Incremental Blogger

At Intel’s IDF event in China, Intel is talking up its forthcoming MID-enabling technology–namely the low-power, Atom processors.

I’m quite excited to see how this market pans out, but as I’ve blogged about in the past, I see a tough road ahead for Intel and its partners in this category. The two biggest challenges? The running start of the iPhone and iPod Touch as well as the fact that Intel’s MID component is missing a strong software partner. The iPhone/iPod Touch illustrate the importance of this. For instance, not only is the iPhone well designed at the user level, one should also check out the SDK. There’s nothing on par with it.

Now some could argue that Apple isn’t an enterprise expert and so there’s room for others. Yep, but I think it’s clear that Apple’s going to keep growing into this area too. But Apple has the distinct advantage of also having the respect of many early adopters. This is going to be a big challenge for Intel.

There are a few things Intel can do. They are:

1) Get a strong software partner. I think there are only two winning choices: Microsoft or Google. Either one will work. One is needed.
2) Think even cheaper. Lowering prices will eat into revenues, but Intel is behind. It’s going to take more than low power to win here. My concern is that if Intel lowers its prices the OEMs will take the opportunity to increase their profit since numbers probably won’t be as good as they want. The workaround is for Intel to give rebates to consumers. I’m thinking of something substantial for the early buyers. Maybe $100 dollars. The amount drops would drop off after 30 days.
3) Leverage the X86 community. Give away dozens if not hundreds of devices to leading bloggers. Invite them to your conferences. Get them talking.
4) Leverage leading, online trends. For example: Encourage at least one partner (or do it yourself) to build a MID device that’s very, very good at live video streaming. Think Nokia N95 without the phone–which can get in the way and cause streams to drop anyway. Think great lens. Think great image sensor. Think good chat readability. Think good battery life better than 20-30 minutes.

Mary Jo Foley speculates that with the arrival of Distinguished Engineer Len Kawell that Microsoft will be gearing Windows Mobile to the MID form factor. She gets this from Kawell’s bio on the Microsoft site. I’m not sure how much you can really get from this. I’m sure Microsoft investigates lots of things.

I’ve blogged a couple times about how Microsoft appears not to have a strong solution for the MID offerings–particularly on the low end. Vista may work, but I’m not sure how well considering the limited hardware. Still, I like the Windows approach because it will enable people to run “real” apps.

Using Windows Mobile, might be a nice option for some MIDs, because it’ll give people a reasonable and familiar feature feel for heavy phone users. For notebook/desktop users, they may feel a little restricted.

Here are a couple reasons why I think Windows Mobile will have a challenge on the MID form factor:

* First, graphics. Whatever OS is used on the MID form factor, it needs to provide graphics capabilities that ISVs can leverage which are at least on par with those on the iPhone. If you can’t create swipes, fades, and the like, forget it. Vista and XP have an edge here.

* Second, Windows Mobile may make sense when you think of a feature to feature comparison with what’s currently out of the box in the iPhone (essentially the leading MID device on the market along with the iPod Touch)–but does it reach the level of apps that can be created with the competing Linux-based MIDs? See, it’s not just the iPhone’s OS X that’s competing in this space. If CES is any indication, there will be many Linux-based MIDs. It makes sense, because the OEMs can create a nice MID-friendly shell.

* Third, the browser. A MID needs a real browser experience. This is going to be a challenge whatever OS Microsoft picks, but it’s worth mentioning. The iPhone shows that this is a must.

* Fourth, the developer ecosystem. Apple is going full speed with its developer program, even though it’s plenty restrictive for my taste. Microsoft has the edge here. Whatever OS it builds, it should leverage its developer contacts. My guess is this is easier to do with a WPF-friendly OS, but maybe Mobile can pull this off. It seems like it’ll have to be doing lots of duplication, which means it’s going to ramp up slower, still leaving the iPhone as the premier platform for the near term–let’s say a year or two.

* Fifth, a compelling SDK. I’d give the iPhone the SDK edge here whether compared to Windows Mobile, Vista, or XP–unless Microsoft also bundles in speech and similar technologies. But still, Microsoft has a weak touch and accelerometer story at this point. It’s not all about the screen. Microsoft has lots of experience with alternative UIs, so I imagine they can catch up, but it’s worth mentioning. The iPhone has an interesting developer story though which is going to inspire a lot of creativity.

So here’s the $64,000 question for developer: Which platform do you develop for now? A Linux MID? A Vista-based MID? A Windows Mobile device with the hope of making it upgradeable to a MID? Or the iPhone?

Seems like the iPhone has the edge to me for now.

I’m going through an innovation meltdown. Maybe it’s a developer mid-life crisis I’m having. Maybe it’s all in my early-adopting mind. But it feels real and I can’t take much more of this without throwing caution to the wind and….and….coding.

What’s the “this” I’m talking about? This time it’s about a little music and a little thing called the iPhone. Seems some creative types have been creating little virtual instruments for their iPhones. Stuff.co.nz has the details and YouTube has some videos you can check out of their music. Here’s one that’s been viewed over 2 million times since its posting in February.

Why is this a big deal? It’s not. But the thing is, that this is yet another one of those little things that the UMPC should have enabled. Unfortunately the hardware wasn’t quite there. But this was only part of the issue. If you ask me, the UMPC builder “community” wasn’t up for it either and without their support….you know what happens. And by “community” here I don’t mean the end users–I mean those creating the devices and their experiences. You fill in the blanks with your favorite names.

Here’s the thing. It’s with little stuff like this that inspires. Especially on the consumer side. But over the last while I’ve heard the creaks and cracks of too many shrugging shoulders, telling me it’s not all that.

I made a mistake. I listened to them. I shouldn’t have. I should have pushed, prodded, and produced. I didn’t. And now I’m bummed.

Put simply: I don’t like sitting on the back of the innovation bus. I don’t want to ride there and unfortunately that’s where I’m at in too many respects. I don’t like it.

So I’ll say it again: The Tablet PC/UMPC/MID-builder community better get a good touch solution out and fast or it’s simply not going to matter any more. I’ll put it more colorfully: That clock-is-ticking sound you hear is no clock–it’s the chug-chug of the technology train leaving the station.

On the launch of the iPhone SDK, several of us described how we saw that with the iPhone was essentially the initial victor in the MID market–even though the MIDs have yet to hit the street. After this, there was a bit of a debate about whether the iPhone market and the MID market overlapped at all. Looks like Intel agrees with our take. Check out this market diagram on MacRumors. In it you can see that Intel looks at the Smartphone market as a larger opportunity for MIDs–although it sees it as a “Generation 2″ opportunity. Of course, Intel is meaning this from a processor perspective–in other words, they will have a processor that will be smartphone friendly in their second generation. But it’s interesting to see that they are lumping the first gen MIDs and the iPhone along the same “mobile internet device” spectrum. Makes sense to me.

It does acknowledge, though, the lead that Apple essentially has in the MID market. Not so sure if this is a good idea. Well, I guess if it’s obvious to most, then there’s no harm. However, it sure points out–at least to me–that Intel needs to get better aligned with its MID partners–unless it’s simply looking at MIDs as 18-month devices that’ll get drawered about the time their batteries fail to hold any more charges.

So this begs the question: Is it going to be worthwhile for developers to write for the first gen MIDs–or just jump right to the iPhone. After all the iPhone is out now.

If Intel had a large software partner, this issue would at least have a retort. You could argue that MIDs run a full OS (if Microsoft was fully behind the MID initiative) or that MIDs have unequaled access to the Internet (if Google worked with them). As it is, Intel is left with MIDs as a chunk of hardware with a mixed story in terms of the software–one that is overwhelmed by the Apple “equivalent”–the iPhone.

This being said, I do think what Intel is missing out on is the differentiators they have in their first gen devices:

* larger displays–which most of us older types find much easier to view. Plus you can simply do more with more screen real-estate.
* open platform and marketplace
* add an IR device in order to support remote control scenarios
* room for GPS?

Likewise, in terms of scenarios, I’d go talk with the camera folks. Add a good sensor array and a real lens, and you may just have a new market. Check out what’s going on with the Nokia N95 and Qik if you don’t believe me.

One last possibility going on here: This diagram may be telegraphing–get this–not simply that the iPhone is a great MID, but rather that down the road, the makers of the iPhone may be joining in on the MID game. In other words, Apple might position the iPhone as it stands today as a MID, but it might also be creating a Moorestown “iPhone” family device that’s more MID than phone.

What might this be like? Dunno. But maybe a larger screen. Richer apps that can take advantage of a larger screen. And who knows what. Likely? Your guess is as good as mine. No matter. If you hear about a rumor like this down the road, you now know where it might have started. Ooops.

Warner Crocker’s declaration that the MID market race is over now that the iPhone/iPod Touch SDK has been announced may be a bit provocative, but I think he’s onto something. What do I mean? For the near term the iPhone/iPod Touch is essentially going to lead the MID market in terms of price, availability, developer community, quality of user experience, and funding of its ecosystem.

For Microsoft, this doesn’t mean much, because Microsoft isn’t playing in this game per se. Yes, there’s XP and Vista for some beefier units and I guess “CE” is a choice too. But let’s be serious here, for the near term none of these reach the platform model of the iPhone/iPod Touch. Sorry.

There are some Linux distros that are pretty slick that I’ve seen on some MID prototypes (at CES), but I don’t see these as major contenders either. Why? Because they are fragmenting. There’s not one single way to do things. It’s a little bit of this and a little bit of that. Nice efforts in some cases, but for the immediate future they are not going to lead the industry. They won’t condense into an industry. Sorry.

Where I think the big issue is, is not particularly in the OS “wars,” but rather in how essentially Intel’s MID initiative is left without a software partner. If Microsoft isn’t going to do it–if Linux isn’t going to provide a cohesive answer–Intel’s view of the MID world is going to have a tough time competing with the iPhone/iPod Touch family.

Actually, for Intel it probably doesn’t matter. I’m sure Intel will be quite happy if Apple switches to its CPU family and takes over the MID market. It doesn’t need the Intel-named MIDs to “win.” However, since it’s unlikely that Apple will ever license their OS platform to others to build like-minded devices, Intel will lose out in the total market it could achieve. So I’m sure Intel is struggling to figure this out.

As I see it there’s one possible software partner left–for the near-term–that could come to Intel’s aid. And that’s one that’s been quite good at filling holes left by Microsoft–Google. I don’t think it’s likely–just possible. Google could rework its Android initiative to make it MID friendly and this together with Intel’s hardware partners could possibly create an ecosystem that might have a chance at broadening the MID market. A chance. A thin one. But one nonetheless. I’m partially in doubt because of Google’s boardroom ties with Apple and Google’s lack of prior experience in this area. Besides they are thinking “phones” rather than MIDs at this point.

Note that in all of this I’m talking near term. Three, five, ten years out anything could happen. However, for the next year and possibly two Apple is in the lead and will most likely stay that way.

For all of you that are thinking I’ve fallen victim to the hype, let me encourage you to do a few things: First, get an iPhone. Use it and then tell me that it’s connectivity and form-factor don’t draw you in. Second, play banker for a minute. Where would you place your bets? In an unproven, fairly fragmented software market geared around an unproven family of MID products from hardware-based Intel and its partners or with Apple and its “iPod” family including the recent iPhone device that’s done remarkably well for its first year? And third, if you’re a developer, check out the iPhone SDK. Tell me it doesn’t have many of the things we’ve all wanted as rich-app, mobile developers. We’ve seen similar things before and beyond as well. But have they been so well packaged before? If you’re still not convinced, watch the demos during Apple’s SDK announcement event. And if none of this convinces you, I bet you’re not shaken by near term events, so no problem. I agree with you that in time the world will reach equilibrium and all will be well. What’s a couple years here and there among friends?

Yes, several years out, things will most likely be much different. And no doubt, there will be plenty of room for niche players across the board in the meantime. And Microsoft’s and Intel’s coattails are big enough to carry several efforts along the way too. But for the Kliener Perkins level break away products, I’ll be looking in the iPhone/iPod Touch direction.

As a Tablet/UMPC enthusiast and developer, I’m not going to dump what I’ve been doing and radically change directions, but you can rest assured that I’m keeping my options open. Like with the OLPC and Eee PCs I see an evolution occurring here and I don’t want to be left behind.

Good technology and good implementations deserve respect. And I’m treating the iPhone with such. Doesn’t mean my competitive instincts aren’t kicking in. Just means I’m very mindful and doing my best to do my best.

The other day I blogged about how I’d like to see the OS support video (more specifically “enhanced” video) as a native data type to ease sharing and recording of desktop content directly. I’d also like to revisit another idea that I’ve blogged about before that’s also along these lines: I’d like to see direct audio recording supported on laptops, video cameras and mobile devices.

What do I mean by “direct audio recoding?” If I’m recording a talk and the speaker is using a wireless mic (in particular), I’d like to be able to record directly from the wireless mic to my device. Why record over the air in this electronic world when a simple electronic solution is practical and would produce much better results? How many times have you tried listening to a recording that some one’s made in a large class or at a conference and instead of hearing the speaker you hear those around the recording device whispering, adjusting their chair, typing, and the like?

Seems to me with wireless recording of audio every college student, conference goer, and reporter should have an appropriately equipped device. These are all three very attractive customers for OS vendors because they include influentials and new buyers. Kind of seems like a great differentiating “feature” for a company, doesn’t it? Imagine if Apple supported a standard like this? Imagine how much additional market they’d capture? Would we see reporters on TV holding up their iPhones all recording directly to their phone? Would we see even more college students using MacBooks?

How might this work? There are a couple possibilities.

One is to have a “sound server” that the speaker can plug into which digitizes the stream and broadcasts it in a stream over the network (WiFi/Internet) so it can be directly recorded locally. This might be a good way to go because it only requires a single hardware change on the broadcast side–at least for laptops. And, of course, it would require WiFi support in the recording devices, which is a reasonable assumption going forward for many devices.

There would need to be some additions on the device end, however. For laptops, Tablet PCs, and the like we’d need a way to record the live audio stream. Lots of possibilities here. An OS built in feature would make sense to me, but it could be an extension.

A downside to this approach is that it would place more stress on the network–particularly WiFi where there could be many users such as at an industry tech conference. WiFi at settings like this are already overloaded.

Another approach would be to add circuitry on each device that could record the audio. Unfortunately, it’s probably not practical to record from the mic itself. It may be of a proprietary format. Some of the companies that make the wireless technology aren’t going to want to make their technology cheaper and more accessible to the vast number of digital devices. They’re all focused on the high end, which makes sense. They have to be focused on quality for professional productions. Providing mass-market access is another game. 

One solution might be to add an FM-based repeater in the network and integrate FM-recorders on each device. This might be better in the sense that it would not load up WiFi networks and it’s more broadcast oriented than connection based. It wouldn’t matter how many people are recording. It could be 10 it could be 1000.  There are some USB FM digitizers on the market which hint at how much this might cost each supporting device. (I’m not sure if an FM-digitizer would consume less than a comparable WiFi-based one. That’s a question for the double Es.) I did try a simple experiment where I took an ultra-small FM radio and wired up its audio out to my Tablet’s audio in and then recorded some test broadcasting I did from a wireless mic. It worked OK although the range wouldn’t support large-hall uses.

So if this is such a good idea, why doesn’t it exist already? Well, essentially it does exist, in pieces at least. But the reason is simple and a couple fold: First, this is something that mobile devices really need. If you’re primarily using a tethered desktop, you’re unlikely to be anywhere that you might want to record “over the air.” That being said, we’ve all probably wanted to record audio/video streams over the network at some time. Unfortunately, this technology has been held back for various reasons in order to prevent people from recording online music or broadcasts. Silly though. This should not be a high-end feature. It should be made accessible to everyone and everywhere.

And I don’t just mean laptops, Tablets, MIDS. Video cameras should support features like this. While you’re video recording let’s say Bill Gates at a presentation, you should be able to switch the audio feed to come directly from the WiFi network or possibly some radio (FM) frequency. If the videographer wants crowd noise they’d turn off direct recording and use the device’s mic. If they want to focus on the speaker, they’d switch to the direct recording “channel.” Sure would make for more professional audio recordings.

Wired magazine takes a look at the forthcoming MID (Mobile Internet Devices) that will be hitting the markets this year.

Will the MIDs find an eager market? That’s the $64,000 question.

The article points out that Intel is making great progress at creating PC-grade, mobile processors that scale down to pocketable devices. Intel is pinning great hopes on the Silverthorne family leading the way.

There is something very important that the article leaves out: The software. It’s not just a matter of building a small device. That’s only part of the problem. These are for the most part “sealed” units (from a hardware standpoint) and as such people are going to expect them to work as is–and work well. That means the software is going to have to be up to par.

You see, the big difference between let’s say a MID and a Pocket PC is not just the hardware. It’s the fact that a MID can run a full OS and full apps. However, it doesn’t take much to realize that most apps are going to have to be tuned for these small devices.

From what I’ve seen (at CES, for instance), some MIDs will run a variant of Linux and some will run Windows. The question is which one will yield an experience on par of iPhone’s OSX-lite?

A MID needs to be fast on, have easy access to apps, and boast apps out of the box that run well–really well (a browser tuned to reading on a small display, live maps, live weather, and so on). 

Where’s the initiative to create any of this? I don’t see it. This means that the manufacturers are on their own which will mean spotty results and platforms that may be extensible, but will take work for third parties to take advantage of.

So I don’t think the MIDs necessarily will be DOA from a hardware standpoint. It’s going to be the software that makes a huge difference here. And once the software is “good enough” it’s going to be a matter of whether the hardware and software blend together to make a device that really signs.

All this being said, if the prices are low enough consumers will be more acceptable of any flaws–at least the early adopters will. My prediction is that this is going to be an evolutionary product. We’ll see.

Think UMPC cut in half with widgets.

Tom Krazit of CNet adds to the chorus of commentary on how Vista does’t fit well into Intel’s MID world. Ubuntu Linux is one hope, and now possibly Google’s Android is another.

Where do I place my bets? That Microsoft will eventually catch on and release a mobile version of XP. I’m still waiting though. No real good, public signs this is happening.

I don’t know enough about Android if that’ll make it. I’d probably pick it over Ubuntu, but that’s just me cheering on Google. I have no experience one way or another to make a rational decision. I’m just working at the gut level.

The market has taught us that the $500 UMPC isn’t going to be seen any time soon. I’m convinced after a year of watching the OEMs build UMPCs that that’s the way they want it to be. I can’t blame them a $700-$1500 device makes more money than a $500 one.

But that’s not where the markets want to be. Sorry folks. We’re talking $500 at the most. Maybe, just maybe someone will figure out how to build an inexpensive system that’s worthy of being purchased, but I don’t see this in the UMPC crowd. UMPCs are being marketed as mid-range notebooks. I don’t see the price changing.

There is discussion though around the OLPC and the ASUS Eee PC. These $300+ notebooks are getting a lot of attention. For good reason. They are challenging the pricing spreadsheets that everyone seems to be going after. There’s no reason that low cost notebooks can’t be made. And I add, that there’s no reason these devices couldn’t’ be full-fledged Tablets for maybe a hundred more. I have my fingers crossed that someone will figure out how to do it. And make money from it.

Now in terms of the Tablet side, there is a problem At this point only Windows has the software support really needed, but unfortunately the price and the footprint are a problem–except maybe in terms of footprint XP would be OK. The price needs to be knocked down. If I were Microsoft I’d add an alternative shell that’s great for these form factors, knock of 50% for the price and let the market sing.

Crave is posting another Mac Tablet rumor. This time it supposedly someone from ASUS confirming the rumor.

First things first: ASUS is a contract manufacturer for Apple. So it would make sense that ASUS might build a Mac Tablet if one came to market. However, it would also make sense that ASUS would build an Mac Tablet that Apple is purely building as a research project. I think this is where previous rumors have gotten tripped up. Just because Apple builds something internal doesn’t mean it’s going to take it to market.

There are some differences now, however. Tablets are reaching across the market–whether they are called “Tablets” or not. There are now full sized Tablets convertibles, slates, very small Tablet convertibles, UPMCs, MIDs, and who knows what else Apple, Intel, or Microsoft have up their sleeve.

I can guess that a Mac Tablet will have it’s top notch pinch-touch displays. If so, I imagine the screen won’t be that large. Generally these are technologies that scale up slowly. So maybe a 5 or 7″ display?

At this size a slate makes sense with either the onscreen keyboard or a flip out one. I’m thinking MID here. Something that’s top notch at browsing the Internet and staying connected. The iPhone is jut a little too small for comfortable browsing. Everything a little bigger could make the device easier to use in more places. And it might become a good platform playing games. Or a Brainage knockoff. Dunno.

Then again–since this is all based on rumors–I can see Apple responding to all the education-focused Tablets. Toshiba, Fujitsu, Gateway are grabbing market share fairly well. And Dell is about to enter the fray too. That means Apple is the odd one out. So here, maybe they are thinking of an education-capable Tablet. Fact is Apple already has a reasonable foothold in the education market. Are Tablets eating at their market.

There are two concerns here if Apple takes this route. First, Apple products recently have been selling well to the consumer market–in which I’d include high-school age kids on up. I’m not sure what the IT folks think–and these are the ones in charge of the school infrastructure.

If Apple wants to ride its consumer wave, then an Apple education-capable Tablet would need to attract the older kids. So we’re talking maybe a small, Tablet convertible. Something that might even sell well in Asia. It would need enough umph though to play games and stay well connected. I’m not sure if they could pull this off and have the dreamed of 8hr battery life and so on. This would make more sense for a smaller device.

Anyway, like I mentioned at the beginning. These are all rumors. Rumors, rumors, rumors, that have all turned out to be false.

And it makes sense that the rumors are kicking up now that MacWorld is approaching in early Janurary 08.

Maybe we’ll see some leaked photos next. If so, I’ll really begin to believe.

Update: Ooops. I forgot one of the best features for an Apple MID–It could serve as a remote control with a live TV Guide built into it. It would be an  ideal companion for the Mini.

The Fall Intel Developer Forum is going on this week in San Franisco. Oh, how I wish I was there. Intel will be annoncing its plans for the Mobile Internet Devices (MIDs).

jkkmobile has a very short YouTube video of one prototype device from BenQ:

The devices run Linux, which make sense since we’re talking about low-cost devices. What about Vista? I imagine someone can create a MID that runs it, but it would probably require more storage and memory than a comparable Linux-based version and hence cost more. And if the user experiences are comparable (in terms of browsing the Internet, getting email, and so on), I can see people opting for a lower cost Linux-based unit.

In terms of consumer devices, MIDs might give UMPCs a run for their money. Sorry Microsoft, but that’s the way the dollar bill crumbles. Of course, we’re running into a value proposition challenge here. Can Microsoft and its ecosystem build out a network of applications that can rival the flat cost of a MID? At this point my eyes are on Intel and their platform from a hardware standpoint and Microsoft’s from the software side.

You can watch a live UStream.tv feed of Goordon Moore’s keynote here at 12:15 today (Tuesday the 18th):

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/events/idffall_2007/livecast1.htm

Here’s another video–this time from Intel–that even shows the ultra-small Silverthorne die outside of its casing.

Very cool.