Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Whats Next in The Tablet Market

Props to Amy Graham for this great perspective
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/25/tech/gaming-gadgets/smaller-cheaper-tablets/index.html

(CNN)
-- Smaller tablet computers that are significantly more affordable and portable than the iPad are finally starting to hit the United States -- and they could hit a crucial sweet spot in the consumer market.

Recently Kobo announced the new Kobo Vox, which costs $200. That's the same price as Amazon's recently announced Kindle Fire. The Kobo Vox starts shipping Friday, while the Kindle Fire won't start shipping until November 15. The Barnes & Noble Nook Color, which costs about $250, is already available in stores and online.

Although marketed mainly as e-book readers, all three of these consumer devices are actually small tablet computers (7 inches long) that run the Android mobile operating system and use Wi-Fi -- no carrier data plan or contract required. So theoretically, they can do much more than just let you buy and read e-books.

This makes them potentially powerful tools for people who want access to the Web, apps and more -- especially people who face economic or other barriers to using smartphones or computers. Small, inexpensive, easy-to-use tablets could become an important bridge to help people cross the digital divide and gain expanded access to education, jobs, community, and other resources.

The grand vision of tablet computers is that, ideally, they'll allow the average, non-geeky person to do most of what can be done with a laptop computer -- in a way that's much easier to learn, use and carry around.

Certainly this is the case with Apple's iPad, which sold 11 million units in the last quarter alone.

But at this point, iPads start at $500 -- about what you might pay for a brand new 32-inch flat-screen TV at Best Buy, and twice or more what PC netbooks cost at most retail stores. From the perspective of typical consumers, especially given the current economy, that's a significant luxury investment.

This month there are fresh rumors that Apple may be planning to introduce a smaller and less costly "iPad mini." But nothing is confirmed, so don't hold your breath.

The tablet market is growing fast, and its dynamics are shifting quickly. According to a new report from Strategy Analytics, in the last year Android tablets grew from 2% of the global tablet market to 27%. Meanwhile, the iPad's global tablet market share has dropped from 96% to 67%.

That doesn't reflect a decrease in the iPad's popularity, but rather that consumer demand for tablets is not one-size-fits-all.

In fact, size is a key issue for people shopping for tablets. The iPad measures roughly 7-by-10 inches -- too big for a typical pocket or purse, and nearly twice the size of the basic Kobo Vox, Nook Color and Kindle Fire models. Digital devices that aren't as easy to carry around tend to mainly get used only at certain times of day, in certain settings.

For this reason it's questionable how "mobile" larger tablets like the iPad really are.

Aside from the Vox, Fire, and Nook Color, there are lots of other small Android tablets available. But so far these products have faced various challenges in the consumer market:

Cost: The Wi-Fi-only version of Samsung's 7-inch Galaxy Tab costs about $350, which is on the pricier side. The carrier-branded versions cost much less to buy up front if you agree to a two-year contract. For instance, Verizon currently sells the 7-inch Galaxy Tab for just $200, but data plans cost $30-$80 per month, and there's a $350 early termination fee.

Philadelphia Newspapers Inc., publisher of the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News, is selling a small Android tablet by Arnova for just $99-$129 in a small pilot program -- but for that bargain-basement price you have to agree to a one- or two-year newspaper subscription, costing up to $13 per month.

Device quality: This is an issue for the cheapest tablets. For instance, one reviewer noted that the touchscreen performance on the Philly.com tablet is less than stellar.

In contrast, the Nook Color has been getting generally favorable reviews for device quality. The advance Kindle Fire reviews are also mostly positive.

Android's learning curve: This can be an obstacle for some. The straightforward Android experience that comes with tablets by Samsung, Motorola, Lenovo, and other manufacturers can be daunting to typical consumers -- especially the majority of U.S. consumers who don't yet own a smartphone. A more constrained but dependable out-of-the-box user experience can be simpler to learn and can make the average consumer happier, at least initially.

Gadgets that are more complex or open-ended tend to confuse or frustrate average consumers -- which generally isn't good for sales. Despite the high relative cost of Apple devices, and the fairly closed nature of the Apple ecosystem, there's a lot to be said for "It just works."

However, most "pure" Android tablets do offer one key advantage over constrained e-reader tablets: direct access to Google's Android Market, where there's a virtually unlimited choice of apps.

The Fire, Nook Color, and Philly.com tablets only offer apps through their own markets, not the Android Market, which means they can block the installation of competing apps, such those from other e-book vendors or publishers.

Also, even though Kobo touts that its Vox will offer access to "over 15,000 apps," the company has not clarified whether that will be through the Android Market or its own app store. Which means it's possible that you may not be able to install the Kindle e-reader app on the Kobo Vox -- at least, not without "rooting" the tablet to remove vendor controls, which can be a formidable technical hurdle.

The coming year -- especially the 2011 holiday season -- will probably indicate whether smaller tablets will play a leading role in the U.S. digital media landscape. If these devices start becoming as commonplace as iPhones and Kindles, they may become popular and powerful tools for the delivery of mobile services for health, education, jobs, and more.

Sure, you can use a small, cheap tablet to read books, watch YouTube, and play "Angry Birds." But maybe someday lots of people will be using these devices to get a college degree -- or perhaps to learn to read in the first place.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Google News for Those Who Really Care

CNN) -- On this week's Tech Check podcast, Doug Gross, Stephanie Goldberg and Mark Milian discuss the roll-out of "Ice Cream Sandwich," Google's delicious new version of its Android mobile operating software.

Google debuted Android 4.0 this week in Hong Kong, along with the new Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone, which will be the first gadget to run it.

The crew discusses its features, including Face Unlock, which is designed to recognize the user's face instead of a password.

Mark has spent a week testing Siri, the new voice-activated "digital assistant" on the iPhone 4S. We discuss her strengths and weaknesses, as well has giving in to the irresistible urge to ask her questions from "2001: A Space Odyssey."

Our Reader Comments of the Week come from a story about WireDoo, the new search engine being developed by a team working with MC Hammer. Yes ... that MC Hammer. (As if there could be two).

And we present to you a Tech Fail of the Week that was 14 years in the making.

Michael Dell, founder of Dell Inc., was asked in 1997 what he would do if he were the CEO of Apple. This week he got a long-awaited opportunity to revisit his fateful words.

To listen to Tech Check, click on the audio box to the left. To subscribe, you can add Tech Check to your RSS feed here. You can also listen, or subscribe, on iTunes.

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Hackers Take Aim at NYSE

Thanks to David Goldman and CNN for the article

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Anonymous' call for a massive attack on the New York Stock Exchange's website was met Monday -- but very, very briefly.

A group calling itself Anonymous, a name used by disparate groups of online "hactivists," threatened to take down NYSE.com at 3:30 p.m. ET today as an extension of the "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrations that have continued into a fourth week.

The website was slow and then unavailable from about 3:35 p.m. to around 3:37 p.m, after which it returned to normal. Keynote, a mobile and Internet monitoring company, confirmed that NYSE.com slowed down during that time. It also measured widespread disruptions to the site between 5:30 p.m. and 5:55 p.m.

Another tracking site, AlertSite, measured "a definite increase in response times from 3:45 p.m. to 4 p.m. ET." After that, the site returned to normal. Monitoring site downforeveryoneorjustme.com also registered a series of brief outages.

But Rich Adamonis, a spokesman from the NYSE, rebutted the monitoring sites' findings.

"We detected no service outage on our corporate website at that time," he said.

In a message that went out in early October through a video on YouTube, the group called for a "distributed denial of service" (DDoS) attack, which directs a flood of traffic to a website and temporarily crashes it by overwhelming its servers. It doesn't actually involve any hacking or security breaches, and would have no effect on NYSE's stock-trading systems.

Adamonis confirmed that trading was not impacted.

DDoS is a tool that Anonymous has employed successfully before, taking down MasterCard.com and Visa.com for several hours on Dec. 8, 2010.

The YouTube video posted earlier calling for the NYSE.com attack proclaimed: "A new civil rights movement has begun. You now have an opportunity to make a difference. Join the protests. Organize your own. Watch online. Be a part of the movement."

Anonymous' attacks haven't always worked: It failed in an attempt to take down Amazon.com (AMZN, Fortune 500), which has extensive safeguards against sudden traffic spikes. The DDoS attacks have also led to the arrests of several participants.

At least a few people claiming to be part of Anonymous didn't think the attack on NYSE.com was a risk worth taking. One site used to coordinate Anonymous operations, AnonNews.org, posted a statement saying that it was "sincerely worried" about the plan, due to the bad press it could give to the Occupy Wall Street movement.

A back-and-forth debate raged across Twitter Monday afternoon, with various factions of Anonymous alternately cheering and decrying the planned attack.

But in the end, the chatter drew more attention than the actual effects of the cyberprotest. NYSE.com barely blipped, and the markets finished the day with a rally: The Dow Jones industrial average finished Monday up nearly 3%.

Monday, October 3, 2011

Facebook Fact or Fiction

The recent deluge of Facebook changes -- both those that have already happened and those that are on the way -- have people talking.

OK ... that's an understatement. They have people shouting (with either glee or fury). And fuming. And, sometimes, freaking out.

When a site has roughly 800 million users, and each of those users has a quick and easy way to share their thoughts with others, interest is high and info starts flying fast in the face of what looks like a pretty radical overhaul.

Inevitably, that leads to things getting a bit confused sometimes. So, here's a look at some of the rumors that we've seen flying around about Facebook's big changes, along with our best effort to sort them out.

1. Facebook is going to start charging you

Do we actually have to address this one? Apparently, yes.

Every once in a while, this rumor starts cropping up in status updates -- often in all caps. Some people can't seem to get their brains around the fact that a useful service like Facebook is going to remain free. So people begin copying and pasting messages announcing the date the site is going to a pay model.

A quick glimpse and you'll find multiple "We Won't Pay For Facebook" groups. On Facebook.

So, of course, when all the new changes rolled out, the planets were aligned perfectly for the rumor to spring back up. This time, it apparently got so prevalent that Facebook addressed it.

"A rumor on the Internet caught our attention. We have no plans to charge for Facebook. It's free and always will be," the site posted on its own Facebook page.

Here's the deal: Facebook will never really have a reason to start charging you for using it. To oversimplify the situation, you aren't Facebook's customer. You're its product. The site's business model is based on advertising and it wants as many users as possible to dangle in front of the click-hungry advertisers.

Charging for Facebook would inevitably decrease the number of users. And that would decrease advertising revenue. It's not going to happen.

Verdict: False. Very false.

2. Friends will see the websites I visit, even when I'm not on Facebook

This one is partially true, with one big "if."

With what Zuckerberg called "frictionless sharing," Facebook users can have the stories they're reading on certain other websites pushed straight to their News Feed for friends to share. But this will only happen on sites with the Facebook "like" button -- and only when the user has given the site permission to share the info.

That addresses one big privacy complaint Facebook has been hit with in the past, when new features started automatically, requiring users to opt out instead of opting in.

But there's always the possibility for confusion. Some people might not realize that they're authorizing the feature or may simply forget they've enabled it. In that case, best not to make a habit of reading a bunch of articles about how to find a new job if you're FB friends with your boss.

Verdict: Partially True (If you enable it)

3. The Timeline is going to show all my photos and info (whether I want it to or not)

One of the biggest changes Facebook is making is switching users' profile pages into what's being called a Timeline. It will, in effect, make your profile look more like a blog, with a chronological stream of photos and posts from the entire time you've been on Facebook and even before.

People viewing your profile will be able to scroll through, year by year, and see what you were up to far more easily than they can now.

Reports of that have led some users to freak out, or even say they planned to delete all their photos before the feature rolls out.

Here's the deal: The Timeline will definitely make it easier for your friends to see your photos and posts, particularly older ones. A single click could take them from your recent and respectable photos from office parties and play dates to those infamous college keggers from days of yore (you know ... if you're young enough to have been on Facebook in college).

But you'll be able to curate your own timeline. You can remove photos or posts you don't want on it and resize images to emphasize (or de-emphasize) chapters of your life. At the end of the day, there will be nothing there that's not already available to prying eyes -- but the eyes just won't have to pry as hard.

Verdict: Mostly False

4. Facebook monitors my activity when I'm not logged in

This one isn't directly linked to the changes, but has cropped up as they're about to roll out. And, in truth, as more off-site sharing is introduced, it could become more prevalent.

Earlier this week, an Australian blogger posted data that he said shows information being sent to Facebook by users even when they're not logged into the site.

Facebook acknowledges that it uses "cookies" when you visit the site that then transmit data from other sites that are connected to it.

Facebook engineering director Arturo Bejar told the Wall Street Journal that the system is used to prevent phishing attacks and spam and to make it easier for users to log in on the sites they've connected to the social network. Facebook deletes the data immediately, he said, and it's never used to target advertising or the like.

"The onus is on us is to take all the data and scrub it," Bejar told the Journal. "What really matters is what we say as a company and back it up."

Verdict: True (But in a limited way)

5. I can't use Spotify unless it's linked to Facebook

This one depends: Are you already on Spotify? If so, you're in the clear. If not, or if you already signed up through your Facebook account, the two services are pretty much married, 'til digital death do they part.

To Spotify, the emerging music-streaming service, and Facebook, it's a seamless and convenient way to listen to music and share songs with your friends. To people who might want to listen privately, or those elusive few who don't have Facebook accounts, it's a hassle.

Users will still be able to use their Spotify settings to control what information gets sent to Facebook, though. So don't worry -- if you're secretly listening to lots of Bieber and Gaga on Spotify, you can still do it on the down-low.

Verdict: True (If you didn't already sign up)

Read the full article here - http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/28/tech/social-media/facebook-rumors/index.html