Storm Control

by Pablo Carlier.

#Mobile

Mobile voice vs. data usage, 2007 to 2012.

I wonder what happened around mid 2007 that sparked this massive disruption…

Mobile voice vs. data usage, 2007 to 2012.

I wonder what happened around mid 2007 that sparked this massive disruption…

iPhone sales almost equaled all Android phone sales combined in the last three months. That’s one vendor with just three models against a myriad of manufacturers and a zillion models.

Another way to put it is Apple sold ten times as much as BlackBerry. Ten.

So much for a disappointment.

iPhone sales almost equaled all Android phone sales combined in the last three months. That’s one vendor with just three models against a myriad of manufacturers and a zillion models.

Another way to put it is Apple sold ten times as much as BlackBerry. Ten.

So much for a disappointment.

The Galaxy Nexus is Big

  • Ben: That’s no moon. It’s a phone.
  • Han: It’s too big to be a phone.
  • Luke: I have a very bad feeling about this.

Android screen resolution madness »

Google’s Android developer’s guide states that:

Before publishing your application, you should thoroughly test it in all of the supported screen sizes and densities.

The title links to this same guide, where these supported screen sizes and densities are listed. It’s worth checking it out. That’s twenty different resolutions developers have to test their applications against. Twenty. No wonder resolution fragmentation is increasingly high, and developer pain grows accordingly.

This is one of the reasons why Apple kept the same screen size for their iPhone 4S: until they can significantly increase the current density to accommodate a re-doubled resolution, they won’t touch screen size. Fragmentation is not an option in their view.

Jim & Siri

  • Jim: I love you, Siri
  • Siri: Impossible
  • Jim: No really, I love you
  • Siri: I hope you don’t say that to those other mobile phones, Jim
  • Jim: No way, I only love you Siri
  • Siri: You are the wind beneath my wings
  • Jim: That’s nice. I’m glad you know I love you
  • Siri: All you need is love. And your iPhone

iPhone 4s: most successful Apple product launch ever »

It is becoming clearer every day, as iPhone 4s is already sold out in the US, that the greater the disappointment in the product by pundits and media, the greater its success.

Just remember the iPad, dismissed as a “large iPod Touch”, and now the spark that ignited the Post-PC era.

Apple leads the way, but it’s not always sparks and magic, sometimes it’s about perfecting what was already magical before pulling the next rabbit out of the hat.

This time it surely seems so. Again.

—Edit: Apple just announced iPhone 4S pre-orders the first 24 hours topped 1 million units.

“If you fight consumerization, it just goes underground and you’ll actually be in a worse situation. Prisoners are some of the most creative people that I can think of. If you make your users prisoners, they will get real creative about working around you.”

– /via Trend Micro/ Gartner interview transcript on BringYourOwnIt. (via rankandfile)

The costs of the patent Cold War

Imagine what could be achieved with a free 12 billion dollars. What could technology giants such as Google, Microsoft or Apple surprise us with? In which fantastic ways would innovation materialize into revolutionary products?

Now imagine that all that potential got lost in a fruitless patent guerrilla. That’s today.

Google acquired Motorola Mobility on August 12th, for the astonishing sum of 12.5 billion dollars. That means duplicating its workforce with another 19,000 employees, and completing its largest acquisition ever. This was not a strategic move. This was a tactical, defensive operation that cost Google in excess of a net 7 billion dollars, when you discount Motorola’s cash and assets. Its ultimate goal: get hold of a patent arsenal to defend itself from competitors.

Some weeks ago, a consortium including Apple, Microsoft and RIM spent over 4.5 billion dollars in the defunct Nortel’s patent portfolio. This is surely what motivated Google’s quick and bold response. And the madness goes on and on.

These last moves are surprising for several reasons:

  • The mean cost per patent has rocketed to over $500,000 each in these acquisitions. Half-a-million-dollars for one-single-patent.
  • Neither of these investments provide any innovation value whatsoever to its investors. This is 100% insurance money… just in case.
  • Patents have become an asset that’s valued not so much for what it enables you to do, but for what it forbids others from doing.

Patents exist to foster innovation, as The Economist pointed out yesterday, “granting an inventor a limited monopoly over a technology in return for disclosing the details of its workings, so that others can build upon the invention”. One could argue that their use has been corrupted lately, and the costs of the current patent system are damaging, more than helping, innovators. Even worse:

"Patents are emerging as a new currency," Alexander I. Poltorak, chief executive of the patent licensing and enforcement firm General Patent, told the New York Times. "I’ve recently received several calls from financial analysts and bankers who want to know how to value patents and what does it mean."

Akin to the Cold War arms race, gigantic amounts of money are being spent in a dissuasive campaign to protect from patent lawsuits. And indeed these amounts are gigantic: to put just these two initial examples into perspective, what Google spent in the Motorola acquisition is somewhat comparable to the cost of developing the Large Hadron Collider, arguably the single greatest and most ambitious experiment the human being has ever pursued. But, unlike the Cold War, this time the industry faces a new enemy: patent trolls.

The purpose of a dissuasive weapon is to prevent opponents from using their own similar weapons, out of fear that they would receive the same damage upon themselves. But patent trolls do not have any product to defend against lawsuits. They have no “population” to protect, and no “cities” that could be attacked. They can just use their patents again and again without fear of retaliation, making millions of dollars every time. These are patent monsters, direct result of how the patent system works:

It is far too easy to be granted a far too vague patent over far too many things these days.

The pharmaceutical and medical industries went over a similar process in the past, and are now stuck in a place where over $50bn a year is spent in “defensive medicine” to protect from medical malpractice lawsuits, or more money is spent in patent litigation than in actual investigation for new prescription drugs. Another study showed that in 1999:

American public companies’ total profits from patents (excluding pharmaceuticals) in 1999 were about $4 billion—but that the associated litigation costs were $14 billion.

There is a great danger that the tech industry could follow next.

Meanwhile, the results of this situation today, are:

There is a continuous value-destruction process going on around the patent warfare. And this is happening while the debt-crisis and stagnant economy challenge our very way of life and the European welfare state. Technology is a strategic asset for value creation, productivity improvements and industry transformation, all three much needed to reverse the current economic downturn.

Fix this mess, or we won’t be able to deal with it later.