Kindle for iPhone - Great App, but not a Primary Reading Device

Amazon recently introduced a Kindle application for the iPhone, and will reportedly be creating a similar app for other mobile platforms in the near future. I think this is an awesome idea, but as I've said in a previous post, this will not become popular as a primary reading device.

Why do I like it? Reference. I'm not going to buy the latest great novel and read it on my tiny phone, but I did purchase the complete works of Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare. I might also buy a French/English Dictionary, and other reference books that I would find use for while on the road and away from my computer, kindle device, or a physical book.

But like most free apps, I see a surge of downloads once it's been released, followed by little usage. This will primarily find continued use from people who like to use it as a reference library, or those who own a Kindle and iPhone, and like having access to their kindle purchases without toting the device with them at all times.

Being the consumer technology geek I am, I will be both types of people once I can justify the purchase of a Kindle.

iTunes Pass, and why it WON'T work

EMI announced a new service with iTunes called the iTunes Pass. Essentially, it gives you temporary access to an artist's library. While I think Apple should be investigating it's options in terms of subscription based services on top of pay-per-song, I think this is a horrible start.

The pilot program is a pass for Depeche Mode. The terms aren't exactly clear, but it seems to involve a 15 week pass to Depeche Mode's upcoming content for $18.99. No old content. Just the upcoming album, plus a few singles and videos. For twice the cost of the album itself.

You get to keep the content, but let's not kid ourselves; this is the "deluxe version" of an album presented as subscription access to trick people into thinking they're getting more bang for their buck. While die hard DM fans will probably bite, I don't see any success coming out of this gimmick.

iTunes marketing seems to be losing its touch.

iPhone and Kindle; Apples and Oranges

With Google's Book Project going mobile, a lot of media outlets and blogger are trying to pass off the idea that the iPhone could actually be considered a competitor in the eReader market (1,2,3). This has no chance of happening for the following two reasons:

Battery life - I don't know about you, but when I'm reading a book, I usually read for an hour or two. Do you think your iPhone or Google Android based phone has enough juice to continuously power the display for that long? The Kindle consumes very little power, giving you days (not hours) of reading time.

Screen size - You can get away with video on a phone, but no one wants to read that much text on a 3.5 inch or smaller screen. Add the back-lit screen, and your eyes are going to tire quickly. Kindles paper ink technology means no glare, and the screen is about the size of a paperback page.

While I'm sure we'll see great sales for iPhone eReader app developers, we won't see any drop in marketshare from Amazon's Kindle. Avid book readers who are thinking of going digital want something that still maintains the legibility, capacity, and sustain of an actual book. Mobile apps are going to see high sales, followed by little usage.

It's safe to say that phones aren't going to make any significant strides in digitizing print industries unless they can tackle those obstacles. While I think the kindle is overpriced for the features it offers (take away the wireless feature, have it sync to your computer, and they could be offering it for a whole lot less), it's the best bet technology has in directly porting the written word to a screen.

A Magazine's Effect on Search Traffic Inspires an iPhone App

http://adage.com/digitalnext/article?article_id=134258

“When 2-and-a-half-year-old start-up NearbyNow noticed demand for women's clothing and accessories spiked up without fail around the eighth to the 10th day of each month, it decided to investigate. After some research, it zeroed in on the trigger: Lucky magazine. NearbyNow is in the online business of locating the closest retail outlet that stocks merchandise shoppers are searching for -- anything from a snowman cookie jar on Oprah's favorite list to a Prada bag. It locates the things you want based on your search query of a product with a specific location. It's a concierge service of sorts and even has a call center that makes sure the item you want is in stock at the store and then confirms it's there, or not there, via e-mail. When the shopping magazine, which catalogs the latest clothing, shoes, handbags, sunglasses and makeup, hits the newsstands, queries go up. Way up. (Yes, it turns out the youth still read print.) So Scott Dunlap, president-CEO of NearbyNow, took his findings to Lucky several months ago and struck a partnership with the Conde Nast-owned title. Now the two are set to launch an iPhone application that brings the geo-locating concierge service to the mobile handset. Every product featured in the magazine will have a corollary in the iPhone app, which means iPhone-toting fashionistas can dial into the Lucky app and see if their nearby retail outlet has their object of their desire in stock, in their size and in the color that matches their favorite nail color.”

iLife 09: First Impressions

I have to say, overall I'm impressed with the majority of the new features of the new iLife suite:

iPhoto

What I love: The face recognition, while not perfect, is amazing, but the Facebook sync has to be the best new feature. You can upload albums to your profile, and when people tag your photos, you can sync those tags back to iPhoto!

What I'd like to see: While Faces, Places, and Events are nice, not everyone uses them. I like that iTunes allows you what type of libraries to show (Music, Movies, Podcasts, Etc). I'd like to see a similar feature for the iPhoto sidebar.

iMovie

What I love: Precision editing is great; it's odd that it took them this long to add it!

What I'd like to see: It was too bad iMovie's companion iDVD didn't get any noticeable updates. While online video is becoming the fad, DVD is still popular as a family video medium.

Garageband

What I love: A visual representation of virtual amps and pedals is a nice step in making amateur recording fun and user friendly. While I probably won't use the "Learn To Play" feature, it's a great tool that if developed, may give Practica Musica a fair amount of competition (although I don't see Apple offering theory lessons in the future).

What I'd like to see: With the virtual pedals, I'd love for Line 6 or M-Audio to create a USB stompbox to give it an authentic experience. I'm also hoping that they eventually create an environment like iWork.com where musicians can collaborate on projects through the web.

iWeb

What I love: Finally, they added direct FTP publishing! The process I had to go through in order to update all of my websites was just to complicated (while other programs offered FTP publishing, nothing beats the WYSIWYG capabilities iWeb offers).

What I'd like to see: There's still a few features that are easy to offer to external sites that they limit to MobileMe published sites (password protection, RSS). If they want to keep MobileMe popular, they should consider adding domain hosting as a feature of the service.

iTunes DRM upgrade: now per song, but I'm still not happy

MacRumors has reported that iTunes is now allowing folks to upgrade their previously purchased DRM songs to DRM-free on a 'per track' basis instead of having to upgrade their entire library at once.

While this is a step in the right direction, it's still insulting to loyal Apple customers.

Apple is trying to pass this scheme off as a chance to upgrade the bit rate of your song from 128kps to 256kps, charging you 30 cents for the better bit rate. But most users could care less about the higher bit rate, and probably aren't going to notice the difference unless they have a serious sound system hooked up to their computer. From my perspective (which I think is shared by a large amount of veteran iTunes customers), I'm being charged 30 cents for a song I've already purchased just to have the right to play it on a device of my choice.

Does that sound like an honorable business decision to you?

While I love Apple software and hardware (I just bought iLife '09, and will post a review once I have a chance to play with it), I feel as though I'm being punished for the business I've given to the iTunes store for the past few years (over 4000 tracks worth of business). Since I currently have no need to play the songs on other devices, I won't be upgrading my songs, and going forward, my business is going to Amazon.

I'm hoping by the time iTunes incorporates the layered pricing structure, they'll come up with a better offer. What are the chances someone is going to want to pay an additional 30 cents for a song they've already bought for 99 cents, and is now available for 30 cents less?

(FYI - this isn't the first time Apple has defecated on their customers. In 2007, they charged people who had recently bought new Macs an additional $2 after the purchase just to activate the 802.11n wireless capabilities already built into the computer).

Forget Apple, and You May Be Forgotten

Palm's new smartphone, the Pre, has garnered some attention, and some folks are calling upon it, like many before, to be the "iPhone Killer". Nokia had one. So did Blackberry. But none of them have even put a damper on Apple's momentum in the phone market.

It appears as if karma is catching up with a lot of companies for snubbing Apple over the past decade. Now that times are tough, most consumer tech companies are feeling a hit. Apple sales are similar, but they are able to sell laptops priced 30% higher then comparable offers from competitors.

My theory is that this could have been avoided if companies had only recognized Apple's turning point back in 1998 with the iMac. Before Apple unveiled their 'bondi blue' savior, their products came in beige or gray, and the few major software and hardware companies who supported them didn't provide updates for Mac as often as they did for PC. And after the iMac was released, those companies still didn't see much potential in them.

This was also right around the time that MP3s were taking over the CD and short lived minidisc market. Hardware companies were making portable players to jump on the trend, but with the exception of Diamond Rio, they didn't see profit in extending compatibility to the Mac. So Mac released iTunes, then the iPod, and finally the iTunes Store. Today, they are the #1 music software, device, and store in the world. Most of the original companies from the 90's are nowhere to be found (How many people do you see today carrying a Grundig or a Diamond Rio?). The same thing applies to phones. While Palm had limited ability to sync with a Mac, Blackberry offered nothing. People still rely on 3rd party software to make it work. So Apple created the iPhone, cutting into Blackberry's market share, and leaving Palm and Motorola in the dust.

Can you see the pattern? Apple's not necessarily trying to take over these markets. OK fine - yes they are, but part of the decision to go down the recent paths they've traveled is to further strengthen their computer market share. You haven't seen them dive into the graphic software market, because Adobe has always provided cutting edge software for them. They backed off of the printer market because Epson's entire line of printers were compatible by the mid 90's. By the time digital cameras were commonplace, Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Olympus knew better than to ignore Apple. Today, gaming companies are quickly porting their most popular games to play on the Mac, and Google was quick to admit their mistake in not having a Mac version of Chrome upon release.

The moral: Apple marketing is king. If you create a product that is not compatible with the Mac, Apple may just create a similar product that will render yours obsolete.