garygilliland:

There’s a physicality to turntables and a connection to the music that isn’t available with other media. The ritual of picking out an album, sliding the record out of its sleeve, cleaning the disc and then putting it on the platter. As the record spins up I lift the arm across the blank space before the first track. There’s a few crackles and pops, then the music begins, twenty or so minutes listening to the music as a single piece, the way the artist intended.

Compare this to an Ipod, it’s more advanced, more convenient, more robust but it’s cold. Press a button, the music comes out in an endless stream sorted by genre, artist or date. I don’t need the discipline of listening to difficult tracks, I just click next until I get something easier to consume.

When my nephew and niece come to stay they don’t ask for the Ipod, they ask for the “disco”, aka the turntable. Like me they seem to be fascinated with the rituals involved in playing the music. Then when the music’s playing the slow spin of the disc holds them entranced.

Sonically it’s prone to pops and clicks. Records get scratched or warped and yet still the warm imperfect sound is more comforting than the consistent reproduction of a CD or MP3.

I recently digitised some old videotapes that I thought my brother might be interested in seeing and showing to other people. Instead of simply being able to send it directly to his phone I had to go through multiple steps, convert the video format to something a Nokia could play (apparently Nokia’s can’t play all types of MP4), copy the files to a USB stick because they were too big to upload to the web, copy the files onto his laptop and finally upload to the phone. This started me thinking about how bad connectivity and integration is for most consumer technology.

The average consumer now manages a considerable technology infrastructure; televisions, cable / satellite boxes, broadband, wifi, digital cameras, media players, mobile phones, computers, printers, scanners, consoles etc, etc.

With multiple operating systems, applications, web platforms and file formats the average user has little chance of ever extracting the full benefit from their technology. Even apparently simple tasks like ensuring that media is playable across a range of devices or ensuring that their files and settings are synced between devices is beyond most.

Advances in technology are impressive but in truth most people don’t need more megapixels, more cores or more features. The average person is seeing diminishing returns from new devices, software etc not because the technology is failing but because new devices are adding layers of incompatibility and complexity. New file formats, connectors, software, batteries, chargers etc. All of which notionally add functionality and improve on the previous generation. Alternatively they make older peripherals redundant, require relearning of simple tasks or mandate conversion of existing media.

The time honoured answer from geeks and manufacturers is that we should be awed by the new features or RTFM. Surely we’ve moved past that.

When I buy a device I want to buy it because it’s right for me and not because it happens to support a particular file format, DRM system or because it has the right connector for another piece of hardware. We need manufacturers and developers to offer standards which are designed to assist the consumer, not standards which consolidate market position and secure user lock in.We need devices and software which work together, communicate effectively and add value to existing infrastructure.

CES gave us 3D TV, which as far as I’m aware means that instead of being just dull, TV will now be pointy and dull. Not having tested any of the devices I might be missing something and the glasses might just contain pixie dust that magically transforms dross into gold but to me it seems that falling TV audiences are more to with the quality of programmes than the quality of the presentation.

Ebooks readers or tablet computers can’t save the publishing industry. The majority of people don’t consume long form writing of any kind so the ability to carry 150 books and the entire history of your favourite newspaper seem irrelevant. The arrival of the web and 24 hour news coverage that the newspapers have shifted from purveyors of news to become gossip and propaganda sheets. To survive the publishing industry needs to change what is presented, not how and when it’s presented.

As far technology and media companies are concerned the phrase "content is king" seems to be dead. Today “style over content” is the new mantra. Tell everyone it’s the future, design it to look good and you’ll have a hit. Surely consumers aren’t stupid enough to fall for that? Are they?

Everyone else has an opinion so after some consideration here’s mine.

What is it?

• It’s not a communications device: no phone calls, no video calls.
• It’s not a laptop alternative: it doesn’t have the power to run standard applications.
• It’s not a portable device: it’s too big for pockets and you need to be seated to use it
• It’s not an eReader: it has a backlit display not a readable eInk display.
• It’s not a home media centre: the screen is too small and it has too little storage.
• It’s not a portable mediaplayer: it’s too big for everyday use.
• It’s not an education device: schools struggle to buy textbooks costing £20 each.
• It’s not a business device: no MS Office means no business for most of the world.
• It’s not a gaming device: too underpowered for console, too big for schoolbag.

Despite the apparently adverse comments I think this is the most interesting device to arrive in years. It’s design and the technology behind are to be admired but after the initial sales rush caused by the media hype and fanboys, it’s unclear what will happen.

The iphone gained almost immediate traction with the general public because competing products were so very poor. Initial sales volume, combined with a creative development community created a virtuous circle dragging both consumers and developers into the Apple fold.

This time the Ipad is competing with products from two sectors (phone and laptops) and doesn’t seem to offer clear advantages over either. Apple and it’s development community will have to begin to define the Ipad as something different and remove the feeling that it’s is defined by what it’s not.

Can the Ipad define itself as a new class of device or will it become another in the long line failed of tablets? I don’t know but given Apple’s recent history it would be hard to bet against them.

There was a thing running around the net a while ago where bloggers would outline their ideal computer, so here’s my attempt. It’s a phone/handheld which I can dock to gain features such as more processing power, better graphics, a larger screen, keyboard mouse etc. Key features would include

• handheld form factor should be similar to those of the high-end smartphones with similar functionality i.e. phone, gps, touchscreen,3G, Wi-Fi etc
• significant handheld storage capacity* (100 Gb plus), which should be capable of booting a dock system and acting as storage for it
• the docking workstation should be dumb i.e. only provide processing and graphics power but no storage to reduce security risk from docking
• same software and OS to be available on both desktop and handheld. With full featured versions for use while docked and less functional versions available while handheld
• dual file formats with both full and portable versions, so that I can manipulate the data on a mobile without the overhead of unnecessary formatting, full size images etc
• the handheld should allow for the connection of external devices such as flip-down keyboard, card reader, printer etc
• high-level encryption with biometric access control so that it remains secure when I inevitably lose it
• live sync to the cloud

* I know the future is supposed to be cloud based but until we have truly omnipresent wireless data network, I want my data and processing to be available locally.

At a conceptual level none of this too fanciful.

• storage is cheap and xml file formats mean that dual format files are relatively simple to achieve and practical to store
• high speed docking options such as USB3 mean storage performance when docked shouldn’t be an issue
• the iPhone, Android and even Windows Mobile have all proven that portable devices can offer functional software which with a few tweaks should readily scale to desktop resolutions
• hardware such as the ARM processor are powerful enough to handle portable needs. Versions tuned for performance rather than battery life or multi-processor systems could handle desktop duties. Thereby simplifying the task of developing software and OS for a single architecture.

A secure mobile device capable of holding most of my data which I can dock to a generic workstation with no security concerns would meet most of my computing and communication needs with one device carried in my pocket.

Gartner, Inc. have presented their guide to the technologies which have “the potential for significant impact on the enterprise in the next three years.” The headings in bold are Gartner’s and I’ve added comments after each heading but you’re probably better checking out the details here.

• Cloud Computing. Obvious, but given the benefits of omnipresent technology with reduced management requirements, lower overheads etc this should feature heavily on the agenda of any organisations.
• Advanced Analytics. This could be the cure-all for information overload but we’ve been promised panaceas before so it’s may be a ‘wait and see’ as to whether advances in analysing data can finally outstrip advances in collecting it. 
• Client Computing. This could be important operationally, financially and environmentally. With the rise of virtualisation and cloud computing we may finally get away from operating systems wars and the need to prescribe standards for every user in an organisation. Together with the change face of hardware netbooks, tablets, phones etc organisations will need a strategy which is flexible in the extreme.
• IT for Green. We’ve had the technology for years (video-conferencing, remote access, electronic documents etc) but the increase in awareness means we might actually see organisations utilising technology to reduce their environmental impact.
• Reshaping the Data Centre. Organisations must start to factor in the effect of the cloud, environmental taxes and increasingly energy security. Whilst the full impact of these issues cannot be gauged yet, the longevity of data centre projects means they will likely come into play during the life of many new and existing centres.
• Social Computing. Whether it’s the game changer proponents suggest is up for debate but no organisation can ignore it. 
• Security – Activity Monitoring. There is an undeniable need to move to more automated and more sophisticated monitoring tools to meet security and regulatory requirements. But as evidenced by the data loss stories in the press many organisations needs to focus on more basic security matters such as encryption, media management and employee training.
• Flash Memory. I’m not sure that this will be a strategic for most organisations but nevertheless it will interesting to watch.
• Virtualization for Availability. Any technology which increases increases availability and reduces complexity should be on the watch list of all organisations.
• Mobile Applications. Organisations with a large consumer facing business, those who need to reach staff or consumers in remote or underdeveloped areas and those looking to project a forward thinking image would be well advised to begin investigating the possibilities surrounding the phone as an application platform.

Source: Gartner Inc

It’s just after Christmas and like a lot of people I’ve spent my fair share of time in toy shops and I’ve been reminded of a goal that I had when I ran a programming team. Everything should be designed like a Tomy toy. I don’t mean child-like but where possible solutions should follow the pattern in toys.

I’ve got a memory like a sieve so I like acronyms hence SERIES

• S imple – nothing wasted
• E ngaging – asks to be used
• R obust – hard to break
• I nteractive – instant feedback
• E lective – you choose how to use it
• S timulating – encourages creativity

Compare this with Word, Photoshop and even web apps like Gmail. How many menus, icons and hidden rules are there to cope with before you can use the things?

From the file marked unbelievable but true comes the iPhone app that you can use to disguise the sounds of nature that emanate from bathrooms. Presented on-screen as makeup kit it certainly gives a new meaning to the name Cover Girl.

via Apartment Therapy Unplugged

The current adverts for Windows 7 / Windows Phone and the Palm Pre highlight not only Apple’s superiority in advertising but why most tech companies just don’t get consumers.

Microsoft is selling windows that snap into place and a task bar with large icons. Apple is selling creativity design and aspiration.

Microsoft is selling a phone which let’s you use work applications (word, excel etc). Apple is selling a phone which is a games console, a spirit level etc

Palm is selling a phone with multitasking which means you never have to ‘disconnect from friends’. To an audience which doesn’t understand multitasking or why they need it, or that Palm is actually having a dig at the iPhone which doesn’t do it very well.

Microsoft is selling utility, Palm is selling technology, Apple is selling the dream, which one do you want to buy?

As a follow up to my last post about the Independent Review of Economic Policy report. I thought I would post my comments from a LinkedIn discussion, from a few months ago, on developing a software strategy for Northern Ireland.

The current strategy of inward investment is leading to a narrowing of the skills base. For example the pool of marketing professionals with real commercial experience is at best limited not because we don’t have degree courses filled with good candidates but because so many of the large employers here are either government or ‘branch offices’ who have no responsibility for marketing. The net result is that local companies are struggling to develop viable marketing strategies. This applies not only to marketing but to expertise in a wide variety of professional areas which are essential to growth.

The arrival of corporate software factories may produce a few nice headlines in the Telegraph and improve jobs statistics but what does it do for the wider tech community? When the big manufactures arrived in the past they needed an ecosystem of small engineering firms, technical specialists, transport companies who could learn and then apply their skills in other companies and industries. The new software factories don’t need this type of support. They deploy the systems and technologies mandated by head office. Then the programming drones go to work on software which has been specified by experts based in another country. In other words the real IP is never transferred to staff here. We are creating a generation of ‘production operatives’ who like those of the manufacturing era will be replaced by cheaper labour and newer technologies.

The technical and management skills developed in the factories aren’t the key to success. We can only truly benefit from these skills when they are applied to IP developed inside NI. We need a strategy which builds IP. This will come from exploiting the expertise in existing industry sectors and academic programmes of research. These will create a virtuous cycle in which both the technology sector and the IP generator can grow and thrive together.

Our ‘thought leaders’ are composed of two groups. The ‘boys club’ which is composed of the same people trotting out the same ‘old bumper sticker’ platitudes, think civil servants, columnists and members of committees / quangos whose bio uses the word former. Then there are ‘young turks’ who think that carrying a Mac, an iPhone and the communicating via the latest social app will make Lagan Valley into Silicon Valley. The connecting factor between these two groups is a desire for self-publicity rather than an ability to produce original thought. These are the people who have brought us years of bandwagons and blockbusters. They have failed.

Look around on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter etc and there is a notable lack of Northern Irish business men. Arguments over whether they are luddites or not are pointless. The hidden genius of Northern Ireland industry lies in this silent majority who are busy working and running successful businesses. These are the people we need to engage in order to develop a successful strategy for Northern Ireland. These are the people who can help us develop an IP ecosystem which can provide sustained growth.

I closed the comment with “sorry for the rant but this stuff touches a nerve” and the IREP has simply exposed that nerve even more