivery methods. But, when an organization comes up with its own version of “Agile” it can only work for the subset of projects it is tested on. Rolling this out to the entire organization as “the way” to deliver projects from them on is a failure pattern. The principals are lost and so is the adaptability of the organization. The time spent to move over to agile is immediately wasted.

Photo Credit:
kevindooley
under a Creative Commons Attribution License

Share/Bookmark

… it’s hard not to think about how much easier some people’s lives would be (hi Mom and Dad) if they could trade technical complexities they don’t care about for vastly increased simplicity and ease of use.

- John Siracusa, ars technica

My parents were technically savvy enough (with a little help from their sons) to start using Skype video in their mid seventies, prompted by the arrival of grandkids halfway across the country. But for them, it was always a cumbersome affair:

1. Arrange a time to have the video call.
2. Move the laptop to the dining room.
3. Call on the telephone to tell me that they’re using Skype on the computer.
4. Initiate the Skype phone call.

Needless to say, this did not happen all that often.

This past Christmas my brother got them a Skype Video Phone. They set it up with a little help from us, and when we told them to just treat it like the telephone, they got the idea. Now, they are making video calls much more frequently – not just to the grandkids, but to our cousins in Switzerland and South Africa.

They traded complexity for simplicity and ease of use, and though the skype video phone will not end up being a success on the level of the iPhone, it’s already brought my parents a lot of joy, and is part of a trend towards more simplicity and ease of use. It’s one major reason the iPhone is as successful as it is.

Now imagine that simplicity and ease of use in a multipurpose, always on device with a bigger screen. My parents wouldn’t need the skype video phone, they’d just have that as an app on their tablet.

Share/Bookmark

photo credit: matsuyuki

I’ve made my fair share of predictions, and this may seem to be a layup, but I think it’s a prediction worth making anyway: mobile devices and applications will transform business and every day life in the next decade.

Why does this seem like such a layup? Well, look at the iPhone and the ecosystem of applications and companies springing up around it. Android and Blackberry are trying to jump in on the business and everybody and their brother is cooking up a connected mobile device. And yes, that’s obvious. Mobile devices are going to increase in importance in 2010 and if you don’t already have an iPhone app cooking to complement your other online channels, you’re behind the times.

But if you’re just thinking that more iPhone applications are going to be the end of it, you’re in for a rude awakening. Businesses have just started consolidating after the disruptive years of the 90′s and aught’s, with the transformative effects of the web largely digested by the marketplace (the newspaper industry is still thrashing but will soon succumb). A new disruptive decade is dawning that may see the passing or fundamental transformation of industries as varied as telecom, credit card and broadcast television/cable. Prepare to take your business through a roller coaster ride every bit as challenging as the web revolution.

Share/Bookmark