Though Microsoft has been uncharacteristically tight-lipped about the next version of Windows, tentatively codenamed Windows 7, last week at the Wall Street Journal’s D: All Things Digital conference the company gave the world a peek at one of its key new features – multi-touch technology.

Sound familiar? It should. It’s the same concept used in Apple’s iPhone and iPod Touch. Oh, and let’s not forget the trackpad gestures featured on the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro models.

But before rushing to accuse Microsoft of ripping off another Apple idea, I must point out that Microsoft demonstrated multi-touch technology at last year’s All Things Digital event with its tabletop “Surface” product. And according to Wikipedia, people outside of both Redmond and Cupertino have been experimenting with multi-technology for at least 25 years.

And there’s Microsoft’s problem. The one great new feature it tells us about, the one it’s using to build anticipation for the release of Windows 7 (promised to appear (cough) in the vicinity of early 2010), already is yesterday’s news.

Both Apple and Microsoft have products on sale today that use touch-screen gestures as part of the interface. The iPhone has been with us for nearly a year, while Microsoft’s Surface went on sale in April.

And who knows what new products will appear between now and when Windows 7 arrives?

I expect Apple to continue expanding its use of multi-touch technology. Its executives have stated publicly on several occasions the company’s intent of establishing the iPhone/iPod Touch as a new mobile computing platform -- a platform that also happens to run Mac OS X Leopard.

Leopard’s multi-touch capabilities mean that Apple can add the technology to existing products or incorporate it into new ones at will. Like a Mac tablet.

Just a week ago Jason O’Grady of ZDNet breathed new life into the years-old Mac tablet rumor. He cited an anonymous but reliable source that claimed Apple will introduce an “iTablet” in September or October.

Regardless of what Apple does and how long Microsoft has worked on this technology (the Surface started development back in 2001), hyping it over the next two years as some sort of brilliant innovation will only solidify the perception in the public’s mind that of Microsoft as a technology follower, not a leader.

And that will be the least of Microsoft’s problems. Although multi-touch is a very cool way to interact with a device, it is not suited for every purpose. It works well for the table-like Surface. It works very well for the small-screened iPhone. And I expect it will work well for tablet computers.

(Frankly I think Windows 7’s multi-touch could be the salvation of the Tablet PC, which at its introduction in 2002 Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates predicted would be “the most popular form of PC sold in America" within five years.)

But what about conventional laptop and desktop PCs?

The first hurdle people will face is that upgrading a PC to Windows 7 alone won’t give users multi-touch capabilities. You also need the hardware -- a touch screen designed to receive tactile input.

Beyond that, will multi-touch even make sense for people sitting at their desks using a computer at home or at work? I’m not sure people will want to use a standard PC that way. In fact, the fussy among us already detest fingerprints on their screens.

Maybe Apple was thinking this when it limited multi-touch technology on the MacBook Air to the trackpad.

In any case, by the time Windows 7 shows up multi-touch will be far from cutting edge tech. Were I running Microsoft, I’d start promoting features in Windows 7 that won’t look quite so passé in 2010. Unless of course they fear Apple will steal all their good ideas…

Posted by David Zeiler at 5:09 PM in Taunting Microsoft | Permalink | Comments (6)
                       

The dearth of personal database programs for the Mac has puzzled me for a long time.

While many people may never need (or think they need) a database app, nothing beats them for organizing and tracking large lists, catalogs of collections and other personal information.

I created database files years ago (in the original version of AppleWorks for the Apple II!) for my music and film collections, among other things. (I know iTunes serves as a de facto database for digital music, but my original file includes a lot of albums on vinyl and cassette that have not yet made it to my Mac.)

I still can access my ancient files with the Mac version of AppleWorks thanks to my trusty old MacLinkPlus translators. But Apple discontinued development of AppleWorks last August, so we’ll never see an Intel-native version.

Many Mac users with basic database needs searched for a replacement but came up empty.

Apple’s iWork? Nope, the suite features only a word processor (Pages), presentation (Keynote) and spreadsheet (Numbers).

Microsoft Office? Well, Office does offer a database program -- Access – but it’s exclusive to Windows and available only in pro-level versions.

Mac users could buy the venerable and acclaimed FileMaker Pro, but as a product aimed at professionals and businesses with a relatively hefty price tag ($299) it never made sense for casual users.

Enter Bento, a database app from the folks at FileMaker designed specifically for personal use. It lacks most of FileMaker’s fancier features, particularly the ability to share a database over a network, but for a reasonable $49 it provides most of the functionality an individual user would require.

FileMaker is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple Inc., which helps explain why Bento has the look and feel of Apple’s iWork and iLife applications.

And it doesn’t just look like an Apple application – Bento integrates with other Apple programs as much as any component of iLife or iWork.

Case in point: On first launch Bento imports any data you have in iCal and Address Book.

Any changes made in Bento immediately are reflected in the source program and vice versa. In other words, whenever you add someone to Address Book, that entry shows up automatically the next time you launch Bento. If you make a change to a calendar in Bento, it appears in iCal.

You can create new databases (”Libraries”) from scratch or import them from CSV (comma-separated value) files. If you’ve been using Microsoft Excel to store lists, you can export them as CSV files for import into Bento.

Bento also copies many interface features from OS X and Apple applications. Smart Collections, for example, work just like Smart Playlists in iTunes. For any given Library, you can create a Collection to include only records that meet a specific set of criteria. If you add a new record that meets those criteria, it automatically shows up in the Smart Collection.

Stepping beyond the capabilities of the databases of yore, Bento offers more than mere data storage and management. In addition to text and numbers, you can include media files such as photos and video, hot links to Web sites and links to related files elsewhere on your hard drive (such as Microsoft Word documents).

Other nice touches include optional fields for assigning star ratings or creating a multiple-choice pop-up menu.

Adding fields is as easy as drag and drop in Form View, which shows one record at a time. Want to get rid of a field? Drag it out of the window and it disappears in a puff of smoke, Mac OS X-style. You can rearrange the fields on the page any way you like, and can easily resize or align them.

If you want to see your data in list form, Table View shows it in labeled columns (as it would appear in a spreadsheet like Excel.)

The Advanced Search function provides traditional database functionality, allowing you to find all the movies in your film collection from the 1980s starring Emilio Estevez, for instance.

Although solid and impressive for a 1.0 version, Bento could improve in a few areas.

My biggest complaint is that despite all the customization available in Form View, Bento offers no option for printing multiple records on one sheet of paper. Table View will print a list, but if you have one or more fields with a lot of text that won’t do the job.

Another oddity is in how Bento saves files, or rather doesn’t save them. Databases don’t exist as standalone files; all of your Libraries appear on launch in a Mac OS X-like sidebar called the Source List.

Somehow every change you make is saved to the database with no user interaction. Although it seems to work fine, I find the lack of a Save function mildly disconcerting. The Bento User Guide does at least tell users how to back up their data.

Finally, although Bento is not a system-resource hog, its advanced integration with Mac OS X means it runs only on 10.5 Leopard, the current version of OS X. Those with Macs incapable of upgrading to Leopard will need to buy a new Mac before they can run Bento.

Overall, I recommend Bento for Mac users who have need of a database application. FileMaker has created an exceptionally Mac-friendly, easy-to-use database program for regular folk, and just in the nick of time.

Posted by David Zeiler at 11:17 AM in Software by Apple | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

Forrester Research presumes to know what sort of products Apple will introduce over the next five years. On Thursday it issued a report predicting Apple’s products will focus on digital entertainment in the home.

Among the things Forrester foresees from Apple by the year 2013 are, ahem, a networked digital photo frame and a clock radio.

I won’t dispute the likelihood of Apple concentrating on networked devices in the home, but seriously, a clock radio?

It occurs to me that given Apple’s legendary veil of secrecy over its research and development, any Apple watcher could make an equally valid set of predictions.

In that spirit, I predict Apple will reach for the sky in the next five years. A few of the products I imagine brewing in the Cupertino labs:

iMod
A successor to the iPhone and iPod, the iMod (short for iModule) will be a tiny electronic device implanted in the user’s head, where it will interface with his or her brain. Thought impulses will control the iMod, which will utilize a 4G wireless network to connect to the rest of the world. The iMod will be able to stream GPS data, e-mail, Web pages, music and videos all directly into the user’s head, eliminating the possibility of disturbing others nearby. Talk about getting a song stuck in your head.

The device also will be capable of making telepathic phone calls, but the user will need to take care to screen stray thoughts. Chronic liars beware. Only Apple-certified surgeons will have authorization to insert an iMod or change its battery.

Virtual Apple Store
Why go to the mall when you can shop in the virtual Apple Store? Yes, the boring old online Apple Store will get a serious upgrade, transforming it into something more akin to a Sims game. In 2013 your avatar will stroll though a simulated version of a brick-and-mortar Apple Store, interacting with concierge avatars, sales avatars and genius avatars (smartly color-coded so you can tell them apart). However, only those with an active .Mac account will be able to create shopper avatars.

Holographic technology
Apple finally will deliver holographic technology for the rest of us. A new addition to the iLife suite, iDimensions, will use the iSight HT cameras built into all new Macs to generate holograms. If Mac buyers choose to upgrade their optical drives to the new Apple HoloDrive (just $499 extra!), they’ll be able to burn their holograms onto special disks that will be very expensive and very hard to find. A few years later Apple will introduce the HoloPod, a portable holographic projector. Within two years Apple will own 70 percent the exploding holographic market.

Have a fun and safe Memorial Day weekend.

Posted by David Zeiler at 5:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

A tiny tech company based in Landover, Md. stirred the Mac blogosphere yesterday by filing a lawsuit against Apple over, of all things, the use of the name “Mighty Mouse.”

Man & Machine Inc., a private company with 20 employees, has sold a specialty mouse (it’s waterproof and chemical resistant) under the name “Mighty Mouse” since March 2004.

Apple, of course, introduced its own “Mighty Mouse” in August 2005. Trouble followed for M&M, which soon discovered its product vanishing from Web searches.

Because M&M started using the name “Mighty Mouse” first, it has a valid trademark claim. Hence the lawsuit.

Since Apple seems to get in frequent legal scrapes over trademarked names, you’d think they’d start checking these things more carefully.

Remember the iPhone troubles last year with Cisco? Or the “Rendezvous” networking technology that had to be renamed “Bonjour” in 2005 after a conflict with Tibco Software of Palo Alto, Calif.? And do I even need to bring up the long-running Apple Corps skirmishes with the Beatles?

But Apple might have an excuse this time. Knowing “Mighty Mouse” is a famous crime-fighting cartoon figure, Apple simply sought permission to use the name from the company that owned the rights to the cartoon – CBS Corp.

CBS agreed and licensed the term “Mighty Mouse” to Apple for use with its computer product. CBS Corp. and its subsidiary, CBS Operations are named as co-defendants in the suit.

Either no one bothered to research for a pre-existing use of the name or someone along the way decided a company as small as M&M wouldn’t dare fight such corporate behemoths as Apple and CBS.

Far from frivolous, the M&M suit makes a strong case. Under U.S. trademark law, first use of a trademark generally carries the day. M&M could have saved itself a lot of trouble, however, had it filed for the “Mighty Mouse” trademark in 2004.

Instead, it no doubt contacted Apple to complain. Apple no doubt contacted its friends at CBS and lo and behold – CBS filed last July to trademark the term “Mighty Mouse” to describe a computer-pointing device.

When that trademark was published for opposition in December, M&M filed its own trademark application, citing first use as the basis for its counterclaim. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has yet to rule on the dispute.

The long-established existence of the cartoon character – Mighty Mouse debuted in 1942 – may be crucial to the outcome of the case.

Often companies in very different, non-overlapping businesses are permitted to use the same trademark. The main issue is whether customers of either company could be confused. Certainly no one would confuse the cartoon character with a computer mouse.

But very well known trademarks can fall under a broader rule that protects against another party’s use of the mark if it “causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the mark.” This rule holds even if the other party is using the mark in a completely different business.

In other words, CBS could argue the fame of “Mighty Mouse” should prevent its unauthorized use by almost anyone else for almost any commercial purpose. If the court agrees, Apple wins by its having licensed the name from CBS.

If the court sees things M&M’s way, Apple will suffer more than CBS. In the suit M&M asks for a permanent injunction against Apple to prevent its use of the term “Mighty Mouse,” and a requirement that Apple “destroy” all products and packages bearing the name.

M&M also asks for the usual court costs and attorney’s fees, but the damages, if awarded, would amount to a paltry $75,000.

Then Apple will need to rechristen its mouse. If Steve Jobs wants to stick with cartoon mice, he has some less-than-ideal choices:

The Jerry Mouse (of Tom & Jerry) A long shot. It sounds slapped together.
The Mickey Mouse Steve has the clout to license name. Ears could serve as buttons.
The Minnie Mouse Better suited for a throat lozenge-sized mouse.
The Fievel Mouse Makes no sense, but that’s part of its appeal.
The Danger Mouse My personal favorite. Would appeal to college students.

Posted by David Zeiler at 8:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
                       

It’s almost as if Apple had a long-range secret plan to lull Microsoft into a false sense of security while it quietly rebuilt its ability to compete for OS turf.

This week research firm NPD Group announced that Apple dominated the U.S. retail market for high-end computers in the first quarter of 2008, selling two out of every three PCs priced over $1,000.

Echoing trends seen in other market data, NPD said Mac laptop sales saw year-over-year growth over 50 percent, while desktop sales grew 45 percent. During the same period the Windows PC market struggled with zero growth in laptop sales and a 25 percent decline in desktop sales.

NPD estimates the Mac’s overall U.S. market share at 13.8 percent, up from 9.5 percent a year ago.

Before I continue, some caveats: the NPD data dos not include online sales, which is how Dell sells most of its PCs. Nor does it include enterprise sales, where Apple has a negligible presence. And it must be noted that Apple has but one Mac offering in the sub-$1,000 category: the Mac Mini, a small computer that sells without a monitor, keyboard or mouse.

Nevertheless, the NPD data makes it clear that U.S. consumers willing to spend a little more for a computer are choosing the Mac over Windows PCs in rapidly climbing numbers.

Now add this news to last week’s announcement from Microsoft that Office 2008 for the Mac is “selling faster than any previous version of Office for Mac in 19 years.” Since its January launch, the product has sold at three times the rate of the previous Mac release, Office 2004.

The tremendous uptick in sales for the latest Mac version of Office closely mirrors the increase in Mac unit sales since 2004 – Apple sells three times as many Macs now as it did then, with the numbers mounting steadily every quarter.

Until recently, the rise in the Mac’s market share was portrayed merely as stabilization of the Mac OS platform. But the accelerating rate of the Mac’s share and especially the more affluent consumers it continues to lure from Windows is bound to take a toll on Microsoft eventually.

As more consumers buy Macs over PCs, Microsoft sells fewer copies of Windows. True enough, some Mac owners (particularly switchers) do buy retail copies of Windows to run alongside Mac OS X, but not all – probably not even a majority.

Also true: Microsoft makes a boatload of money from Office for the Mac. Still, a significant shift in the Mac/Windows dynamic would have an impact beyond the dollars spent on software.

Think about it. The Mac’s gains so far already have destroyed the psychology that developed in the 1990s that Windows is the only reasonable choice for the average PC buyer.

Thanks to the success of the iPod in establishing Apple as the brand of cool tech, as well as the company’s ever-growing retail presence in upscale shopping malls, PC shoppers are far more likely to consider buying a Mac today than they were three years ago.

Once Apple got the Mac back on the public’s radar screen, its ability to deliver on consumer expectations fed the momentum. The Mac has established itself as not just an alternative to Windows, but now for many a preferable alternative.

What intrigues me are the consequences of the Mac as a legitimate competitor to Windows in the marketplace for the first time in over 15 years (one could argue the first time ever).

I don’t envision a day when Apple vanquishes Microsoft from the OS battlefield, but that won’t be necessary.

If Apple succeeds in winning 20 to 25 percent of the market, Microsoft would lose one of its key assets – the leverage that comes from holding a near-monopoly on PC operating systems. For years Microsoft used that power to bully rivals and promote its own technologies over that of would-be competitors (think Internet Explorer).

Even if Apple’s market share levels off in the low 20’s, it would seriously hamper Microsoft’s ability to impose its will on the computer users both in the home and the workplace.

And what about the workplace? As the Mac becomes the computer of choice in more homes and on more college campuses, more young people entering the work force will question the primacy of Windows in the business world.

Although Apple has so far declined to target business customers, the popularity of the iPhone among executives along with changing expectations of the iPod generation could result in the Mac taking inadvertent bites out of the enterprise market.

Such a turn of events would start eating into Microsoft’s profits. With Apple nibbling at the Windows hegemony and Google jeopardizing the dominance of Office with Google Apps, Microsoft could face threats to both of its cash cows. (Office and Windows comprise about 70 percent of Microsoft revenues).

Not that Microsoft will disappear any time soon, but it would be nice to see them get the wake-up call that mediocrity will not carry the day forever. True competition in the areas Microsoft has dominated for over 20 years would reward consumers with better products from all parties.

Innovation – something about which Apple knows a thing or two -- might matter again.

Posted by David Zeiler at 2:21 PM in Mac market share, Taunting Microsoft | Permalink | Comments (16)
                       

Despite all the attention the media has lavished on the iTunes Store, CDs still dominate music purchases by a huge margin, according to a study released Monday by the Pew Internet and American Life Project.

The survey, conducted by phone last August, focused on how the Internet influences consumer purchases of music, cell phones and houses.

The Pew report says 82 percent of music buyers still prefer the old-fashioned CD. An eyebrow-raising 62 percent said they purchased all their music on CD, with 20 percent more saying most of their purchases were CDs. Only 12 percent said all (5 percent) or most (7 percent) of their purchases were via digital download.

How can this be? Just last month research firm NPD declared Apple the Number One U.S. retailer in January with 19 percent of the market. (Wal-Mart was second with 15 percent and Best Buy third with 13 percent.) Furthermore, the NPD report said digital downloads made up nearly a third of music purchases in January.

We keep reading news stories about plummeting CD sales and rising downloads. It doesn’t seem to add up, but I think there’s an explanation.

First let me say I believe Pew’s data is solid. In fact, it almost perfectly mirrors the RIAA’s 2007 consumer profile statistics. That data shows CDs comprising 82.6 percent of sales, compared with 11.2 percent for digital downloads.

The RIAA also supplies annual data, which helps put the digital numbers in perspective. In 2006, digital downloads comprised just 6.7 percent of music sales. That means digital download sales jumped 67 percent in one year. As recently as 2004 digital downloads made up less than 1 percent of sales.

I suspect part of the reason the Pew survey seems at odds with recent trends is that it was conducted six months before the NPD report. Remember, it was only in June 2007 that Apple ascended to Number Three among music retailers (again, according to NPD data).

Back then Wal-Mart led with 15.8 percent of the market, followed by Best Buy with 13.8 percent. Apple had just 10 percent. That means from June to January Apple nearly doubled its market share.

I imagine the Pew researchers would likely get significantly different results were they to conduct a music-buying survey this month.

While CD sales may continue to outpace digital downloads for some time, the digital revolution cannot be denied. Eventually digital downloads will surpass CD sales, just as CD sales overtook vinyl LP sales in the 1980s.

Research organization In-Stat said last month that digital sales will account for 40 percent of all music sold worldwide by 2012, up from 10 percent in 2007.

Yet another NPD report issued in February estimated that 1 million consumers abandoned the CD in 2007. From the press release: “In fact, 48 percent of U.S. teens did not purchase a single CD in 2007, compared to 38 percent in 2006.”

Even the Pew survey hints at the digital future of music retailing. A chart that breaks down purchasing habits by age group shows younger consumers moving rapidly away from CDs in favor of digital downloads.

In the 18-to-36 age group, 27 percent said they bought digital downloads at least half the time. Only 13 percent of those in the 36-to-50 age group said the same; for the over 51 crowd, the number fell to 6 percent.

Since the iTunes Store holds about 70 percent of the worldwide legal download market, Apple stands to reap great rewards from the inexorable move of music consumers -- led by the youngest among us -- away from CDs to digital downloads.

Posted by David Zeiler at 5:41 AM in iTunes/iTunes Store | Permalink | Comments (5)
                       

Apple must have planned it this way.
Today yet another deal to sell the iPhone surfaced, this one with a current partner, France Telecom’s Orange. Followers of the iPhone’s adventures will recall that Orange is the official iPhone carrier in France.

The non-stop publicity the current series of announcements has generated recalls last year’s six-month hypefest leading up to the iPhone’s debut at the end of June. Apple is expected to unveil a fresh version of the iPhone within weeks.

The new deal includes an assortment of countries in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and even the Caribbean. In a one-sentence press release, Orange named the following countries: Austria, Belgium, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Jordan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Switzerland.

Orange also mentioned its African markets, which includes 14 countries and territories in addition to Egypt. Those areas are Guinea Konakri, Guinea Bissau, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Botswana, the Central African Republic, Cameroon, Senegal, Niger, Mali, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius and Réunion Island.

In a note to clients, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster noted the Orange deal brings the total number of countries where the iPhone is due to appear this year to 42, representing a total market of 575 million potential customers.

Munster said he had “increased confidence” that Apple would hit his previous estimate of 12.9 million iPhones sold this year and repeated his prediction of sales of 45 million iPhones in 2009. That estimate is predicated on Apple adding China and Japan at some point, which would nearly double the iPhone’s potential market to 1.1 billion customers.

Keen observers will note that the Orange deal includes a few countries already covered by deals with other carriers; apparently Italian iPhone buyers will not be alone in having a choice of wireless service.

This bodes well for U.S. customers who dream of using the iPhone on a network other than AT&T’s. If Apple sees that offering a choice of carrier helps sales, we should see the policy expand to more countries.

Although I don’t see it happening this year (or even next year) because of Apple’s exclusive arrangement with AT&T, eventually Apple will want to offer the iPhone in the United States through a second carrier. More availability will equal more market share growth. It’s a no-brainer.

Posted by David Zeiler at 5:44 PM in iPhone | Permalink | Comments (0)
                       

For the second time this month, Apple has chosen strategy over principle.

After losing NBC Universal’s content from the iTunes Store in a much-publicized tussle over variable pricing last fall, Apple today announced a deal with HBO to offer many of its most popular shows at two price points.

Customers can buy some shows at the usual $1.99: “Sex and the City,” “Flight of the Conchords,” and “The Wire” (the brainchild of former Baltimore Sun reporter David Simon). But others cost $1 more: “The Sopranos,” “Deadwood,” and “Rome.”

This follows last week’s announcement that Apple will offer the iPhone through two wireless carriers in Italy, breaking with its policy of one carrier per country.

Apple did not explain why it made an exception for HBO on pricing. In the iPhone’s case, Apple COO Timothy Cook had forewarned back in January that Apple is “not married to any business model.”

I view the Italy iPhone deals and the HBO deal as signs that Apple – and specifically CEO and head guru Steve Jobs -- increasingly is willing to sacrifice its historically stubborn adherence to philosophical ideals in favor of pragmatic solutions.

Perhaps the most infamous example of this was Apple’s enduring commitment to the one-button mouse. After years of grumbling from large numbers of Mac users Apple finally relented in 2005 with the Mighty Mouse.

Not that Apple is wrong to stand on principle – Jobs’ legendary insistence on ease of use in all his products has paid off in the success of the iPod and the resurgence of the Mac – but when an ironclad policy becomes counterproductive, the company needs to change it.

After all these years, Apple finally is getting better at knowing when to dig in its heels and when to be flexible.

That said, the HBO deal raises other issues.

One major question is whether Apple will consider variable pricing for content from other networks, or for music supplied by the major labels. You can bet that each content provider will ask for some kind of flexibility when its contract renews. And Apple will have a tough time saying no now.

I think Apple should strongly consider allowing some variable pricing at the iTunes Store. Such a minor change would scarcely befuddle music and video customers well versed in the ways of retail.

And variable pricing doesn’t have to mean lots of higher-priced content. Frankly, I’d like to see lower prices on some of iTunes’ routine fare. How about 99 cents for episodes of “Bewitched”? Or even “Hannah Montana”? (as if parents haven’t got every word of dialogue memorized already from the incessant reruns on the Disney Channel) For that matter, what about cheap TV episode rentals?

Another question is whether Apple and NBC Universal will kiss and make up now that Apple has compromised on pricing with HBO. Eddy Cue, Apple’s vice president of iTunes, told the Associated Press that NBC is now the only major channel not offering shows through iTunes.

But NBC wanted more than variable pricing. It wanted Apple to build some sort of anti-pirating technology into its iPods to prevent them from playing illegal content. Not surprisingly Apple balked.

According to a technology blog on the New York Times Web site, Microsoft agreed to “explore” content filtering on the Zune while eating the variable pricing – it will charge $1.99 for each episode, as does iTunes.

While Apple might be open to a compromise with NBC Universal on pricing, it does not share NBC’s views on anti-pirating schemes. Jobs discovered first-hand how easily iTunes’ Digital Rights Management could be broken and has pushed the record labels to sell their music without DRM. Approximately 2 million of the more than 6 million songs on the iTunes Store are DRM-free.

Reconciliation, though both companies would benefit, appears unlikely in the near future.

Finally, I see the HBO deal as another piece of Apple’s overall video puzzle. As Apple adds more desirable video content to the iTunes Store, it quietly adds value to its portable video players (primarily the iPod Touch and iPhone) but also to the underestimated Apple TV.

Apple’s video hardware, coupled with its growing stable of movie rentals and the caliber of content HBO brings, has created the embryo of a video ecosystem that someday could grow as formidable as its music empire.

Posted by David Zeiler at 6:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
                       

The long wait to find out which countries will get the iPhone next ended dramatically over the past week with a flurry of announcements that should have the device on sale in 26 more nations by year’s end.

Not that you can’t buy an iPhone almost anywhere in the world already. But those unlocked iPhones are unauthorized -- purchased primarily in the United States for resale in places with demand but no supply.

In its past several earnings conference calls, Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer has described this worldwide “grey market” not as a problem for Apple but as an opportunity, a demonstration of extraordinary demand for the product.

While Apple makes a profit from iPhones that end up in the grey market, it would make more by selling them to customers in those countries via a cellular partner along with a service contract.

Perhaps that’s why we’re seeing such a large number of countries on Apple’s iPhone schedule – the longer it takes Apple to set up its international iPhone distribution network, the more money it loses from the lucrative revenue-sharing deals it makes with the carriers.Depending upon how the iPhone is priced, grey markets may continue to thrive in many places. But a legitimate iPhone should take back the bulk of sales in most countries.

So just who is getting the iPhone this year? Canada made the list when Rogers Communications announced its deal with Apple last week.

On Tuesday U.K. -based Vodafone – the world’s largest mobile carrier – said it would be selling the iPhone in 10 countries by the end of 2008.

And yesterday America Movil SAB, Latin America’s largest wireless carrier with 37 percent of the market, announced plans to “bring the iPhone to its Latin American operations,” which includes 15 countries and Puerto Rico.

Expect the list to keep growing, as reports of several unconfirmed deals also surfaced this week. Yesterday the Swiss newspaper Le Matin said that mobile carrier Swisscom had forged a deal with Apple to bring the iPhone to Switzerland this summer.

And France Telecom CFO Gervais Pellissier hinted during a conference call that his company, owner of the Orange network, is in talks with Apple to sell the iPhone in countries besides France. Two prime suspects are Spain and Poland, but Pellissier said the discussions extend to more than just two countries.
On top of all that Apple also announced that in Italy, Vodafone will not have exclusive rights to the iPhone, breaking its policy of one country, one carrier. Vodafone will share the privilege with Telcom Italia TIM. Some suspect the Australia deal also may not be exclusive, but that is not yet confirmed.

But the Italy situation alone marks a major shift in strategy for Apple. Here we have proof that -- at least with the iPhone -- Apple is willing to break with its traditional stubbornness and pursue whatever business model works best in a given situation.

What we don’t know is how much (if any) shared revenue Apple will get in a country with multiple carriers. Until now, Apple had used the exclusivity as a bargaining chip to obtain a percentage of revenue from the service contracts.

We also don’t know if this new willingness to experiment means Apple itself will start selling unlocked versions of the iPhone, at least in countries where Apple considers it practical.

What we do know is that Apple’s global iPhone strategy has kicked in to high gear. The countries lined up so far constitute a huge chunk of the worldwide market, which should accelerate sales substantially.

And then factor in the impact of the 3G iPhone everyone expects Apple to announce next month. Whoa.

Posted by David Zeiler at 12:30 PM in iPhone | Permalink | Comments (8)
                       

If you’re shopping for a computer with a good balance of features, performance and price, check out a Mac. And if solid tech support is a major concern, your choice is even clearer – Apple’s support tops all competitors.

So says Consumer Reports in its annual computer-buying extravaganza (June issue). The latest data continues the trend, as it has the past few years, of overall praise for Apple’s line of Mac laptops and desktops an in particular for its customer support.

On tech support issues, Apple stands out. Its reader score for laptops is 83 out of 100 (meaning it solved the problem 83 percent of the time), well ahead of Lenovo’s 66 and Dell’s 60.

Apple beats its rivals by an even greater degree in the desktop category. Its score of 81 percent led the field by an embarrassingly large margin; second-place Dell (56 percent) trailed by 25 points, just ahead of Gateway (54 percent).

Not that Consumer Reports has been chugging Steve Jobs’ Kool-Aid. As it has done often, CR criticized Apple for its brief 90 days of free tech support compared with a year for most other PC makers.

Because of that, as well as the above-average service Apple customers get with paid support plans, the magazine advises Mac buyers purchase an AppleCare plan.

Consumer Reports also points out, however, that all Mac owners can get free tech support at the Genius Bar in Apple’s retail stores, which CR says solved problems an impressive 90 percent of the time. But the customer is responsible for the cost of any required repairs.

However, the CR piece misleads a bit when it describes the Genius Bar as “walk-in support.” Yes, you can walk in to any Apple Store with a Mac problem but you can’t consult with a Mac Genius unless you’ve made a reservation.

The only truly bad news for Apple appears in the main article, in the “Brand Repair history” survey chart. While Apple’s desktops boast the fewest repairs – 12 percent versus 17 percent for its closest PC competitors – Apple’s laptops sit at the bottom of their category.

According to the CR survey, 23 percent of Mac laptops required repair or had a serious problem. While that’s not so far from Lenovo’s category leading 20 percent, Apple should take note that the quality control of its laptop line could stand improvement.

Elsewhere in the main article, in which CR makes its general recommendations, both Mac laptops and desktops earn high marks.

In the 15.4-inch “workhorse” laptop category, the MacBook Pro was the magazine’s top choice: “The Apple weighed the least and had the best battery life among the 15-inch models.”

The beefier 17-inch MacBook Pro earned top honors in the “Best Desktop replacement category despite its much higher price relative to its competition (it costs $1,000 more than the next cheapest laptop in that category – a Sony Vaio VGN-AR770).

Meanwhile the newest member of the MacBook family, the MacBook Air, managed to take second in the “Best Lightweight laptops” category on the strength of its exceptionally low weight (3 pounds), strong battery life and slim form factor. The CR editors apparently decided those characteristics trumped the Air’s higher price and missing features (no CD/DVD drive or Ethernet port).

Here’s how CR assesses the Air: “This somewhat pricey, ultra-thin ultra-portable won’t replace your everyday laptop, but the generous keyboard, touchpad technology, and small size make it worth considering. The compromises are in performance and ease of loading and unloading data.”

On the desktop side, the Mac appears absent at first, but it turns out Consumer Reports has added a third Apple-inspired category: all-in-ones.

CR says the best inexpensive all-in-one is the 20-inch iMac (“excellent performance and good ergonomics”) -- and that was before last week’s processor upgrade. Going from a 2.0 gigahertz Intel Core 2 Duo to a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo, the 20-inch iMac represents an even better value now.

The 24-inch iMac was ranked behind the HP TouchSmart IQ775 (who comes up with these names?), but that model’s processor upgrade to a 3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo from 2.4 GHz enhances its value quite a bit, too.

Curiously, the Mac Pro got no mention in the “high-end” desktop category, perhaps because it’s not aimed at ordinary consumers but rather video and graphics professionals.

Overall, this year’s CR report card looks as more favorably upon the Mac than ever. That’s the sort of positive reinforcement that could encourage more potential Windows users to switch in the months ahead, maintaining the Mac’s market share growth momentum.

Posted by David Zeiler at 5:06 AM in MacBook, iMac | Permalink | Comments (9)
                       

Despite the sea of red flags that accompanied the public debut of Miami-based Mac clone maker Psystar Corporation, the company appears to be for real. This week customers have reported delivery of working Psystar clones, and several tech sites have posted first impressions.

That brings us back to the questions people were asking when Psystar’s sudden appearance two weeks ago first sent the Mac blogosphere into a frenzy: does buying from Psystar make sense?

At first it may seem that way. What’s not to love about a $399 computer that runs Mac OS X? Oh, let me count the ways….

Let’s begin with the price. You don’t get Leopard with a $399 Psystar “Open Computer,” that’s $155 extra. Now we’re up to $554.

You don’t get FireWire, either, which is standard on all Macs. You can add three FireWire ports for another $50, though. That puts you at $604.

Built-in wireless networking? It’s standard on the Mac Mini (which starts at $599) and iMac models, but an extra $90 on the Psystar. That raises the cost to $694.

How about the iLife suite, free with every Mac? Not on a Psystar. You’ll have to buy it for $79 if you want it.

And unlike the $1,199 20-inch iMac, Psystar clones don’t come with a monitor. Unless you have a spare monitor to attach, that’s another added expense. The Open Computer doesn’t even come with a mouse or keyboard (though neither does the Mini).

Suddenly that cheap clone isn’t quite as cheap as you thought.

To be fair, the Psystar has some beefier hardware than the Mac Mini: a faster CPU, twice the RAM and a much larger, faster hard drive. Specs like that help when it comes to performance, which is where the Psystar shines.

Two tech sites, Engadget and ZDNet, have already posted benchmarks on Psystar machines that arrived as ordered. The Open Computer performed about as well as a MacBook laptop in the Engadget tests.

The folks at ZDNet compared the Psystar to a Mac mini, the closest Apple equivalent. The Psystar beat the Mac mini in every hardware test ZDNet ran, although they added some options to both machines to make them comparably priced ($740 for the Psystar and $799 for the Mini).

But beyond the basic price-performance equation, potential Psystar customers need to consider the long-term consequences of owning hardware Apple has not blessed.

If you need technical support, you will need to get it from Psystar. Apple surely won’t get involved.

When it comes to system updates, forget it. Psystar has disabled the Software Update feature on its clones probably to prevent “bricking” in the event an Apple update disagrees with the unauthorized hardware.

And that just scratches the surface of the myriad compatibility problems one could encounter.

The Engadget review has a list of clone oddities, such as its outrageously loud fan and the inability of the Apple System Profiler to detect such things as the amount of RAM, the graphics card or the machine’s audio capabilities.

I would advise careful consideration to ordinary computer users who see Psystar as a way to obtain a Mac inexpensively. I don’t think the money saved is worth the potential headaches.

But for technophiles and hobbyists – the sort of people who think building a PC from scratch is fun – Psystar’s clones should be great. Such people can work around any technical limitations they encounter, and should understand all the risks up front.

And finally, there’s Apple itself. It has remained dead silent on the issue. Will it continue to look the other way or are its lawyers now huddling over the details of an impending lawsuit? Even if Psystar were on solid legal ground, a lawsuit from Apple would be no picnic.

Proceed with caution.

Posted by David Zeiler at 1:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (10)