by Jason Smith
When you're thirsty, it doesn't matter how much pizza you eat, you'll still be thirsty.
In the same way, making something of value, something that is good and appreciated by others, hits a spot inside you that money or watching movies can never make up for.
Good article here: http://mwunsch.tumblr.com/post/50588412660/on-google
about Google's incompetent management of the web.
I question, however, how long Google will have a stranglehold on the web for.
With many physical products, a large market share perpetuates consumer uptake and usage of that product. e.g. A car manufacturer can suggest spare parts will be easier to come by because they are the most popular model; When everyone else wears jeans you will probably wear them too because you will want to fit in; If everyone is using DVDs your laser disc player is pretty useless...
But what search engine you use to spy on a prospective date, read an obscure Wikipedia entry or simply use as the address bar (because you don't even realise that you're not meant to type the address into google and "oh look there's a space up the top where I'm meant to type the www stuff, all this time I had no idea") is different because everyone using the same search engine doesn't make it a better experience for everyone else... necessarily.
Consider these facts:
Mobile web browsing is still increasing.
Most people don't bother to change the default search engine on their devices.
People don't deliberately use Google. They use the little box that appears on their screen when their device turns on.
A lot of websites report that half their web traffic is mobile. And 3/4 of that is an Apple device; iPad or iPhone (oh and the iPod touch).
So that's something like 37% of traffic coming to your website through a device made by a company who's very ticked off at Google. Lots could change for Google at the flick of a switch.
Here's another little bit of interesting information. Remember when Apple changed the little search bar in mobile safari from saying "Google" (or whatever other search engine you had chosen) to just saying "Search"? No? You never even noticed? Well go check it out now.
Looks to me like someone wanted you to get in the habit of thinking about searching from your device, not searching via a search engine.
Trust me on the mobile web stats too. Heck, even this post was written on my iPhone from the couch. I would have used the iPad but it went flat.
...
Google buying Android was a defensive move. Google don't need Android to succeed so they can grow. They need it so they can 'not die'.
And if device manufacturers who install Android use Bing or someone else as the default search engine (as some have already started to do), Google are screwed.
I don't believe Google are cocky kings of the mountain who think they can never be dislodged. I think they know more than anyone how precarious their grip is as world wide information curation leader, and their position as biggest advertising company in the world is not guaranteed forever.
They'll never be a MySpace, but they need to make some good choices to not become a Yahoo.
Seriously. Anyone? Other than tech nerds who stare at their phone screen for way too long each day?
I run a fairly busy Facebook page and after Facebook's "fresh" new look came out noone has told me they liked it. Instead they complain they can't find the button they were looking for. And even I am annoyed that tasks I got in a rhythm with, now require me to have to relearn how to do them.
How much worse will it be for iOS users? I don't give a toss what the numbers in the press are each day. I see how many app downloads occur each day on Apple devices compared to Android and Apple is KILLING it. Most days at least 3-4 times as many iOS apps get downloaded of my main app. Sometimes it's only double. RARELY Android downloads are above iOS. Same with web traffic. Over 50% of my website's (not this site fyi) traffic is on mobile devices. And something like 80% of that is Apple devices.
And it's not like the site and app are targeted at Apple users. It's just a local site for everyone who lives in my City.
My point is, you may have heard in the press that Apple's sales are not as high as Android's. But whatever they need to do to sell more, the usability of their phone is not something that needs to change.
Turn an iPhone on and you have a grid of apps. Swipe left. Swipe right. You can't get lost.
Turn an Android phone on and you have more options than Tom Cruise.
Yay. Android is better because it can do more.
Except that isn't what makes something better. And being able to do more means people end up doing less because using the device is too tricky.
If iOS7 can keep the same simplicity and look fresher, then fine... bring it on. And I think that will be Jonathon Ive's goal.
But if you believe Android's operating system is better for a normal person's day to day use then you're smoking crack.
You may have noticed the extra step Facebook have added if you click a link in your newsfeed taking you to another website that isn't Facebook.
It could be that they genuinely want to warn you EVERY SINGLE TIME you try to leave Facebook about the perils of using the scary internet that they don't own.
Or perhaps there's been a genuine spike in deceptive websites that pretend to be Facebook and are tricking people into giving them their FB user credentials.
But I can't help but suspect that adding a hurdle to leaving Facebook might just keep people in their newsfeeds a little longer.
I expect to see Facebook verified sites sites coming soon. They'll have a little bit of extra tracking info on them to help Facebook ensure they're "safe". And conveniently Facebook might know just a little bit more about you and your surfing behaviour.
What would be interesting to see though would be Facebook ads embedded on non Facebook sites. If Facebook already know all about you, they'll be the best company to be able to serve up relevant ads, not just on Facebook, but wherever you travel. The more I think about it, the more I expect Facebook to launch an Adwords and Adsense competitor any day now.
Google should be nervous.
After debuting the new feature CHATHEADS at the launch of their new Android infection called Home, Facebook released an update to their iOS app, so now iPhone users like myself get to try their new weirdly named messaging interface.
And it's a winner.
Maybe the name's not that weird. Heck, Facebook and Twitter sounded like weird names 5 years ago.
Basically you now have a small unobtrusive messaging icon/disc/head that will float over your Facebook interface, and when you select it active conversations will expand.
You can easily ditch heads you're not talking with any more by sliding them to the bottom of the screen.
It's great as it doesn't interrupt your timeline or stalker browsing, and it's just downright cool.
I would love to see Apple embrace what Facebook are doing, confess their sins inasmuch as they lack the wisdom to build their own social network, and simply open up iMessage so it can integrate with Chatheads in a "baked into the operating system" kind of way.
Sure, it's giving Facebook some serious leverage, but who cares. A better user experience for a world addicted to checking their timelines and messages is better than holding onto a shred of hope that one day Apple will have a competing product.
I hope for all the Android users out there Google don't try to elbow Facebook off Android either.
I'm not about to switch to Android for the sake of Facebook Home... BUT, when I activate my sleeping phone I currently see a static picture (currently my son) for a few seconds, followed by a grid of icons with little red circles in their corners quietly asking for my attention.
If instead I was greated by a recent interesting FB post, with my app icons only a gesture away, that would be fine by me.
Would it means people would spend even more time on the dreaded "smartphone" thereby neglecting their nearby loved ones.
Probably.
Would you prefer we went back to using the TV as our primary method of ignoring nearby family?
I can remember as a kid my mum coming home from work bemoaning the latest upgrade to her computers at work. She did administrative type work for some government department in Perth, and was forced to use the latest version of Windows whatever running the latest version of Word or whatever it was people used back in the early 90's.
She was just a normal person trying to get her work done. She appreciated the magic of computers as much as the next person, but changing the software for the sake of it was rather distressing, and seemed unnecessary. Why, after you had finally learnt your way around the program and knew all the shortcuts would anyone want to change it?
It's now 2013 and I know more than one person who is still using Windows XP. They don't want to upgrade to anything new, not because they can't afford it, but because they place a greater value on knowing where the buttons they need are over having a shiny new interface.
I personally switched to a mac almost a year ago, having grown up on Windows machines. Even though I love my mac, I haven't been bothered to learn all the neat shortcuts and what have you because I just can't be bothered. I just want to get in, get my work done, and get out.
This may explain why sales of Windows 8 are so low. The people who may need to upgrade their Windows computers could "tolerate" Athe change involved with windows 7, because it felt like most things were in the same place. But sitting down to try Windows 8 hurts your brain, and most people are not going to be excited about learning it.
So onto the iPhone.
The tech nerds are all claiming the operating system is looking stale. They look to Facebook's new home screen app for Android, or all the widgets you can get for Android. It's spicier, it's different, it's new.
iOS (iPhone, iPad and iPod touch operating system) is apparently starting to feel dated and old apparently. It's too simple. It needs a rethink apparently.
Yeah maybe. But look at the stats for all those Android phones. Android devices collectively sell WAY more handsets than Apple, yet the amount of apps downloaded and used on Apple devices is much higher. Web traffic on Apple devices is much higher. Online purchases on Apple devices is much higher.
Why? Because when you turn on an iPhone or iPad it's easy to figure out what to do. You have a screen with little button thingies on it that you can press and they do stuff, or you can swipe and see some more icon thingies. If you get lost you press the one and only button that exists on the front of the hardware, and you're magically taken back to the familiar looking home screen.
If Apple can think of a simpler way for people to use their phone and work out what to do, then by all means change it. And if they just want to add a coat of polish (or remove a few coats as the case may be) to change the textures or style, then that won't hurt.
But all of these fancy re-imaginings (that you find on youtube) of what you can do on rectangular piece of glass miss the point of Apple. Apple has always sought to bring computing to the masses, not the geeks. That's why they developed the personal computer with a graphical interface and a mouse. That's why they made a portable music player with as few buttons as possible. And that's why they gave us the iPhone and iPad, with what is fast becoming the most loved and used computing operating system yet. It's simple, clean, and people have learned how to drive it. Schools all around the world are now teething their students on it.
Apple don't need to reinvent it. They might need a cheap version though... and an XL iPhone too, just for me.
Opinion articles bagging someone else's opinion article don't inspire me much usually. Nevertheless, new Apple employee Kevin Lynch has been derided by everyone's favourite tech/Apple/independent writer John Gruber as a potential bad hire, and indeed a bozo.
I have nothing to say on the validity of the hiring of Mr Lynch, nor any prophecies to make on his future success or demise.
I only wish to point out that to slam him for his past declarations of the validity of Flash, a product he was responsible for pushing, which turned out to be grossly inaccurate can hardly be considered meat for criticism and is actually inconsistent with a certain former Apple CEO's way of doing things.
One matter that springs to mind is the famous "7 inch tablets are DOA" line by Steve Jobs. It proved to be completely untrue, and in fact Apple's new 7.9" iPad Mini is now deemed by John Gruber to be "The Real iPad". But no-one suggests Steven Jobs was an unsuitable employee for Apple.
Why it would seem unusual for a leader in a company to engage in rhetoric in an attempt to sway public opinion, and ultimately demand and uptake, for a potentially very profitable division of its company, is beyond me.
I worked in sales for many years. Most sales people like to think their profession involves diagnosing a customer's needs/wants, and then offering them a suitable product.
But in reality, this only ever works to a point. If you are selling used cars, and you have a vehicle that is 80% suitable for a client, and your competitor has a product that is 100% suitable, are you really going to send them to your competitor and make no money at all?
In an ideal world of course you would, because you care about your fellow human more than you care about your own personal financial standings.
But I rarely saw it happen.
If Apple had had a 7" tablet earlier, they would have said how great they were and pushed theirs whole heartedly.
If Adobe had another standard up their sleeve to replace Flash then they would have pushed that instead.
And so it would appear Kevin Lynch is a regular guy. He tried to sell what he had.
