Gartner: Western European PC Shipments Fell 16
Percent in Fourth Quarter of 2011

post from Daring Fireball on 07 February 2012 08:03:17 PM. © Daring Fireball

Gartner:

PC shipments in Western Europe totaled 16.3 million units in the fourth quarter of 2011, a 16 per cent decline from the equivalent period in 2010, according to Gartner, Inc. For the year, PC shipments numbered 58.5 million units in Western Europe in 2011, also a 16 percent decrease from 2010.
The PC market in Western Europe has suffered four consecutive quarters of shipment decline.

Sounds like a trend.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1915815

Digg this

Chrome for Android Wont Support Flash

post from Daring Fireball on 07 February 2012 08:03:17 PM. © Daring Fireball

Remember when Android’s (and the BlackBerry Playbook’s, and WebOS’s) support for Flash was supposed to be a competitive advantage against iOS?

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/7/2782743/adobe-flash-not-supported-chrome-android
-browser-android-browser

Digg this

Chrome for Android

post from Daring Fireball on 07 February 2012 08:03:17 PM. © Daring Fireball

MG Siegler reviews the brand-new and long-awaited Chrome for Android:

First of all, yes, Chrome for Android is here. Second, it?s only compatible with Ice Cream Sandwich which is currently on ? wait for it ? 1% of Android devices. But in an attempt to add some silver-lining to the 1% joke, I will say that Chrome for Android is of a much higher class than the previous Android browser, the aptly-named and horribly icon?d: Browser.
Browser is dead. Long live Chrome.

Thus ends the single most perplexing thing about Android: why its web browser was so horrendous. Conventional wisdom says Apple is the one pushing native apps and Google is the web-first company, but you’d never guess it judging by their respective mobile web browsers.

I installed Chrome on my Galaxy Nexus review unit and I concur with MG — it’s good. It still doesn’t zoom or scroll as well as Mobile Safari (not even close), but it’s so much better than the old Browser it isn’t funny. My biggest gripe with Chrome for Android is that it feels overly skewed toward search. Bookmarks are tucked several taps away, unlike Mobile Safari where they’re one tap away in a menu at the bottom of the screen. But overall, the interaction design is good: useful, attractive, obvious, and efficient.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://parislemon.com/post/17215781807/chrome-for-android-the-browser-for-the-1

Digg this

Thats No Moon

post from Daring Fireball on 07 February 2012 06:03:43 PM. © Daring Fireball

Samsung is heading into Gordon Gecko territory.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/02/07/picture-galaxy-note-next-to-iphone-4s/

Digg this

Its Been a Long 14 Years

post from Daring Fireball on 07 February 2012 06:03:43 PM. © Daring Fireball

If you want a visceral sense of just how far Apple has come since the NeXT acquisition and Steve Jobs’s return, you’ll do no better than watching this video from Macworld Expo 1997. Then-CEO Gil Amelio rambles on and on, woefully unprepared and unrehearsed. Then, Jobs takes the stage, with a tight presentation and an actual plan. Then Amelio returns to preside over what must be the worst and most awkward product introduction in company history.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhhFQ-3w5tE

Digg this

App Economy has created almost half a million
jobs

post from Apple on 07 February 2012 05:03:49 PM. © Apple

Could the app economy be the cure for the United States’ employment doldrums? A new report suggests that the nascent app economy spurred on by iOS, Android and Facebook apps has generated 466,000 jobs in the U.S. economy since 2007.

In the report by technology trade group TechNet, Michael Mandel of the South Mountain Economics, who conducted the research, found that 311,000 app-related jobs have been generated and another 155,000 jobs have also been indirectly created from the app boom. The figures are estimates and are based on calculations on the existing market for app-related jobs. Mandel warns that the figures could represent ?jobs not lost? rather than net jobs gained.

But if the latter is true, it starts to paint a broader picture of the economic benefit from apps, which have only really been around in force for the last four years. We’ve already talked about some of the revenue brought in by apps and where it’s forecast to hit. Gartner said last year it expected mobile app stores to generate $15 billion in revenue in 2011. But it’s interesting to see how many actual jobs might be at work in this emerging economy. App jobs can be found in big software and gaming companies like Electronic Arts and Zynga to small one person start-ups working out of a home. Big companies are also devoting more and more resources to apps, and as apps help companies grow, it fuels the need for more jobs in human resources, sales, marketing and other non-technical positions. There’s also an emerging app development services economy growing out of the app boom.

The app economy has been a major engine for job growth in an otherwise sluggish labor market, said Mandel. And it’s likely to keep growing as wireless and social platforms expand.

Mandel arrived at his estimates by looking at the number of unique “help wanted” ads for apps in the the Conference Board HWOL database. He then factored in the historical rate in the computer and mathematics industry for employment ads compared to existing jobs. And then he applied a multiplier to estimate the number of indirect jobs created by apps.

The highest number of app positions in a metro area were created in the New York-New Jersey-Long Island area (9.2 percent), followed by San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont (8.5 percent), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara (6.3 percent) and the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue (5.7 percent) area. Overall, California generated the most app jobs by far with 23.8 percent of all jobs, followed by New York (6.9 percent) and Washington (6.4 percent).

These are still early days and that’s why Mandel was forced to come up with his own estimates, because there is no good tracking done by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But I think we’re likely to see a lot more growth, especially as smartphone and tablet penetration increases.

As I wrote earlier, consumers are increasingly favoring apps over a browser in part because it’s a pretty streamlined experience that is dedicated to one purpose. Over time, we will likely see the growth in app jobs level off as more companies look to leverage the web and build more cross-platform HTML5 web apps. But for now, there’s still a lot of interest in native apps that are built atop popular platforms. And that means this is where to find a lot of new jobs.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Read The Full Article:
http://gigaom.com/2012/02/07/app-economy-has-created-almost-half-a-million-jobs/

Digg this

Salon: 33 Percent Fewer Posts; 40 Percent Greater
Traffic

post from Daring Fireball on 07 February 2012 05:03:47 PM. © Daring Fireball

Salon editor Kerry Lauerman:

We’ve also — completely against the trend — slowed down ourprocess. We’ve tried to work longer on stories for greater impact,and publish fewer quick-takes that we know you can consumeelsewhere. We’re actually publishing, on average, roughlyone-third fewer posts on Salon than we were a year ago (from 848to 572 in December; 943 to 602 in January). So: 33 percent fewerposts; 40 percent greater traffic.

Good news. But it shouldn’t be surprising that for a certain audience, quality is far more important than quantity.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://open.salon.com/blog/kerry_lauerman/2012/02/03/hit_record

Digg this

Sleep Tracker Version 2.0.0 Released for iPad,
iPhone, and iPod touch

post from prMac on 07 February 2012 04:10:00 PM. © prMac

Today Cameron Johnson releases version 2.0.0 of Sleep Tracker, bringing the highly anticipated feature of data export to an already well polished program. Other new features include a complete rewrite of the graphing system and more reliable data analysis. Sleep Tracker is useful for anyone with non conventional sleep patterns, or that needs a way to keep up with their sleep. This includes college students, doctors, parents, and anyone else with less than perfect sleep habits.

Read The Full Article:
http://prmac.com/release-id-38105.htm

Digg this

Apple’s iTV and the carrier question

Evidence is slowly emerging that Apple could be working with operator partners for the introduction of its upcoming iTV product. Last week, Bloomberg reported that Apple may get access to programs through partnerships with carriers such as AT&T and Verizon. And Tuesday the Globe and Mail reported that Apple is pursuing partnerships with Canadian operators Rogers and BCE. But why would Apple feel the need to partner? Because doing so would give it a more complete lineup of content, enable it to offer a better user interface and give it wider distribution than if it went it alone.

Interestingly enough, I was discussing the possibility of Apple partnering with operators the other day at lunch, before the Bloomberg piece came out. That first piece might seem like a fluke, as it was written based on an analyst note. But with today’s Globe and Mail story, it seems more likely that the hardware giant is indeed considering some sort of a partnership approach to tackling the TV market.

The move isn’t totally unprecedented: After all, Dish Network was one of Google TV’s launch partners, and Verizon has partnered with Microsoft to make its FiOS TV service accessible through the new Xbox Live user interface.

All the content, none of the fuss

By partnering with pay TV operators, Apple would immediately gain access to all of the TV content that viewers have come to expect, without having to strike up carriage deals of its own. It’s not alone in pursuing this strategy: Microsoft’s Xbox 360, for instance, can be used as a set-top box by AT&T U-Verse and Verizon FiOS subscribers.

In the FiOS case, the program data and channel lineup will be deeply integrated with the Xbox Live service and Bing search engine, which will let viewers discover live TV and video-on-demand content alongside streaming content from services like the Zune Marketplace, Netflix, Hulu Plus, Vudu and YouTube.

I could see Apple doing something similar by allowing operator partners to build integrated apps into the new device, which could be used to control channel lineups and program discovery. For Apple, such a move would give it the content it needs to be relevant, but allow it to control the overall user experience of search, discovery and navigation.

But what would the operators get out of it? Well, for one thing, an integration with the Apple iTV could potentially give them a competitive advantage over their peers. In the U.S., Apple already has relationships with AT&T and Verizon, both of whom could stand to benefit from having the best new iDevice available for customers as they pitch their IPTV services against the more traditional cable offerings. Those operators could be incentivized to push the iTV to their customers and could act as an additional distribution outlet, on top of Apple Stores and the company’s existing big box retail partnerships.

Could AT&T help you buy an iTV?

There’s even the possibility that Apple could bring the same subsidy model that exists in the mobile space to TV operators. To a certain extent, carriers already subsidize TV hardware, by making set-top boxes available to customers. Assuming an Apple TV product would enable those carriers to deliver cloud- and IP-based programming guides, it could act as a set-top box replacement. Whatever money was being put toward that hardware could be committed to reducing the cost of an Apple iTV purchased by subscribers.

A carrier subsidy could potentially boost adoption for an Apple device being launched in a market with traditionally long replacement cycles. Some believe that any introductory Apple TV product would be sold at a premium over existing Smart TVs, and a recent Best Buy survey lends some credence to this belief, polling users if they would spend $1,499 for a 42-inch Apple TV device. I personally doubt that Apple would introduce a new product priced so far above existing products, but if there’s any premium a subsidy could bring products within parity. And if there isn’t a premium, a subsidy could make the product all that more attractive.

iTV not just for partners

Note that I don’t believe that any operator partnerships Apple strikes would be exclusive. In the U.S., Apple would likely partner with multiple providers, since their services are only available in certain geographies. As noted above, AT&T and Verizon are the most likely partners in the U.S., but I don’t think it would shy away from the same type of deal with a company like Comcast.

Nor would the Apple TV be “broken” if purchased direct from a retailer or if a consumer doesn’t subscribe to an Apple partner. They will get all the same third-party apps and TV coming from the customer’s set-top box. There’s even the possibility that non-partners could build their own apps for device search and navigation — in the same way that Comcast, Time Warner Cable and others have built iPad apps that can be used as remote controls. But it won’t have the same tight program guide integration. And if there are subsidies involved, it wouldn’t be as cheap as it would be from Apple’s partners.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Read The Full Article:
http://gigaom.com/video/apple-itv-carrier-partnerships/

Digg this

Apple iTV and the carrier question

Evidence is slowly emerging that Apple could be working with operator partners for the introduction of its upcoming iTV product. Last week, Bloomberg reported that Apple may get access to programs through partnerships with carriers such as AT&T and Verizon. And Tuesday the Globe and Mail reported that Apple is pursuing partnerships with Canadian operators Rogers and BCE. But why would Apple feel the need to partner? Because doing so would give it a more complete lineup of content, enable it to offer a better user interface and give it wider distribution than if it went it alone.

Interestingly enough, I was discussing the possibility of Apple partnering with operators the other day at lunch, before the Bloomberg piece came out. That first piece might seem like a fluke, as it was written based on an analyst note. But with today’s Globe and Mail story, it seems more likely that the hardware giant is indeed considering some sort of a partnership approach to tackling the TV market.

The move isn’t totally unprecedented: After all, Dish Network was one of Google TV’s launch partners, and Verizon has partnered with Microsoft to make its FiOS TV service accessible through the new Xbox Live user interface.

All the content, none of the fuss

By partnering with pay TV operators, Apple would immediately gain access to all of the TV content that viewers have come to expect, without having to strike up carriage deals of its own. It’s not alone in pursuing this strategy: Microsoft’s Xbox 360, for instance, can be used as a set-top box by AT&T U-Verse and Verizon FiOS subscribers.

In the FiOS case, the program data and channel lineup will be deeply integrated with the Xbox Live service and Bing search engine, which will let viewers discover live TV and video-on-demand content alongside streaming content from services like the Zune Marketplace, Netflix, Hulu Plus, Vudu and YouTube.

I could see Apple doing something similar by allowing operator partners to build integrated apps into the new device, which could be used to control channel lineups and program discovery. For Apple, such a move would give it the content it needs to be relevant, but allow it to control the overall user experience of search, discovery and navigation.

But what would the operators get out of it? Well, for one thing, an integration with the Apple iTV could potentially give them a competitive advantage over their peers. In the U.S., Apple already has relationships with AT&T and Verizon, both of whom could stand to benefit from having the best new iDevice available for customers as they pitch their IPTV services against the more traditional cable offerings. Those operators could be incentivized to push the iTV to their customers and could act as an additional distribution outlet, on top of Apple Stores and the company’s existing big box retail partnerships.

Could AT&T help you buy an iTV?

There’s even the possibility that Apple could bring the same subsidy model that exists in the mobile space to TV operators. To a certain extent, carriers already subsidize TV hardware, by making set-top boxes available to customers. Assuming an Apple TV product would enable those carriers to deliver cloud- and IP-based programming guides, it could act as a set-top box replacement. Whatever money was being put toward that hardware could be committed to reducing the cost of an Apple iTV purchased by subscribers.

A carrier subsidy could potentially boost adoption for an Apple device being launched in a market with traditionally long replacement cycles. Some believe that any introductory Apple TV product would be sold at a premium over existing Smart TVs, and a recent Best Buy survey lends some credence to this belief, polling users if they would spend $1,499 for a 42-inch Apple TV device. I personally doubt that Apple would introduce a new product priced so far above existing products, but if there’s any premium a subsidy could bring products within parity. And if there isn’t a premium, a subsidy could make the product all that more attractive.

iTV not just for partners

Note that I don’t believe that any operator partnerships Apple strikes would be exclusive. In the U.S., Apple would likely partner with multiple providers, since their services are only available in certain geographies. As noted above, AT&T and Verizon are the most likely partners in the U.S., but I don’t think it would shy away from the same type of deal with a company like Comcast.

Nor would the Apple TV be “broken” if purchased direct from a retailer or if a consumer doesn’t subscribe to an Apple partner. They will get all the same third-party apps and TV coming from the customer’s set-top box. There’s even the possibility that non-partners could build their own apps for device search and navigation — in the same way that Comcast, Time Warner Cable and others have built iPad apps that can be used as remote controls. But it won’t have the same tight program guide integration. And if there are subsidies involved, it wouldn’t be as expensive.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Read The Full Article:
http://gigaom.com/video/apple-itv-carrier-partnerships/

Digg this