Author: Jeff Morgan (Page 3 of 5)

Is the Facebook Phone a Microsoft-grade error?

December 2, 2011 /

Facebook logo.

With all the buzz about Carrier IQ, most of the tech world’s attention has already turned away from “Buffy,” the rumored-and-all-but-confirmed Facebook phone. The shift is appropriate. Frankly, the Facebook phone is a mistake, and if Facebook really has been working on the project for two years, a colossal mistake. A Windows Phone grade mistake.

Don’t try to tell me Windows Phone was a success, either. Despite the recent upturn in market share, WP7 is still in dire straits. Some estimates put WP7 market share lower than Symbian. Yeah, that’s Nokia’s old OS. With the new deal between the two companies that will obviously shift, but Nokia hardware doesn’t have a shot in hell of saving Windows Phone. The operating system is already on some really nice hardware and it still won’t sell.

Here’s the rub, at least for Microsoft. Windows Phone 7 is a great OS. I mean that. It’s solid. It’s pretty. It’s fresh, certainly when compared to the increasingly homogeneous Android and iOS platforms. It still isn’t doing well. Microsoft may have spent as much as 500 million dollars marketing Windows Phone 7, to say nothing of the massive development overhead. It still isn’t doing well. Why is Facebook so ready to make the same mistake?

The easy answer: Apple and Google. Those two companies have a stranglehold on mobile computing. Facebook is on both platforms, but my guess is that Facebook is worried about one of those companies making a play that could push Facebook out. The Galaxy Nexus is shaping up to be a beautiful phone, a phone that Google is planning for serious Google+ integration. But Google+ is dead. A nursing home at best. Is Facebook really worried about that?

It also seems reasonable to wonder if Facebook branding will really sell a phone, and to whom? Unless Facebook can pull an Apple-style keynote that warrants the existence of the phone, I don’t see the appeal. Apple has sexy mobile locked down. Android has the nerd factor. Both of those brands carry weight across demographics. Where does Facebook play? The tween market? Yuck.

As long as Facebook remains easily accessible on every Android and iOS handset, a phone with deep Facebook integration won’t really have a market. Not anything significant, anyway. Not enough to offset the cash Facebook has dumped into big names and a severely protracted development cycle. Not by a long shot.

Gadgets

Is “The Walking Dead” losing its way?

November 25, 2011 /

I went into season two of AMC’s “The Walking Dead” thinking it would be a slam dunk. How could it be anything but? The first season, at just six episodes, was one of the most intriguing pieces of television I’ve seen in years. Most of its allure was the pacing. Every episode had moments of pure calm that were invariably interrupted by drooling hordes of zombies. But the zombies didn’t carry the show. The characters did most of the work, which is exactly what a good zombie show needs. We need to care about the characters so that the inevitable losses have some consequence, a task the writers of the show met head-on. All of this is to say that my expectations, high as they were, were based on the merit of the first season.

Season two started well. The survivors from last season had decided to leave Atlanta and head for Fort Benning. They hit a roadblock on the way out of town, which included a brush with a shuffling horde of zombies. We saw a pair of walkers dispatched, the first with a screwdriver through the eye, the second with a quick stab to the brainstem. It was a perfect re-introduction to the gruesome, post-apocalyptic world I loved in season one.

While creative zombie-killing is great, it isn’t enough to carry the show. There has to be some sort of plot. For season one, it was getting into Atlanta and the CDC with the hope of finding more survivors. In season two we have Fort Benning, again with the hope of finding survivors. It’s a fine plot, though it does get quickly derailed when Sophia, one of the children in the group, is chased into the woods and later disappears. Sophia’s disappearance would have been fine had it been contained to just an episode or two, but it has utterly consumed the show. Continue reading »

Television

The Future of Apple: Steve Jobs, Siri, and the iPhone 4S

November 16, 2011 /

iPhone 4s

It may seem late in the year to take a look back on the death of Steve Jobs and the legacy he left behind. We’re more than a month out at this point, which even to me feels more like a year, but I think this is a good time for it. The iPhone 4S is now sweeping across the world, faster than most expected, bringing us one of those strange and uniquely Apple experiences, Siri. A lot of people thought the iPhone 4S was the wrong product to launch after Jobs stepped down from his position at the helm. To me, though, the iPhone 4S was maybe the last brilliant move from Jobs, with Siri giving us a look at the new Apple.

This won’t be a shining eulogy to Jobs as the greatest technological mind of our time. That’s not really my place and frankly, I don’t think it’s very accurate. My only point here is that Jobs left the world as he lived in it – carefully and intentionally.

The iPhone 4S was definitely a disappointing announcement for a lot of people. We had been hearing about the iPhone 5 for long enough that, in the light of Steve’s retirement, it seemed inevitable the iPhone 5 was the announcement to make. With Jobs gone, Apple needed to send a message that it was still plowing ahead, right? That it would be at the forefront of technology, always pushing to deliver the next great thing, right?

No. That has never been Apple. Apple has never been first to market. That’s not what Apple does. Apple is not about being the first anything on the market. Apple is about being the most complete experience on the market. When the iPod first launched there were dozens of MP3 players to compete with. The difference, of course, was iconic design and a simplified interface. It was simply better than the alternatives. The iPhone was no different, and please, let’s remember what the iPhone was like when it originally launched. You know, before the App Store. The product has definitely come a long way – Apple’s market cap is a testament to that – but when it launched it was simply a cleaner, more stylized, more complete way of doing things.

It’s also important to remember how Apple launches a product. It does so regardless of hype. It does so without even considering our expectations. Apple releases products when they are ready and that’s a big part of the company’s success. The iPad was a success at launch because it was a complete product. It wasn’t something pushed to market just to have a tablet. The iPad was actually late to the tablet game, but it has since gone on to define that segment of the market.

This is the Apple the world knows and loves. It is methodical. It is plodding. It is sometimes downright slow. But it is also beautiful and well-crafted and damn fun to use. In the wake of Steve Jobs’ death, that’s the Apple I hoped to see. When Apple starts pumping products out faster than you can buy them, then Apple is no longer Apple. The iPhone 4S is a quintessential Jobs-era product. It is an improvement on an already functioning piece of technology. It is beautiful. It is damn fun to use. It is only slightly more powerful than its predecessor but it’s still selling millions of units.

The truly weird part of Apple’s iPhone 4S announcement was Siri, a new digital assistant that launched as a beta. While Siri seems great when it works, it certainly doesn’t work well all the time. That’s the difference between Jobs’ Apple and Tim Cook’s Apple. I won’t say that Jobs wouldn’t release Siri in its current form. He might have. But if I had to make a bet, I’d say this was Cook’s call.

That’s not to say I think Tim Cook can’t keep Apple on top of the tech world. He will. If anything, the iPhone 4S proves that. It’s a conservative play from a traditionally conservative company, even under new leadership. It’s exactly the kind of product Jobs would launch with just a taste of something new. This is the future of Apple – solid products with just a taste of something new.

Gadgets

Which music service is right for you?

November 14, 2011 /

The ways we enjoy music have changed so much over the last decade that it’s almost impossible to keep pace with the industry. The latest obstacle we had to overcome was the storage problem – where do I keep those gigs an gigs of music I’ve acquired over the years? Now we’re moving away from acquisition altogether, hurtling instead toward a musical world in which we rent someone else’s library month-by-month for a flat fee. And you know what? I love it.

I know. For a lot of music freaks that sort of concession is cardinal sin, but it works for me. I’m not the type to savor rare recordings and unplugged albums. I want quick access to a wide range of music, and that’s exactly what today’s streaming services give me. The good ones also provide some ways for me to discover new music without a whole lot of work. I know, I’m lazy. I’m exactly what true music lovers hate. I’m little more than a parasite feeding off the knowledge and expertise the real fans have taken years to cultivate. But hey, at least I’m aware of it, right?

This post is for people like me, the average music enthusiast. I’ve spent some time with the major streaming services out there and come away mostly impressed. I’ll breakdown the good and bad of each and, hopefully, give you some guidance on your quest for the perfect streaming service.

The Basics

There are some basic criteria we need to be clear on before I talk about specific services. For one, this isn’t exactly an oranges-to-oranges comparison. Each of the major streaming services is trying to differentiate itself from the other. Any streaming service should be able to provide the basics, though, which look a little something like this.

First, selection. When you give up the search for hard copies of music, streaming selection becomes hugely important. Your streaming service should be able to provide music that suits your tastes, and hopefully a few things that don’t. You know, just in case you get bored.

Second, user interface. Both finding and accessing your music should be quick and easy. That’s the whole point of a streaming service – quick, easy access to a vast supply of audio pleasure.

Lastly, access. What’s the point of a streaming service if you can’t access it from multiple devices? If digital music can be on your home machines, your phone and in your car, your streaming service should be able to do the same, preferably with some offline functionality in the event you’re away from an internet connection.

Continue reading »

Music

« Older posts Newer posts »

BULLZ-EYE INFO

© 2026 Bullz-Eye Blog

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑