The Ambitious Life

The Product-Distribution Framework

Just 2 weeks ago I wrote about how somebody needed to buy Palm, and lo and behold, now the company is putting itself up for sale.  

As I continue to organize thoughts around some general motivational posts, I'm still fascinated by technology and recently the iPad, the newest addition to my tech library. 

In light of Apple's finally confirmed event next week about their "new creation", I wanted to capture my expectations. I got a little carried away on the details, but the headers will give you a good idea of what I'm thinking.

Aiming to Redefine Portable Computing

In general, I agree with John Gruber's thoughtful post on the Tablet (well worth a read) and I don't think this will be designed as a single focused device, e.g. an eReader or big iPhone. They are aiming to redefine laptops and portable computing, not to make a pretty interface for e-reading and movie browsing.

Thoughts on OS and Usability

Completely redefined Finder / File Browsing

Presumably on a computer of the rumored size and power there will be some more robust file structure than on an iPhone. Although file structure is fading away with cloud based services and Apple's own push to make files meaningless in their iLife sweet, they are still here for now. However it's easy to imagine what it could look like by using the CoverFlow viewer on the Mac Finder.

Full Screen Applications

Most people don't understand the current paradigm of "Applications" and when you're "in" an application. I think computing in general will move away from the floating windows to a full screen application. It's hard to realize this until you have to explain to non-savvy users what an "Application" is, how to tell if they're in one ("Mom, look up at the top left and what does it say, no the really top left). Every time I have to explain to

No iPhone App "Widgets"

Many people have been speculating that the Tablet will have the ability to either scale up iPhone apps, or enable them as widgets. I disagree because that would be the easy way out, and Apple doesn't do that. They will make developers re-write their apps completely, to take advantage of the larger screen real estate, new gestures, background processing, and perhaps other goodies. The App Store has proven that developers are extremely willing to write new apps, and Apple will leverage this to make them create new versions and not give them the easy way out of letting exiting apps exist on the tablet.

Thoughts on the Steve's Keynote

In typical Steve Jobs style, he will come on stage and make fun of current Tablet PCs including insults on usability (most require pens and have terrible UIs), aesthetics (I don't need to elaborate), and usage cases (what do you do on them other than scribble illegible notes?). This will set the stage for him to focus on the usage cases that make the Tablet different. For Steve, it's all about the product and how it's used. I can also see a similar type of introduction to Steve Jobs' iPhone introduction, which they positioned as a "a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod, and a breakthrough Internet device." Perhaps a world-class eReader, a full size media center, and a breakthrough tablet computer. It's worth watching the original iPhone keynote, which was 3 years ago. Steve wasn't too far off with his prognostication that the phone was 5 years ahead of others, it took Google and the entire industry to come up with the closest bet to the original iPhone - 3 years later.

Core Usage Cases and Product Features

Productivity - Touch-ready iWork

One thing that really excites me that hasn't been talked about in all this hoopla is the ability for a truly innovative productivity suite. Microsoft Office has not changed its fundamental structure in 15 years, other than questionable UI changes (i.e. the "Ribbons"). But Apple can leverage their internal iWork (already a much better office suite, except for Numbers vs. Excel 2003 for Windows) to create a dedicated version that leverages the strengths of a tablet. Admittedly this is more relevant and exciting for Keynote, for creating, editing or reviewing presentations, but is also relevant for Pages and Numbers, though not for heavy lifting. I think there already exists a UI framework that would make sense, similar to iPhoto full screen editing, with an auto-hiding browser on top and auto-hiding tool bar on the bottom.

Hub of Digital Life - Touch-ready iLife

Another core software suite will be porting iLife as a touch-ready application. iPhoto would probably be the most useful, but there might be new applications.

Reading

Even though Steve Jobs said that "nobody reads anymore", it's impossible to ignore that reading on a laptop / computer is a major usage case, just not necessarily books, as he was referring to. When I'm reading blogs, PDFs, or newspapers online, I'd certainly prefer a tablet form factor. And if it was good enough, I'd much rather have that to view my magazines (Wired, The Week and Popular Science) instead of the paper version. I also imagine Apple will be working with publishers (newspapers, magazines, books) to make the buying experience easier and get them excited about eReaders, which are here to stay. Again, this won't be a dedicated device, but I'd be surprised if this is not laid out as a core usage.

Full iChat including Video Chat

The Tablet would certainly have the horsepower, and a front mounted built in iSight would make video converations incredibly simple and elegant.

Video

As more and more video consumption moves online and onto computers, it makes sense for a device that will essentially be just a screen to have a core and elegant video viewing interface. Apple also has strategic reasons to continue to push to centralize how people purchase and watch video. Watching a movie on a 10" screen is certainly more doable than on a 3.5" screen.

Areas that will NOT be core usage cases

Games

Apple is allegedly not happy with the fact that the iPod Touch and iPhone have become such game centered devices, but I think it makes sense on a device that size. The entire device is a great controller that offers unique handheld gaming abilities. A 10" devices does not lend itself to that type of gaming, and if you're going to need a controller, then you might as well have a game console. I disagree with AppleInsider on this one.

Music

Music, which has been the center of the iPod revolution and was a core feature on the iPhone, will play a primary role on this device. iPod market penetration is already near saturated, and people want music portability, which a 10" tablet won't offer.

Price: $999

Apple doesn't go low end, they are not trying to compete with netbooks directly, especially at launch. They will try to create the best tablet computer ever created, and then potentially have it move down market to compete with netbooks, but don't hold your breath (I've been waiting for a $299-399 Mac Mini for years and full expected they would come that low, but instead the base price increased from $499 to $599). Even at that price, you better believe people will be lining up around the block to buy one when they come out. I myself will be one of them (I bought the original iPhone at $599).

Doubtful but feasible and would be cool

True Docking Ability

If you take the keyboard off of the MacBook Air, and fold the screen down onto it, you can imagine a pretty thin tablet style computer. Now add 2 years of technology innovation on top of that, and you can see a tablet that should be just as powerful as a MacBook Air. When you think that a MacBook Air can run a 30" monitor with its video card and support a full array of USB connections, it's easy to envision a tablet with a dock that gives it power, USB, and a display connection, through either USB, MagSafe, and MiniDisplayPort, or an iPod like connector. This way, when you're at home or the office, you simply dock it in and have your main computer there, with an external screen, keyboard and mouse for full desktop computing. Either way, I'm excited to see what Apple and Steve Jobs unveil. My guess is this will be as significant as the original iPhone announcement three years ago. Can't wait.

Earlier today I read an interesting post from Venture Hacks about how disruptive innovation will continue in the near term. Their analogy was about how computers are evolving and accelerating. We all know the evolution from mainframes to personal computers to laptops. This is common knowledge.

The technically adept also are very well aware about how mobile phones are the next phase, and will replace personal computers in the near future. This analysis reminded me of a post by John Gruber of Daring Fireball, who a year ago wrote about how the iPhone has as much computer as the top of the line Desktop computer from just 10 years ago. This is really fascinating and eye opening, and really supports Naval's point.

It gets even more interesting when you start thinking another 10 or 20 or 40 years from now, and look at that type of innovation and acceleration in technology. I had a couple of beers with Matt Hodgson and Moe Kelley this evening, and we got into some very interesting discussions about the future, and business, which builds on the previous points (but in all reality deserves its own post, but since I'm bad about blogging, I thought I'd just throw it all in here)

Our discussion ranged from general technological advancement, to the companies that will die as a result of that advancement (think book publishers, newspapers, and "value-add" content distributers that are really dumb pipes), to the long term implications of this technological advancement. And that's where things got really interesting. So we thought about a framework to capture this evolution, which I'll roughly lay out here.

Phase 1: Today's Reality - The $200 Billion Technological Revolution

Let's face it, as much as we're all excited about the companies that are changing the world today (Google) and the companies that will change the world in the coming months or years (Facebook), a lot of it really comes down to the shift in dollars from traditional advertising (TV, print, radio) to Internet and new media advertising. Google has already shown how profitable this can be, and many others are well positioned to take advantage of the remaining advertising dollars that have not shifted to the Internet, but inevitably will (really, it's inevitable, just a matter of time). Yet even as exciting as that is, it's still just 3-5% of our economy.

Phase 2: Augmented Reality - The Next Technological Revolution

There is a lot of talk among technology circles about Augmented Reality. Simple and known versions of this are location based services that tell you where your friends are (e.g. Loopt), or great local deals through coupons. More advanced augmented reality includes the ability to layer on information into any real world setting (e.g. Layar), which nearly infinite uses and benefits. In terms of economic benefits, I find it difficult to quantify the impact. It's probably broader than advertising (think services, transactions, shopping, etc.).

Phase 3: Parallel Reality - The $2 Trillion Technological Revolution

The real mind bender is when you start looking at "Parallel Reality" (which given by the dearth and inconsistency of the Google search results isn't even a broad concept). I define "Parallel Reality" as the third stage, where the real world continues to exist, but a "parallel reality" exists along side it. This is Second Life taken to a whole new level of realism, where things try feel, smell, and seem real. In this world, you still live your normal life, but might plug in (or something else) to a parallel reality where you can enjoy things you might not otherwise be able to do. This could mean things you could not afford (luxurious trips), things you couldn't physically accomplish (climbing Mt. Everest for the physically able but not quite fit, or going for a jog for the physically incapable), or things that would be physically impossible (being in Tokyo for breakfast and Paris for lunch) or difficult (walking around Mars).

The reason I call this a $2 Trillion revolution is that it has the potential to impact fundamental industries such as travel, tourism, entertainment, restaurants, alcohol, etc. Basically anything that costs money to do in order to provide a mental or even physical stimulation that can be replaced in a virtual world is no longer safe from disruption the way it currently is.

Phase 4: Post Reality - All Bets are Off

Finally, at some point of technological evolution, we move past the physical world and even the virtual portrayal of the physical world. Fans of Ray Kurzweil will realize I'm treading into his territory. But once we move into a "world" where the virtual is more real and satisfying than the real, all bets are off. Government, the economy, society, are all irrelevant as they are defined today. Even if we're all digital, enjoying immortality in a utopian "Matrix", how do we physically keep the power on for all of our virtual brains and selves? I can go on, but I mainly wanted to illustrate how irrelevant everything we know is once we cross that chasm.

Before you write this off as sheer lunacy or even too far in the future for you to worry about, consider how fast technology is improving:

By the year 2020, your $1,000 personal computer will have the processing power of the human brain-20 million billion calculations per second (100 billion neurons times 1,000 connections per neuron times 200 calculations per second per connection). By 2030, it will take a village of human brains to match a $1,000 computer. By 2050, $1,000 worth of computing will equal the processing power of all human brains on earth.
Source: http://www.rense.com/ufo6/live.htm

That excerpt is from an article by Ray Kurzweil, and is worth a full read if you're interested. But it's clear that the computational power will be able to recreate worlds, recreate human brains, and recreate intelligence in the foreseeable future.

Back to Real Reality

Now bringing this all back to earth, there are lots of real opportunities in the short, medium, long, and real long term. I'm excited about all of them, and will be continuing to think and work in all realms. But every now and then it's really interesting to step back and think about what the current technology revolution really means beyond the business models. Even more interesting is to think about what the world will be like when I'm really old dying (or not).

There has been a lot of buzz recently about Twitter. Just a few months ago, it was a techie network that was difficult to explain to an existing user, let alone anyone that had never heard of it. Not, it's a mainstream phenomenon that everyone is talking about. This came to head with all the ridiculous Ashton vs. CNN race to a million users (Ashton won), and Oprah's first tweet. The explosive growth is a result of reaching a critical mass of users, getting celebrities started, and having a wide range of support tools (e.g. TweetDeck, Nambu). As a result of this growth, Facebook has been reacting, or possibly over-reacting, as evidenced with their recent redesign. The controversial redesign is trying to focus more on status updates, and copied a lot of Twitter (and FriendFeed) features. Given the explosive growth, Facebook is certainly justified in their fears.

Lead Users

Facebook is worried about the Lead Users, the early adopters. Among my tech friends, we all are spending more time interacting with Twitter than we are with Facebook. I do this is mainly because it's much easier to actually interact with Twitter (with the tools I referenced earlier, my favorite is Nambu). And on top of that, I've found that Twitter is more useful and relevant for what I need.

Chasing the Wrong Problem

Twitter is winning the status update wars. But that's ok. Facebook is caught up in this because it thought that status messages were such an important part to it's value proposition, right from it's initial conception, inspired partly by AIM status messages. (On a side note, other sites need to get over the status update issue and stop trying to force users to update their status, yes I'm talking to you Plaxo and LinkedIn).

Facebook = Identity

Facebook right now is so much more than a fancy way to update your status message. It's your IDENTITY. Facebook is trying to win back status messages and real time conversation. Instead, it should just realize it's about identity, and focus on that. Facebook Connect is important, and if they neglect that, it won't become what I hope it becomes.

Twitter = Communication

Twitter is leading in real time communication. Ironically, it's also going back into the era of random user names that I was hoping Facebook has ended. That's not as bad as it once was because there are more ways to map the random names to names that make sense to you, i.e. real names. But the implication of Twitter's usernames is that it makes it much less likely to become a standard login protocol (as TechCrunch is implying). Facebook's use of real names and validation makes it well suited for a global identify management, and Twitter's open standards make it well suited for real time public conversation. I don't mind some overlap, as long as they each don't lose focus on what makes them valuable.