Hello, I have a Very Important Announcement

So, I have a bit of an announcement to make. Or a VIA (Very Importance Announcement). To me, this blog is basically my little arena to write and express my opinions on gadget companies and the trends in the consumer electronics scene. My head is constantly flowing with thoughts of 'how I would this', 'what's happening over there' and 'I see potential in this'. Put simply, to prevent a brain explosion I unload it all on this very blog. This small blog. To you, well, I don't know what this blog is. It could be just something you read every now and again to add dimension to your technology news, it could be a place for you to laugh at what this silly guy is talking about or perhaps you just ended up here in passing. 

Nevertheless, this blog has evolved from a Sony opinion and news blog that it was when I started it half a year ago to an opinion blog on all things gadgets and tech. The current blog URL doesn't reflect this change. Yes, I'm going to do the unthinkable and move to a new address. 

As of now, this blog will be operating under a new URL that is deliberately ambiguous to keep up with any evolutions it may encounter in the future.

www.geekypony.blogspot.com

I'm continuing with the 'Pony' theme, I like the character. 

I have registered a new URL, so The Sony Pony will still be around. It just won't  be getting updated as much, or ever again. I've also imported (exported?) all my opinion pieces to Geeky Pony so you can also access some of the content on this blog there too. 

It will take some time to regain traffic but it's a change that I feel has to happen. After all, it didn't feel right blogging about other companies on a blog named 'The Sony Pony'. 

Rest assured, my content will not change one bit.I will continue to write thought inducing editorial , comment on the big news and express my opinions on all things tech. And as long as you remember and know the new URL, you'll be able to keep up too. If you forget? Don't worry, 'The Sony Pony' will still be around with a link to the new blog, and perhaps I'll continue to update it with specifically Sony news that isn't suitable for the new blog. 

For now, adios. And I'll see you at Geeky Pony.

RIM: Where it stumbled, why RIM still matters and How to fix it

Well, RIM has been in all the news for the past month for all the wrong reasons: lackluster sales, sales estimate cuts and a plummeting share price, you name it. It's always sad to see a once great brand that builds great products diminish in such a way and in such proportions. I obviously wasn't old enough, or perhaps not even born but many will remember when Apple in the late 80s to the mid 90s began to lose its feet and if it wasn't for Steve Job's return to the company he created we mightn't be seeing the iPhone and Mac as they are that have influenced and helped to greatly shape consumer electronics. Sony, currently are elbow deep in a similar sort of decline, in which once ubiquitous and world changing products they created are struggling to even be noticed in a tidal wave of competition. For many, the advent of the Apple iPhone and rise of Google Android marked a beginning of a rapid decline for the maker of the Blackberry.

WHERE RIM STUMBLED:

Perhaps it is only suitable to begin this here editorial with a discussion of how Research In Motion have found themselves in this precarious conundrum. Let's face it, RIM were breezing before the iPhone came around. They had a clear vision for their products and their devices were selling well to both their two distinct consumer groups at the time: the social savvy and the enterprise consumer. I believe that much of the reason that made their vision so straightforward was the fact that the concept of the smartphone itself was so uniform back then. Smartphone was deemed as a device with exclusive features for people who needed them, not wanted them for mindless time consumption or...fun, for want of a better word. Having said that, there was ultimately nothing truly fun about a smartphone when the 'Berry was king, at least not to the extent to which it could be considered more entertaining than the average dumb-phone.

There were several things that made Blackberry unique, and thus, far superior to their competitors: the keyboard, BES services, BBM and of course just the unmistakeable look and feel of a Blackberry. BES services and BBM are the two key points here and they really serve to highlight what went so right with RIM, and subsequently with the arrival of Apple and Google, what went so wrong. Essentially, RIM knew who their products were for and therefore delivered appropriately. A potent combination of a high-quality keyboard and the acclaimed Blackberry Messenger sealed the deal for a solid product for the social consumers. Additionally, BES (Blackberry Enterprise Server) provided a secure and powerful experience for the business consumers, completing once again, a flawless offering.

So what went wrong? The introduction of the Apple iPhone, initially laughed off by Steve Ballmer (don't get me wrong, I love Steve Ballmer) augured a significant shift in the smartphone landscape. The iPhone didn't just bring the smartphone concept to the mass market, but it shifted the entire form factor of the traditional smartphone entirely. Suddenly, the things that had made the Blackberry unique, were undermined significantly. The novelty of the capacitive touchscreen iPhone diminished the appeal of RIM's small display and keyboard combination. Not only this, but the introduction of the now enormous App Store raised the iPhone's after-market appeal enormously and more importantly widened the devices' potential use cases. Blackberry users began to question 'hey, why can't my phone do that?'

Fast-forward three years later, and we see RIM as it is now. Stumbling badly and thus far unable to create a product that truly sticks. What's most saddening isn't that Apple, subsequently Google and potentially Microsoft beat RIM at the smartphone game, but how little RIM did to stop it. The technology industry is a bit like quicksand, the further down you go the progressively harder it gets to climb back up. And I don't mean this in an 8 steps down 8 steps up kind of respect, but more an exponential relationship. Had RIM capitalised on the loyalty of their consumers rather than purely relying on them, the Blackberry's market share probably wouldn't be sliding to quite the extent it is now. Perhaps not sliding at all.

RIM separated themselves somewhat from the emerging smartphone pack and focused on continuing to deliver brilliant messaging and enterprise services whilst the 'fun' factor and user experience so prevalent in competitors slipped by the wayside. This short-sighted decision making was driven by one thing, and one thing only: overconfidence. With the prior success of their products, RIM were simply too confident in their own ways and their own purpose to consider rethinking their products. Consequently, with too much focus to their traditional ways, BBM became the only thing keeping the social savvy consumers attached to their Blackberry's, but the sacrifices that had to be made to obtain this service continued to build to a certain breaking point where the scales tipped out of RIM's favour. Because of this, the Blackberry's market share continues to slip. It reminds me a lot of my situation with my Walkman. The same can be said for the enterprise customers, though certainly to a lesser extent. To many of these business consumers, Blackberry isn't just a phone, it's a way of life. It's so rare and special to be able to boast such exceptional brand loyalty. But if RIM can't deliver products that can simply do more things...well they're going to lose them too.


WHY RIM STILL MATTERS:
This is not just another RIM bashing article, because I strongly believe that RIM still definitely has the assets to get themselves back on track. RIM has not sunk completely into a deep realm of despair and irrelevance. Actually, quite the opposite, to the average Joe's consumer the Blackberry still represents professional and quality handsets and devices.

As much as you can try to convince yourself that it's not, the simple fact is: brand matters. Brand matters a lot. And despite all of RIM's problems, their greatest asset, the intangible 'Blackberry' name is still almost entirely intact. It is arguably the only thing keeping RIM's head above the water. Ask around, and you'll find that most Blackberry users with the exception of the business consumers don't have much in defence of their purchase aside from the fact that 'Bro, it's a Blackberry'. And rightly so, if it's a Blackberry then it must have something going for it. Such a ubiquitous and powerful brand is so rare to see in any industry. In the mobile market the Blackberry name is only rivalled by the iPhone, and from my perspective, is still unmatched. Just the pure delight of telling people that you have a 'Blackberry' goes a very long way. The contributing factors that build this brand though are equally as important to RIM, and these are the things that they can effectively leverage to get themselves back on track. So far, they've made all the right steps towards this redemption.

One thing I've noticed is that there is still something unmistakeably RIM about their products. I had a chance to play with the Blackberry Playbook over the weekend and it was everything that I dreamt it would be: solid, fast and it exhibited a kind of professional polish unparalleled by any Android tablet that I have ever tried. With mobile devices like tablets, even the slightest of lags or missed touches can detract from the user experience significantly because these imperfections are very obvious in touchy-feely devices like this. Having said this, the Playbook ran unbelievably smoothly. Multitasking on the Playbook was brilliant, better than any tablet currently on the market. Most importantly, in just holding, grabbing and using the device I could immediately tell that 'This is a Blackberry'. Such significant brand awareness is enormously hard to achieve, and to have such a powerful asset at their disposal is healthy proof that RIM still matters.

One of the hardest things to achieve in this viciously crammed tablet market is finding ways to differentiate your products from the competition. I outlined this quandary in an older article where I discussed that the accessibility and availability of Android has definitely given consumers choices, but vendors are finding themselves providing virtually identical products to their competitors. RIM has an advantage here, despite their vastly smaller ecosystem, with the acquisition of QNX, RIM decided that it would take the challenging but rewarding path to exclusivity as opposed to the easy path to mediocrity via the Android wave. RIM's announcement that the QNX platform would be used in the company future smartphones is promising in two very important respects: not only are they laying down the foundations for their own platform with their own ecosystem of apps and services but also, given how well QNX works on the Playbook, well, I can only imagine good things.

The Playbook can arguably be considered as RIM's first step to a new beginning. A new platform, a new form factor and a brilliant web experience take a great diversion from the traditional RIM that we have known in the past, the same one that has failed to adapt and is struggling currently. It has been a wobbly first step, no doubt and the continual flooding of Android tablets has offered little succour for a Playbook struggling in a price battle. But I can't help but contemplate whether the Playbook I used over the weekend  was the same Playbook receiving lackluster reviews on many tech sites across the net. It certainly didn't feel like it. It's such a shame then that RIM brought the Playbook to market half-baked and essentially killed off the hype that could have surrounded a potentially exceptional product at launch. Having said this, the Playbook is still a work in progress, but once the omissions are filled (as promised) and the Playbook is able to reach its full potential, I have not an inkling of doubt that the Playbook with its exceptional design, stellar performance and Blackberry name prowess can conquer the shallow 7 inch tablet market.

HOW WOULD I FIX RIM:
So where do we take it from here? The key now, as it always is, is to build an ecosystem around the Blackberry platform and the products and integrate them. Direct integration between the Playbook and Blackberry smartphones is rather lacking currently. Blackberry Bridge perhaps is mildly useful for enterprise consumers but I can't imagine it being very useful for consumers and it would be useless for those without a Blackberry smartphone. RIM need to know that they can't simply lock their consumers in anymore, particularly since their prison is no longer the pleasant stay it used to be. RIM has to realise that ecosystems aren't a selling point of a product but merely a way of providing more integrated services for consumers and furthermore enticing them to buy further into the ecosystem. Thus, a poor product line-up and great ecosystem is of no help since there is no stand out product to effectively lure consumers in in the first place. Engadget 'Switched On' writer Ross Rubin stated 'if you're going to lock in consumers, it's best to build a prison that people want to move into anyway'. I couldn't possibly put it better myself.

RIM in the past thrived on created services and products exclusively for their own devices. But I believe RIM now has to warm up to the idea of working with others and integrating their products with other services out there. For example the Playbook video calling app only works with other Playbooks. Wouldn't it be nice if it talk to other devices too? You could argue that Apple's Facetime is also proprietary, however for Apple it's excusable because they've reached a certain level of ubiquity with their products that it's an unnoticeable hindrance. An owner of a Playbook on the other hand would be hard pressed to find a mate with one too. Even the popular BBM is beginning to lose its popularity as consumers are beginning to find that they can find comparable services that have the ability to converse with other platforms too. With a declining market share, sticking by their proprietary ways would simply convert into a deathly spiral for RIM. They simply no longer have a large enough customer base to make proprietary services useful. It's time for RIM to play nice with others, it's no longer everyone living in RIM's world, it's RIM living in everyone else's world.

That's probably the most important thing I would change at RIM, because proprietary is only really useful if they can leverage a large market share, which is something that RIM has undeniably lost. It's also important that RIM doesn't stop chasing the consumer business. I've read many articles saying that RIM should stick to investing more in enterprise services and providing for enterprise consumers which is traditionally what they've been known for. But the fact is, the Blackberry does mean something to average consumers and it would be wasteful to not take advantage of such a powerful brand. Furthermore, a pursuit of the consumer business is definitely a safer option because, hey, business people like to browse app stores and use 'fun' apps too. If RIM invest solely in the enterprise market and the consumer competitors are able to match or even come close to them in this market, then the competitors' advantage in more 'consumerised' products and services would guarantee a death to RIM's one-trick pony.

Amidst all the negativity, I feel like I'm the only one that has any confidence in RIM. But I think RIM still has plenty of potential. If RIM utilise QNX appropriately and efficiently, I personally do think they have a gem in their possession.

How would you fix RIM?

Playstation Vita sentiments and a forecast for the gaming handheld

Evolution is a biological term that aims to explain the development and change of living organisms throughout a long progression of time. It is universally known that humans as a species used to be apes. Though I still know some people who have not quite left this atavistic state. For gamers, the passion and love for their devices pathologically turns them into living organisms, and thus it can be said that they evolve over time, through the biological process. This can be certainly said for gaming which has gone through its fair share of 'natural' evolution. Its consumer demographics, manufacturers and content have all evolved dramatically throughout time. Along with this, gaming turned from a cult, into a passion and now into a pastime. Now, with the spread of gaming's accessibility, is it now turning casual?

Core gamers grimace at the very thought that their absolute passions can turn out to be someone else's method of time wasting. However the past 5 years to the present has seen gaming go through yet another one of these evolutions; this time, it is the inexorable rise of smartphone gaming. Gaming back in the day was a form of media split by two extremes, you were either a gamer or you weren't. Handheld gaming only existed in forms applicable to people who actually wanted to game. You wouldn't buy a DS or a PSP because you wanted to web browse or take photos. However, for smartphones, gaming is a second thought. Smartphones and similar devices have certainly widened the consumer demographic for gaming but in a much more diluted kind of fashion.

The once dichotomous relationship between gamers and non-gamers has now turned into an almost sibling like relationship, in that core gamers and casual gamers are both gamers alike, but fiercely rivalled kin in one big happy family. Having said this, all of this mobile gaming talk is irrelevant unless I put it into context. What does it mean for the core gaming scene? What does it mean for the Playstation Vita?

I've been very frustrated with Sony recently, I didn't believe Sony made the entirely correct decision to opt for Android on their mobile devices, and their blatant apathy to what was once their strongest brand - the Walkman - has been nothing short of unresourceful. Sony was criticised by many sceptics with the initial announcement of the NGP for cooking a tried and failed recipe. Hardware superiority since the earliest days has always been one of Sony's key strengths, however the critics argued that Sony once again betting on pure hardware superiority would prove to be a game loser. These claims though, were short-sighted. From where I stand, the Playstation Vita's (NGP's) unfaltering approach is the best decision Sony has made in a very long time.

Now I have a bit of a confession to make: I'm not a game fanatic, in actual fact it will surprise you that I'm not a gamer at all and my gaming accolade can be summed up with the occasional session of 'Pipe Riders' on Miniclip and a 2 kill streak playing Call of Duty: Black Ops on a PS3 at my mate's place. While camping.

Speculation that mobile and casual gaming will bring detriment to core portable gaming devices and other dedicated consoles is...well nothing more than speculation. The slow sales of the Nintendo 3DS and PSP, particularly the PSP Go has fuelled this short-sighted theory, and the success of Apple's mobile contraptions have continued to feed this fat rumour monster.

Looking down on casual gamers. Those n00bs!

It must be considered though, that dedicated handheld gaming has never quite appealed hugely to the masses, and in many ways has simply been considered as an extension to the primary gaming machine, which is the console hooked up to your television. It's a niche, and will most likely remain that way. I would say that the slow sales of these handheld gaming devices has been attributed to a lack of innovation from the manufacturers but also just a natural lack of potential consumers. The PSP 3000 and Nintendo DS both successfully skimmed the portable gamers from the top of the gaming pack, and their successors haven't provided anything worthy to warrant a necessary upgrade.

Frankly, I think Apple's dominance in the mobile devices market has had almost aught effects in core gaming. In actual fact, relating them in the first place is simply an impertinent comparison. When Steve Job's boasted that the iPod Touch had outsold Sony and Nintendo we all found the very notion quite astounding, that a newcomer could create such a splash. However the statistics were a grossly unfair comparison summed up perfectly with the most overused pun in consumer electronics: comparing apples to oranges. This superficial look at the handheld gaming segment didn't address on key factor, and that is that gaming is not the primary and only selling point with the iPod Touch and iPhone. Like I mentioned before, for smartphones, gaming is a second thought. This gives these devices one enormous advantage when its come to their selling power: and that is multiple selling points, and thus a larger potential consumer demographic.

So, it's not surprising that the iPod Touch outsold Nintendo and Sony combined, because in essence it is more than one device. A more just comparison would have been to place side by side Nintendo and Sony's sales against the consumers who bought an iPod Touch specifically for gaming. I'll be damned if Apple still emerged the winner. The point I'm trying to make is that the dedicated handheld gaming market is here to stay. Casual gaming devices like the iPod Touch don't quite have the firepower, and probably never will to penetrate the desires of core gamers.

The Playstation Vita exemplifies Sony's sentiments regarding core gaming, and that is that core gaming will never turn casual. In the mobile gaming market, casual will always be king purely in terms of the magnitude of its customer base, and that's an unavoidable fact. But, conversely there will always be a small market for the consumers who want to take the experience of their home console wherever they go, and that's where Playstation Vita comes in. By sticking steadfastly by their niche market, Sony have maintained the value of their Playstation brand, and the loyalty of their consumers who, like the company they idolise, will never go casual. Betting on hardware superiority was not only the right way to go because it leveraged Sony's strength in hardware, but it's a product that their current consumer base can connect with. And with a price like US$250 for the base Wi-Fi model, it's an invitation for outsiders to join the family.

It can be argued that the likes of smartphones and other forms of casual gaming will eventually reach the level of core gaming through technological progression, after all, there's no end to improvement. However it is a fact, that it's impossible to ever reach the potential of a dedicated device on a less focused one. Smartphones have managed to reach a similar level of gaming that the PSP 3000 or PSP Go currently offer. By raising the benchmark almost impossibly high with Playstation Vita, Sony has brought very deep sentimental pleasure to core gamers. Now, handheld gamers don't have to feel like the casual invasion is catching up on them. Additionally, this is finally a worthy upgrade for current PSP users.

Having said that, what does 'Vita' mean? Kaz had a lot to say about the term Vita at E3:

"Vita means life, and we're confident that Playstation Vita will be the first product that truly blurs those lines between Playstation entertainment and your real life." - Kaz Hirai.

As Windows 8 changes the rules of Apple’s game

It's been over a week since Microsoft opened up the Windows to Windows 8 at Computex. Windows 8 is undoubtedly the biggest and boldest step that Microsoft have taken with their ubiquitous Windows platforms. Big and bold doesn't always win, but in all honesty it was a move Microsoft had to make, and in many ways Windows 8 still has one foot stuck in the old pond. Ross Rubin in his Switched On column on Engadget summed the change up perfectly with his article title: Windows loses it Windows. And it has indeed. It would not be an outrageous proposition if Microsoft decided to call the upcoming operating system 'Microsoft Tiles'.

Microsoft's latest projects has sparked much debate between analysts and journalists, some saying that the 'one for all' approach compromises on necessary features for both tablet and PC devices, however some say that the convergence provides an unrivalled feature set and experience for both devices. To be honest, I don't agree with any of these, neither do I believe that Windows 8 will be a failure. I like Windows 8 and I believe its potential is interesting and will have enormous effects on the market, both for tablets and personal computers.

Apple's approach to tablets and personal computers is obvious and straight-forward. They've stressed that we live in a post-pc age, essentially where our mobile devices become the core of our computing experiences as opposed to our traditional personal computers. This article comes at a fitting time since Mac OS X Lion was just announced a few days ago which gives me a solid ground for comparison. Lion brings many really interesting and innovative features to OS X, including the iPad like launchpad and multiple desktops – a feature that I really love. The multi-touch gestures that allow you to sweep between desktops and full screen applications and the launchpad all exemplify Apple's continual push for Post-PC. Apple is tablet-ifying the PC.

Microsoft's approach to the two computing segments is remarkably different. To be quite frank, I don't believe Microsoft has ever taken the tablet seriously until now, and most certainly doesn't have the same ideas as Apple on what a tablet should be. In Apple's eye a tablet is a new device that simplifies and makes tasks more convenient. In Microsoft's eyes, a tablet is a convenient and portable version of your PC. Microsoft are clearly aware that the user experience needs to be better optimised for touch-screen, but Windows 7 running on a tablet represents the power and versatility that Microsoft believes is possible in a tablet, and Windows 8 finally provides the user experience which has become imperative in our gadgets.

In essence, while Apple is busy tablet-ifying our PCs, Microsoft is busy PC-ing our tablets. And with the one OS for all approach is also making our PCs a little more like tablets. There was one particular announcement that stood out for me, and that was the announcement that Windows 8 would have the ability to run legacy applications despite the OS's monumental shift away from traditional Windows. This announcement surprised everyone, me included. After all, it would have been a hole-proof strategy to have built the tablet OS separately and maintained and optimised the original Windows OS for traditional personal computers. After all, two separate operating systems would allow Microsoft to fully focus on two different segments and thus provide a full experience for both. Right? It’s very easy to question Microsoft’s intelligence here, especially since surely they have learnt that desktop operating systems clearly don’t work on tablets. However, I doubt Microsoft took this decision lightly. Microsoft’s intentions are more complex than simply providing an operating system that works on tablets and PCs.

What Hybrid PCs would look like (Samsung Slider 7)

I believe that Microsoft is trying to combine the two devices. The risky approach accounts for this perfectly. Windows 8 provides OEMs a potent combination of a beautiful and user friendly tablet UI without doing away entirely with a powerful experience. Naturally, vendors are going to try and leverage both these assets of Windows 8 resulting in a breed of ‘hybrid tablet PCs’. By hybrid tablet PC, I’m referring to the likes of the Samsung Sliders and Asus Transformer. With a touch display to take advantage of the tablet UI and a keyboard to align with the power experience which Microsoft doesn't want to compromise. I’d be hard pressed to say that anyone missed the days of the spin around display tablets of old, I’m experiencing a bit of deja vu here. But unlike previously, I can actually see some real and genuine potential.

In my article stating my views on 'post-pc' I stated that notebook and tablet hybrids are a compromise. They neither offer the pure portability of a stand-alone tablet nor the power and versatility of a notebook PC. However much of the basis of my conclusion was simply that there was no OS optimised for a hybrid device. Before the unveiling of Windows 8 we only had a purely PC operating system and purely tablet and mobile operating systems. With Microsoft's new operating system, they aren't just providing these devices a second shot at life, but they're going to give birth to a new generation of them.

Windows 8 is interesting in that I definitely envision it to be successful in its hybrid form factor, but I can hardly see it as an upgrade for desktops or even normal notebooks currently. A touch oriented UI like the one on Windows 8 will never, and allow me to stress, never, work effectively on hardware that operates with mouse and cursor. Even with the easy keyboard controls that Microsoft promises. I mean, just because there's ultimately nothing wrong with operating the new Metro UI with the keyboard does not mean that it's necessarily better than what we currently have with Windows 7. No way in hell will enterprise which are traditionally slow to adopt new technologies upgrade to a new OS which works in an unwieldy manner with the hardware they currently own. Because of this, I don't really see Windows 8 as a new operating system but rather as an extension to what we have currently. As far as the demos have shown us, Windows 8 operating on a computer without touch-input is awkward, and more importantly not worth an upgrade over Windows 7.

Despite this, I'm absolutely certain Windows 8 on a hybrid PC will sure be a winner for new computer buyers.

Overall, I like Windows 8. It’s innovative, new and daring, but it remains to be seen whether it will be successful. Windows 8 will prove itself to be highly interesting and definitely one to watch. And the unexciting desktop computer space may finally exhibit a long sought for transformation. The touch optimisation of Windows 8 has strong potential to launch a new line of touch desktops, like the Vaio L. In 5 - 7 years time with Windows 8, perhaps our desktop will look like huge touch-screen slates on our desks, wouldn’t that just be marvellous?

OS X Lion is a solid update for Mac computers, but for once maybe Apple played it too conservative (but then again $30 for a new operating system is impossible to say no to). The hybrid PC’s that Microsoft has laid the eggs for could well be the thing that dismantles the universal view of what tablets are. Apple has told the world that tablets are personal ‘post-pc’ devices that are convenient with a beautifully natural user experience. With Windows 8, Microsoft wants to tell the world that tablets don’t have to be ‘post-pc’ and that it’s legitimately possible to combine the power of a full Windows experience with the nature and beauty of optimised tablet UI design. In a similar way that Apple created the game with the iPad, Microsoft has come in and is changing the rules. The big questions is, whether these new rules will gain the acceptance of the masses.

Why I love you, Sir Windows Phone

I'm going to keep this intro short, sharp and shiny. An untimely and most unbidden event occurred to me a couple of weeks ago, my Walkman lost its ability to charge. Often, it's quite difficult to forget instinctive life procedures, however I've got to hand it to my Walkman X1060, she just forgot. And what's more, she's also blatantly refusing to talk to my computer. I've just ordered a new cable off eBay just in case it's a cable problem and I'm still waiting for that to arrive, just hopefully that will fix my Walkman's most unfortunate disorder. Despite this, I know my Walkman won't last forever so I've been searching for alternatives to replace my mobile device shortage, I've decided to settle on the fact that Sony won't ever release a decent Walkman ever again.

The sheer immensity of available devices on the market was simply astounding, I went in with the expectation of landing on my dream device within a day or two, however only a fortnight later have I come to a really solid conclusion. This might surprise you, but I have fallen head over heels for Windows Phone 7. It's disappointing that this operating system is often frowned upon in the tech world for its lack of...well tech geeky features. The lack of customization is probably the OS's biggest claim to shame. Windows Phone 7 has taken a different approach than some of its competitors, and even Microsoft themselves in the past has taken, an entirely different approach. Making an operating system easily accessible and customisable places the nerd in heaven, but often too much freedom and too many options leads to inconsistent and unreliable experiences. Windows, and the previous Windows Mobile have a reputation for being highly technical, at least more so than its competitors. However this time round, I support Microsoft's new approach and strict hardware guidelines for Windows Phone devices, because boy does it pay off.

Microsoft's UI design philosophy

User interface is one of the prime factors of a great mobile experience, and this is the area where Windows Phone 7 truly delivers. It doesn't just deliver because of its visual appeal, nor is it because of its mind-blowing animations, but it is extraordinarily fun to use. The UI experience of Windows Phone really succeeds in taking a big jump away from traditional UI designs epitomised by the likes of iOS and Android. The multiple home screen and widget design of Android simply looks outdated when laid side by side with a Windows Phone. It allows us to beg the question of why we honestly need so many home screens, Windows Phone makes do with one beautifully scrolling collection of 'live tiles'. To be brutally honest, I've never met anyone who actually uses more widgets than the music player, clock, calendar, weather and news feeds; let alone use up all of their home screens. It also shows us why Apple haven't bothered with a widget implementation on their iOS platform yet, though competitive pressure somewhat obliges Apple to do so with their iOS 5.

Live tiles: Another winner for Windows Phone. To be honest I haven't had much experience with the live tiles, as you really have to own the phone for a period of time to evaluate its real world practicality and usefulness. But the concept is brilliant and far as my 10 minute trial of it went, my god its amazing! It really does add to create a really pleasurable mobile experience. The idea of Live Tiles is you can pin the things that matter to you most onto the start screen, and it will show you any updates that occur live. For example, I'm an avid Facebook user, so the Facebook Live Tile will show me any notifications that I receive without the need to access the application. And also without any irritating notification pop-ups. Same goes for Twitter and many many other applications. Heck, I can even pin people to my Live Tile display. Stalking just got a whole lot easier.

Music + Video Hub and the general WP7 sliding interface

Another thing I noticed when using Windows Phone is the feeling that things just really flow. Mind you, I'm not referring to a 'no lag' or 'high-speed' experience here but the design of the 'Metro UI'. Take the Music and Video hub or Zune as an example. When you first open the application it presents you with a list of essentially what you can do: music, video, podcast etc. But if you simply swipe to the right it will present you with your media history of all the tracks you last listened to, swipe to the right again and it will show you new additions to your library of media. This exceptional interface design is really successful in challenging and taking a jab at the concept of navigational buttons (non-tactile obviously). If you're in the music menu, there is no need to tap at anything to switch between the metadata you're viewing, rather swipe to the left or right to switch between artist or album or genre. Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 UI feels natural and intuitive - a theme I discussed in my previous article about the fate of the PC and evolving technologies.

It can be said that the umbrella reason why Windows Phone provides such a pleasurable experience - for me at least - is that it feels like a phone designed for you and adapted to your needs. Most consumers don't like having to adapt and learn their technologies, but rather in essence have technology learn the way they want to do things. This is an area where Windows Phone has hit a home run, perhaps even two home runs with one ball.

UI design is severely underrated, tech analysts have made a big deal about how many apps are available on a platform, how highly featured it is and what not. At the end of the day though, the user interface is what you feel, touch and experience and this should be the thing that makes or breaks a purchase. It's not to say the UI of competing platforms is poor, but this is an element where Windows Phone absolutely delivers. The application range of Windows Phone measures poorly against some competing platforms, but it is sufficient and will continue to grow. I'm going to throw my eggs into the Microsoft basket, and I'll be damned if the platform never gains traction.

Who has a Windows Phone and what are your thoughts on it?

*Next week, I will be doing an in-depth discussion behind the potential of Windows 8 and what it means for consumers and the tech industry.*

Where the PC stands in a 'Post-PC' invasion

I thought I would discuss an interesting and also extremely debatable topic today. Currently, where does the traditional PC market stand and what is the outlook? Is it rainbows and flowery hills or murky and hellish depths? Or is it flat and unchanging, remaining a reliable segment of the consumer electronics market. Apple's iPad 2 event was quite some time ago, however there was one theme of the unveiling event that has implanted itself in my mind. Steve Jobs - the visionary, mentioned that we are living in the 'Post - PC' world now. The iPad is Apple's third post PC 'blockbuster', following the ubiquitous iPod and iPhone.

A lot of people will consider this nothing more than a clever marketing ploy, a healthy dose of Steve Jobs charisma and Apple's corporate sugar. After all, it would make logical sense to persuade consumers into the land of post-pc products if you, yourself are almost tyrannically in control of it. However the significance of Steve's statement go far beyond his desire to take your cash, but perhaps we do live in the post-pc world now. I know people who use their conventional PC multitudinously less because of the presence of their post-pc products.

Before one can even debate the future outlook of traditional PC's, it must be first defined what 'post-pc' really means. The prefix 'post' means 'after', so logically post-PC defines products that proceed PC's. This doesn't tell us much. What defines after? It can be argued that 'after' doesn't even have a significance in this instance as we can't be 'after' PCs if they still exist. As a general term, post-pc can be best defined as products that can capably replace our traditional personal computer. Smartphones for example, can do many things that PC does albeit in a smaller and more eye-straining way. This, in essence can be considered a post-pc product.

Having said that, to analyse why a shift in demand might be imminent we have to examine how the average consumer uses their computer. I once read a funny but staggeringly true statement: a computer without internet is like a bowl without fruit. This says a lot about how consumers use computers, it's abundantly clear that we spend the majority of our time on the internet. More than often we will word process, however often the things that we write are merely products of the things that we research. On the internet. We like to think that we use a lot of media software on our computers, but in all honesty a Facebook user would be hard-pressed to say that they spend more time doing other tasks on a computer than they are on Facebook. This is one of the reasons why PC's are getting bitten by our post-pc products, it's because tablets and smartphones browse the internet so well. It's all about user experience and pinching to zoom is significantly more efficient and fun than Ctrl +, using fingers to physically scroll a page rather than a scroll ball is appealing. And of course touching links rather than clicking is pleasingly natural.

I'm not a believer of dying technologies and dying trends. In consumer electronics, things never die, they merely evolve. And that is what I believe is going to happen to our PC. We will always have PC, but in 20 years time it may look a lot different than the one I'm typing on as I speak. There was once a time when technology was all about becoming more advance and gaining leaps and bounds in technicality. The feature-set and sophistication of an offering determined how good it was. However, now I believe we've reached an era where it's all about intuition. The aim now appears to be creating products that are natural and intuitive. But also experiences that successfully mimic the real, tangible products that they replace.

This might be hard to understand, but here's a scenario: Real magazines are so yesterday. It's all about the magazine subscription on your iPad. The flicking of the screen for page turning aims to mimic the experience of a real magazine, which dare I say will never be replaced. Ebook readers aim to do the same with the same flicking motion to turn pages and their paper like displays. This is also why I believe the stylus is up for a come back, the HTC Flyer has revealed its potential. People do not write with their fingers, people write with pens, and the Flyer successfully imitates the usefulness of taking notes and highlighting and circling important points. It's the only tablet on the market which can really act like one of man's timeless creations: pen and paper.

The unreleased Mac OS X Lion heads the PC transformation. The intuition factor of the iPad plays a huge part in the design of Lion. The advertised features are no longer about the inside workings and the intermediates, but rather it's about getting things done more naturally and easily. For example the new Airdrop feature removes the stigma of difficulty out of wireless file sharing. Sharing files shouldn't be a hard task, after all in the real world it would only require you to grab your paper, walk over to the person you want to give it to and physically hand it to them. It shouldn't be any harder than that on a computer. The concept of Airdrop succeeds in creating technologies as easy as nature, simply drag the file onto someone's name.

Having said this, PC will never become a tablet. The sheer feeling of productivity and power of using an actual computer will never be able to be emulated in a touchy-feely device like a tablet or a smartphone. I'm not a believer in keyboard slider tablets either, or the tablets of old with the spin around displays and touch-pen input. On paper, they are superior devices but they are merely a compromise. They neither offer the pure portability of a tablet, nor do they offer the full power of a dedicated personal computer. Nobody will ever be expected to get much work done on a tablet, they are by enlarge convenience devices which allow you to quickly touch up things. They've never been intended to be the device where you can start and complete projects. Tablet's lack of keyboard is one of the main reasons for this. So what about the Asus EeePad Transformer, or Samsung Slider? Yes, you could very well add a keyboard to a tablet, but it doesn't really measure up. If you truly wanted to be productive then I'm sure most people, and I personally would just buy a portable and capable notebook. Like a Macbook Air, for instance.

It's not about the convergence of devices, and it's not about how much a certain device can do but rather how well it does them. This is the philosophy that spells out the future of any of our devices. It's not logical to build a 5 inch smartphone/tablet, as just because it can be two devices at once, it doesn't mean that it's necessarily going to be good at them. Personally, I don't want my phone to be 5 inches, because its large screen real estate would eat into the portability factor. A tablet will supply for my large screen appetite, and personally I don't want my tablet to have a keyboard because guess what? That's what my laptop's for.

Phone, tablet, laptop: three products that serve their purpose fully and well.

Consumers don't want compromise, obviously. Nobody wants a compromise. However many manufacturers are willing to provide just that because they believe that the more devices they can combine into one determines its quality. Rather it is how well it performs its purpose that determines how good it really is. Tablets are defining the shift in consumer technology, their sales are strong because they do some of the things that PC can do in a far more natural and intuitive way. However it can't do the thing that makes PC so essential: efficiently complete work. PC will evolve and will definitely introduce more tablet like features and develop more natural and life-like experiences. But one thing's for sure -

The PC will never become a 'Post-PC' product. The PC is here to stay.

Capturing the 'indecipherable' ladies market

Beyond stereotypical image of two women frolicking in their natural habitat

What is it that females look for in their consumer electronics? This is a puzzle that has baffled manufacturers for many years, and still no one has perfected the 'ladies' device. A brief look at the behaviours of your typical female and it's not difficult to see several traits that most of the species share: a love for fashion, shopping and social networking. And of course texting. Naturally, they are very social creatures.

Given this brief analysis of female interests, dedicated ladies electronics have generally been extremely stereotypical.  Most if not all dedicated ladies phones are jam packed with shopping applications, certain texting features, QWERTY keypads, crocodile skin aesthetics and often laden with that ghastly colour of hot pink. Perhaps throw in a free handbag in there too. None of these approaches have ever successfully completed the puzzle of consumer technology for females. I don't want to be stereotypical and say that all women are make-up obsessed, window shopping addicts, as thank god I have met many girls who are not like this. However, the general consensus is that there are many females that fit this description and a lot of consumer electronics vendors are trying to target just this. I'm going to explain why targeting females in such unimaginative ways will never work, and why targeting females at all is just an inefficient waste of time.

You might have noticed that the word indecipherable in the article title, is placed between apostrophes. This is because people assume that the ladies market is so confusing and unbreakable. We wonder if women want pink phones, or petite handbag sized netbooks. However in the end there is nothing to decipher at all. It's not as difficult as it is made out to be, there's no need to go into the deep complexities of female psychology. But rather, we just need to know one simple fact: women are just looking for a great experience. 

The fact that most women aren't as knowledgeable or interested in the tech field has forced manufacturers to blindly assume that women are to be targeted separately via alternative means. Instead of having normal products for normal people, there's suddenly a need to have modified phones for women. It's like they're not normal humans! However, piecing apart the overall market and providing tailored products for individual segments not only dilutes the value and unity of products in the lineup, but is essentially more costly. Piecing apart and spreading the target market also means spreading promotional expenditure and support expenditure. It's an inefficient way to do business. I'm not necessarily a supporter of small one product line-ups, since one product is often not enough to be able to encapsulate the entirety of the target market. However the ratio of products to consumers should always remain as small as possible. Apple has done well in this respect, though they represent an extreme in this philosophy. The iPhone is one product for all, it suits females, it suits males, it suits students and it suits business professionals.

I know there are many people and manufacturers that would aggressively counter this philosophy, Samsung is probably the most prominent of such offenders. In my opinion Samsung's smartphone line-up is excessive. Excessive to the power of 4. Daily, there is a new review of a Samsung handset: Infuse 4G, Galaxy S II, Droid Charge and plenty more. To be brutally honest, only one or two of these have a legitimate reason for existence. The Galaxy S II is a great phone, and most of the others are just cheap copies of the same device. Evidently, Samsung is trying to break the smartphone market through pure scale. Not much effort has gone into branding or exclusivity, however the 'shove in your face' factor forms the core of Samsung's smartphone effort. They want that obnoxious Samsung logo to be so ubiquitous that when picking a smartphone, the odds are that you'll end up with a Samsung. I can't say that this plan isn't effective, because I would be lying and the ubiquity of Samsung's smartphone effort is from what I've heard proving to be effective. And Samsung's strong hardware calibre has definitely earned the respect of technology enthusiasts. However speaking as a consumer and analyser of such technologies, this strategy offers little in terms of gaining brand value and consumer respect. Only time will tell Samsung's prospects.

Back on topic (consumer electronics for females), another factor that must be considered is a product's general ease of use and tech appeal. And by tech appeal, I'm referring to a lesser focus on tech appeal. A recent article that I wrote talked much about most vendors focus on hardware superiority in the tablet space, instead of aiming to excel in user experience. If technology nerds are the target market, this strategy is gold, however for everyone else and particularly ladies this strategy is far from effective. In this regard, I could say I'm much like a female, I couldn't care less about that 'ghz' and 'dual-core' junk. If it works well and smoothly then it works for me. This is why expert studies have shown that females have a strong preference for iOS over the geeky Android. iOS's omnipresence and 'I don't need a manual' interface has ensured that a lot of consumers are aware of iOS's great user experience. Android's geeky name, general geek appeal, and tailored user experience across difference devices has added confusion and complexity into Android purchases. For example, just because the Galaxy S II is a brilliant phone, I can't be guaranteed that Xperia Arc which runs on Android too will likewise be a great phone. On the flip side, I can be certain that the white iPhone 4 will be just as good as the black iPhone 4, and iPad 2 will definitely be an improvement over iPad 1. 

All up, I have shown two effective to captivate the minds of females. Being stereotyped as pink-loving window shoppers is not one of them. In actual fact, I believe that females dislike being patronised in such a way, the need to have devices specially tailored for them is somewhat degrading and evokes the feeling of deficiency. The most efficient way to capture females is to pull them into the company's overall target market, not aim for them individually by taking them out of the target market. Once again, females are just like males, looking for a great user experience, however, minus the hardware complexities.

What do you think about selling consumer electronics to women? Is it easier or harder than it looks?

Recollecting Sony's handling of the hacker quandary: Stringer must go.

Given it's the biggest tech news going around these two weeks I thought I would comment on the PSN hacking debacle and how Sony have handled it, or not handled it. I'm not going to go into detail about the specifics and intermediates of the event as you've probably read it millions of times and are sick of the same news all over again. Overall, I would rate Sony's handling of the situation decent, but to be honest not too flash. It was largely because of the initial delayed responses and the general lack of specifics that made consumers nervous, and even angry. However, updates have been consistent and frequent which is great, and the occasional Q & A's have really assisted in keeping nervous consumers informed.

I'm not a Playstation or Qriocity customer myself, which you might say is odd given that I blog about this stuff weekly. There were many aspects of Sony's handling that I found disappointing. The fact that Kaz Hirai addressed and apologised to the public in an entirely Japanese press meeting was unacceptable. It's not modern news that Sony is a Japanese company and many of the execs speak Japanese much more fluently and understandably than they do English, however this is a worldwide problem and the least they could do is address a worldwide audience. We have seen the execs speak English at CES, which is a proud and beneficial event for an electronics corporation. However in this case of shame and mortification it is abundantly clear they've chosen to hide behind the language barrier.

Which brings me to my next point, and most important point, where was Howard Stringer? In this situation of desperation where a leader need be present to show agitated consumers who's in control. Perhaps casually lazing by a pool or a high-end game of golf with other wealthy figures. It's not a good image when a leader is present in such events like CES to promote products, yet goes missing for a fortnight when he's most needed to repair the products. Being a leader is not a title or a job. Becoming a leader is crafted by actions, and Stringer's lack of action and commitment has seen my respect bar for him drop to a new low. It was only today, two weeks after the situation began that he issued a public letter to consumers. Even this was simply an echo of what has already been said far too many times by the Sony group. Themes like 'we are sorry', 'we've been working around the clock', 'the hacking was a criminal act' were rampant in Stringer's letter, and yet the letter failed to offer any strong answers to the questions that have been haunting customers for the last 14 days. The media has been all over him for not going public since the incident began, this overdue letter is simply to seek the praise and acceptance of the media.


I believe that this lack of commitment shows us that Stringer is certainly not the right person to head Sony. It's time that Stringer left the helm. It's time for a new face for Sony, one that represents light and potential for the corporation. Stringer's charisma fooled me, he is definitely not the man for the job.


Stringer's need to leave isn't solely because of the hacker outbreak, but this incident represents a possible breaking point. Now I realise that he's a funny and painfully charming man with not enough knowledge in consumer electronics and consumer behaviour to really drive Sony forward. When Stringer took the top job in 2005, he brought along with him several goals with which he wanted to achieve by the end of his tenure. Most notably, the one he wanted to achieve was breaking down 'silo walls'. He wanted the company to integrate its technologies, to work together on projects instead of separately, and to create a unified product line. So far that hasn't happened. I understand that company turnarounds of such magnitude require time but 6 years is simply too long. He turned Sony into a shallow corporation, throwing big parties, huge events and flashy marketing campaigns for products that would never live up to the hype. Walkman X for example was launched in a decorated train carriage, however Walkman X wasn't even able to create a ripple in the MP3 market. The PS3 is now fighting for top spot, when its predecessor the PS2 had an almost impassable lead. And besides all this, the corporation's media subsidiaries Sony Pictures and Sony Music still aren't creating any worthy synergy with the hardware that the company sells.

Sony's inability to provide competitive products in a competitive market has been troubling. The inability to create a unified platform despite their bounty of resources is disappointing. And more importantly, their inability to recapture the spirit of the old days is the biggest problem of them all. The PSN predicament is the bubble burst for Stringer. Stringer had the right idea, however didn't go about them effectively. Under Stringer, the company has created products and attempted to integrate them later, however products need to be created with the sole purpose of integration in mind.

Is Kaz Hirai the right man for the job then? I thought so, however I think Kaz Hirai's reputation has been jeopardised by Stringer's ineptitude. In my opinion, a young fresh mind is what the company needs to feed its innovation appetite once again. A young fresh mind, or a beginners mind. Beginners minds are great because they aren't hampered by difficult past experiences, their minds aren't infected by 'oh, we tried that, this won't work'. Like infants, they are curious and creative, and their thoughts are ocassionally out of line with deemed reality, yet can often lead to ridiculously innovative ideas. The best products aren't created through thorough market research, however purely from a sense of the consumers desires. Additionally, I believe that it would be preferable to have someone who can't be associated with such mishaps like this hacker debacle.

Perhaps it's a good thing that the hacking has happened, its allowed Sony to rethink what's gone wrong and possibly make for a restructuring of the company's board. Stringer is a good man no doubt, however his lack of commitment and passion for the Sony group has been clearly evident this fortnight, and this is the last thing Sony needs.

What are your thoughts on Stringer?

Imperfect technologies: The two faces of dual-screen.

I think that the concept of multiple screen devices falls along with the stylus in the box of brilliant concepts that have never quite been executed to the point of perfection. Both of these technologies are applicable to tablet devices and mobile computing, the stylus used to be the primary input method for PDA's and old mobile contraptions of the like. As for dual-screen, off the top of my head I can only think of one iconic device or trend that has utilised this idea, an that is the Nintendo DS.

The success of Apple often forces us to believe that Apple's way and concepts are the only truly effective ways to do things. For example manufacturers have believed that since the iPad has been such a phenomenal success, therefore large touch screen devices are what they should be making. However, it's simply because there is nothing better in the market currently. It's great to know this since it means that certain ideas such as the stylus and dual-screen are not dead, however simply need to be implemented in a way that is not outdated or just a burden as such. In this article I will be talking about the advantages and disadvantages of dual screen and how I believe it can be successfully implemented. Hence the two faces.

To be honest, I don't think I have seen a successful application of dual-screen ever, apart from the Nintendo DS handheld. And being a small gaming device, it's hard to apply the same ideas that have contributed to the DS's success to tablet devices and mobile computing. The Acer Iconia Touchbook isn't a terrible attempt, however there are many of the same issues that have plauged dual-screen devices in the past present. And once again, its limitations and annoyances, most particularly the touch-screen keyboard don't make up for its increased screen real estate. Also, that obnoxious gap between the two displays that has been haunting the dual screen concept for a long time, has still not been taken care of or put to good use.

A rather obvious and large advantage of the two screens is basically more display estate for essentially the same size given their ability to fold up. One of the limitations - not quite a limitation but on a relative scale when compared with dual screen devices - of tablets is simply the fact that a 10 inch form factor will only permit at most a 10 inch display. Whereas on dual screen devices, it can be double that.

The gap or hinge between the two displays is often viewed as a hindrance to dual screen contraptions, and if nothing is done to help put them to good use then it really is one of the most infuriating limitations technology has ever seen. However, since nothing can be done to get rid of it, the logical way is to find some way in which it can actually assist us. Much the same way that Sony should have hired George Hotz to help build security measures into the Playstation products. Nonetheless, I believe that the gap can be useful, because it provides a physical or mental boundary between certain tasks. Come to think of it, its potential in multitasking productivity is quite vast. Any of you Windows 7 users will know how handy that quick snap split screen feature really is, I myself didn't know how much I needed this nifty functionality until I got my hands on Windows 7.

Dual screen contraptions can work in much the same way. Perhaps you want to download some PDF's while sending an email to your boss, or play a game with the capability of not having your fat thumb on the persons face that you're trying to shoot. Perhaps you want to IMDB a certain movie on one display, while watching it on the other display. Maybe something much more simple, like working on your files on one display while organising it on the other. All of these inevitably increase productivity significantly.

Apple's success has created the assumption that tablets are all about 99 cent apps, having fun, making movies and playing music and not about productivity as such. You could argue that the iPad does have many apps available that sufficiently do productive tasks, however Apple doesn't market it this way therefore obviously doesn't intend the iPad to be this. However the fact is that consumers actually do want to get work done on tablets. The desire to do productive work on tablets is evident because many consumers are struggling to make the pick between a low end notebook or a tablet, obviously because they want the tablet form factor but the productive capabilities of the notebook.

Dual-screen lends a lot in terms of its practicality in doing productive tasks. The last in my pack of useful functions: 'organising files while working on them' is actually quite an important one, and one that I believe will be of great use to consumers. Most of the other examples are somewhat obvious, however this one's potency will be often underestimated. By organising files, I don't mean specifically that, however it represents an umbrella word for sorting things out, putting things together and accessing things easily.

Perchance you're just gathering some information for a particular assignment, just snippets of a webpage, and an image or two. Instead of arduously undergoing a tedious copy and paste process, flicking snippets and images onto the other display for collection or accumulation is an increasingly more appealing way to get work done. Another example would be using one display as a Windows Explorer / Mac Finder kind of thing, and the other for previewing files or working on them, this would allow constant and easy access to content.

Think about the iPad, it doesn't offer the same ease of use in multi-tasking as this dual screen approach would. Working side by side is essentially impossible, and using two windows or applications at once requires constantly flipping between the two, which is hardly productive. An apt dual screen approach should be able to eradicate such restrictions.

Many people when thinking of dual screen devices form this image in their head of someone holding one like a book, however dual-screens versatility in itself is potentially a huge selling point. Hold it like a book, use it like a notebook, game on one like a DS: it's all possible with two screens. Obviously some uses will be impractical if the size of the device does not permit, for example DS-like gaming on two 10-inch displays in somewhat preposterous. However as was seen in the Sony S2 dual-screen tablet promo video, a demonstration was shown depicting the bottom screen being used for game controls, whilst the top obviously for the game visuals. This is great for gamers since there is nothing worse then having fingers in the way of gameplay.

Dual-screen isn't the only way in which true productivity can be achieved on a tablet or mobile device, however it's definitely a step in the right direction. Despite its strong benefits there are many things that can really hamper the dual-screen experience, and most of these crimes have been committed already.

Simply having two screens for the sake of having two screens is extremely distasteful. The gap between the screen has no use when dual-screen is implemented in this manner, and only makes the user progressively more frustrated that there is gaping black line running through their Youtube video or webpage. In extreme cases the frustration can escalate to a point where the user snaps the device in two hoping to end up with two singular screen devices. Also, if no OS optimisation is made to take advantage of the two screens, then again it is simply wasted.

Perhaps one day dual-screen will finally be able to reach its full potential. With current available software and operating systems, none of them are built specifically optimised to take advantage of dual screens. Android I suppose can be customised, but I have mentioned before that customisation can only go so far. In the end, the double screen concept needs truly capable software to back it up, otherwise it's just like a beautiful glass with no Coke inside. Manufacturers moreover need to not be afraid to go against Apple's flow, I said this in one of my older articles regarding the 'sea of sameness', but the key really is 'don't sell what a consumer is buying, sell what a consumer wants'. Does the consumer really want what they're buying? They think so but their preferences can only go as far as what they see available. The iPad is the only thing that's truly appealing, perhaps a really great dual-screen tablet with an optimised OS is what consumers want even more. 

Competing in a fat tablet market, and why Android is the culprit.

We can't all help but notice the continuing overflow of tablets coming into the market. Tablet after tablet, here and there, most of no differentiation to one another. The announcement of Sony's tablet comes as no surprise as inevitably Sony would want to join the big party, albeit a little late. The product didn't surprise me either: Honeycomb, Qriocity, 'Playstation Certified' were all expected, the dual screen clamshell was surprising, especially Sony's odd design. Instead of the traditional linear chassis, instead they have opted for a distinctively curved design, which looks astoundingly similar to those glasses cases that have the ability of closing from both directions. I hope you know what I'm talking about as I am at a loss in better ways to explain it.

Nonetheless, Sony's entrance into the tablet space is well, just another tablet. Just another Android tablet.

I wanted to discuss the overflow of products in this segment with this article, it has been discussed many times before but it simply gets all the more prominent every passing day. Almost everyday, when I hang out on tech blogs, there's bound to be a new post with a table, displaying a new tablet's specifications, display size, processor, Honeycomb no doubt. And possibly a release date. Ok, cool. Forgotten. Another new tablet: Wow, Tegra 2, 1ghz dual-core! Cool story bro. Another one? The point is that all these devices are flooding in, and most of them don't manage to take hold and are just dropping in like dead fish into the sea of sameness. Instead of being, a glorious and vibrant emerging market, the tablet segment is becoming a breeding zone for 'me too' devices. We're not seeing a great collection of products that scream innovation and freshness, but rather a pile of cheap devices made simply with the mentality of 'I can do that too'.
I can sum it up pretty well in this rather clever analogy, the tablet market isn't expanding in a good way, too many devices of no value or differentiation don't add value to magnitude, rather the tablet market is becoming much like an obese person, filled with fat and excess, with little muscle.

If I was to pick someone to blame for this shocking outcome, you'll be surprised at who I'm pointing my finger at: Android.

This is certainly not a bad thing, and given some of my previous articles you might be deceived into thinking that I'm not a fan of Android. In actual fact, speaking as a consumer, we can never really get enough options or choices and Android has provided us virtually limitless choices. Speaking from a vendor's point of view however, Android's benefits have been countered almost equally by a set of growing disadvantages. There's no doubting that the sole benefit that Android has provided to its OEM's is a very good operating system with a vast app store, to compete sufficiently with the iOS app store. Additionally, OEM's will not have to spend time and funds to build their own operating system which would inherently be inferior due to the initial lack of third party applications. Sounds great at first glance, but what is most disadvantageous, is that all potential OEM's have access to this operating system, thus creating an enormous environment of virtually identical devices made by different manufacturers.

This creates the quite grand problem of finding a way to make your product exclusive amongst almost indistinguishable competitors. It's impossible to stand out in terms of app selection. It's possible to stand out in terms of user experience, but Android can only be skinned so much until it becomes loaded and impractical. Simply, in terms of the devices software, there is no way to give it enough exclusivity to warrant a no-brainer purchase over other Android competitors nor is there enough exclusivity to warrant a significant price gap over competitors as well. Thus, competing purely with software, the only hole-proof way to win in the Android space is via competitive pricing. And because bare-bones products with rock bottom prices is not feasible to many licensees, it is evident that many vendors have decided that in order to attract consumers, they must win in the hardware space. It's very obvious: high end processors, better graphic capabilities, more RAM, and faster 3G or 4G internet access. Instead of placing an emphasis on a great user experience, it appears that the focus is now on the fact that it's fast, it's light and possibly more physical connectivity to peripherals. Maybe even an attachable keyboard.
These are all good things but at the end of the day the consumer makes a decision based on four fundamental factors: how enjoyable something is to use, how easy it is to use, how customisable the device is and how attractive the product design is. Of these four major factors, only one corresponds directly to the quality of the hardware.

It's common knowledge that in a digital and connected age, the software takes precedence over the hardware. TV's are no longer purchased primarily on the quality of the picture, phones are no longer focused on call quality, nor are tablets made or broken by the specifications of the components inside. The software is what consumers experience and feel and 'connect' with, if the software isn't up to scratch, there's no way hardware can save that. This is why the Xoom was so astoundingly underwhelming at launch, and more importantly its sales volume was vastly disappointing. The Xoom was just another Honeycomb tablet, albeit the first one, and it didn't quite strike a home run with its hardware either. Despite its Tegra 2 and powerful innards, the display quality disappointed.

It's difficult, and more or less a Catch 22 situation for Android OEM's. Either win in the hardware arena or create a cheap no-frills Android tablet. None of these options is optimal in winning back market share from Apple. Through my eyes, I see two ways out of this quagmire: either introduce an exclusive service, or go out on a limb and just create an innovative and entirely new product. Possibly even start up a sub-market within the tablet segment. Neither of these are as simple as it sounds. However if there's one company off the top of my head that has the framework to achieve both of these, it's Sony.

The Playstation brand is much like a stepping stone for everywhere that Sony decides to go, and I understand and I encourage that since it would be wasteful to not utilise such a strong brand. Unfortunately though they've decided to ruin the potential exclusivity of 'Playstation Certified' by allowing it to be used by all Android vendors. However, Qriocity is still an exclusive Sony only service presently and represents the first way out of the Android dilemma: introducing an exclusive service. Like I said it's not as simple as just implementing the service into Sony devices. Qriocity is not yet a strong enough brand in its own right, and iTunes still has the immense trust and loyalty of its consumers. Also speaking of trust and reliability, Qriocity's reputation has already been damaged by the hacker predicament from the last week involving credit card access and service shut downs. Qriocity is still in relative infancy and requires time to grow, and just as importantly more funds need to be directed into marketing.

Additionally, in regards to 'creating an innovative and entirely new product' Sony has the building blocks for this too, and it was just announced this week. I'm referring to the S2 tablet, the dual-screen sun glasses case looking contraption. In my next article I will be talking more deeply about the advantages and disadvantages of the dual-screen concept. What I can say now is that dual screen has great potential if executed correctly. I don't think I've seen any manufacturer quite nail the two screen idea yet, apart from Nintendo. And even though the Nintendo DS has been a winner in the sales department, there's certainly room for improvement.

All the same, you've probably inferred it's becoming increasingly difficult for manufacturers to compete in an ever expanding tablet market. Each time a new generic Android device pops up, no matter how poor it is, everyone takes a hit. The Android arena has more or less been split into two major segments: low end no frill tablets for the simple minded and high end power tablets for the tech savvy. Here, the high end manufacturers are putting all their eggs into the hardware basket in an attempt to fend off competing Android tablets but are mindlessly missing the bigger picture. iPad. In essence, despite their obviously smaller ecosystems, platforms like webOS, and Blackberry tablet OS are in a better position, merely because they don't have to compete against generic rivals in a price battle. They can consequently put their focus into slaying the monster (iPad), not their 'allies'. Being exclusive has these advantages.

My analysis concludes that the availability of Android is become as much of a problem as it as an advantage. Given the immense scale of the Android ecosystem, manufacturers of Android tablets therefore have to deal with two battles: the battle against competing Android vendors and the more important battle against the iPad. If the race continues this way, individual Android OEM's will never be winners unless of course they can create a winning formula in either two methods I described earlier: introduce exclusive services or create entirely new products.

Confessions from a Walkman devotee. How long can a fan hold on?

Dear Sony, when are you due for a Walkman X upgrade?

Often I ask myself this question, yet I can never be sure whether a new Walkman is in the works. Nobody really knows if Sony have completely given up on the Walkman, the X series I mean. Will there still be a market for standalone PMPs in around 5 years time? Questionable. My Walkman X1060 isn't getting old or dilapidated by any means, in actual fact I can proudly say it's in pristine condition. My leather case has protected my little baby well. But why do I always search Walkman in Google news to see what rumors have sparked regarding an upgrade. I guess, it's just the comfort I'm seeking of knowing what my next media player will be once my Walkman really does go down the drain.

...Perhaps I should tell you the story from the start.

3 years ago I was the proud owner of a Sony Ericsson Walkman W880i phone, if you're familiar with the 'About Me' section of this blog you would know exactly the phone I'm talking about. That very phone served me from late 6th grade through to mid 8th grade as my primary music player. With its 1GB M2 micro memory card, the little in-ear Sony Ericsson buds and that booming Megabass EQ function, that phone kept me rocking all that time, my boredom buddy I would call it. Yes I know, 1GB was enough for me at the time, how many songs could a 7th grader have? As time progressed though, I started to feel like some sort of outcast. All my mates had their iPod nanos and those ubiquitous white buds while here I was rocking my 1 gig worth of tracks on a Sony Ericsson handset. Like the normal kid I was, I succumbed to the pressure and bought an iPod, an iPod Touch. How quickly I went from just the ordinary phone guy to the one with the iPod was astonishing. Back in that time the iPod Touch was a rare specimen in our school, I believe I was the first one in the year level to get one. I would have mates scrambling around me often to try out that cool app: iBowl, Tap Tap Revenge, Crash Kart, old classics like that. I would even have kids I had never talked to or affiliated myself with come up to me for a spin on the Touch. But over time the cool appeal faded. Everybody had an iPod Touch, apps lost their usefulness and jailbreaking took the satisfaction and joy out of purchasing apps.

And I was missing my booming Megabass.

Then strolled in Walkman A729, my first dedicated Sony media player. Oh, the sound! Boy I missed the bliss of quality sound after using that iPod. That booming bass, those fantastic rubber tip earbuds. But how an upgrade could be such a downgrade! I took for granted the convenience of a browser on a mobile device, I took for granted so many functions on my iPod that I overlooked when I had it in my possession. The dictionary I missed the most. Oh, the arduousness of flipping through an actual dictionary. With my Walkman A729, I felt unique that's for sure, but along with that I felt regressed somewhat. I had thrown away all the perks of the Touch and gone back to the bare basics of music, video and photos. And a clock. How could I enjoy the sound quality of owning a Walkman, yet still enjoy the extra perks that my Touch had offered? I knew that I couldn't quite have it all, there had to be some kind of compromise somewhere. Walkman X was my first viable option, it had the internet browsing, touch screen and Youtube, and as far as my research concluded still had the same legendary sound quality I had expected from my experiences with Walkman A729. And like a cherry on the cake it had Digital noise cancelling to top it off. Timely as a sparrow at dawn I spotted a great deal on eBay, and prancing in came Walkman X1060. 12 movies, a TV season and 1500 songs later, here I am today.
The proud owner of a Walkman X series.

There's about 3 years of my life summed up in a lengthy couple of paragraphs. I hope you get the gist. I've never been afraid of voicing my devotion to the Walkman, however that has changed of late. I'm still a fan but lately I've felt that I'm only devoted to the brand and not so much the product itself. I have absolutely no problem in saying I'm a proud owner of a Walkman but every time I pull the contraption out of my pocket, the feeling doesn't quite equate.

I have received an innumerable number of inquisitions over why I didn't just get an iPod Touch instead. The apps and the whole iTunes ecosystem is so bloody tempting. There is no way I could possibly counter iOS's enormous ecosystem of content. What could I say about the Walkman? Well it has great sound quality and it...it...has an OLED screen and it...well yeah. Here I am defending a brand that I've been solely devoted to for the last three years when really there is nothing of fundamental value there to defend. I was a fanboy by all means and perhaps I still am. Fanboys are blind, and now I realise how blind I really was. I look back and I see that sacrificed so much just to get behind a brand and a product that I was so mindlessly in love with.

Had I stuck with the iPod instead perhaps things would be so much different. I haven't touched that horrific browser on the Walkman in months, I would rather wait for a computer to boot if I wanted to Google something. At least I have the comfort of knowing that it will be able to render correctly the sites I will be visiting. Not to mention that diabolical keypad on the Walkman. The real world practicality of apps is questionable but perhaps I would be doing so many things in a more mobile manner and more efficiently with the iPod. The Walkman X's limited capabilities don't help with anything besides enjoying my media. How many times have I shamefully asked to use someone else's iPod or iPhone to briefly check something up, or even worse, to play an app? Numerous times, and all that time they're probably thinking: 'sucked in bud, should've got an iPod'.

I was fully aware of the Walkman's limitations before I purchased it. I can't recall what was going through my head when I made my mind and settled on the Walkman, but I guess I figured, it's a great price on eBay, when the new Walkman comes out I'll just sell the X back and hopefully break even. Then of course purchase the new one which would hopefully be awesome. It seemed like a pretty hole-proof plan, I did overlook one hole though. That was if Sony never made a new Walkman. Well right now, air is seeping through that one hole, and its getting larger and larger.

Sony knows what the fans want: a proper browser, apps, a comparable experience to what the iPod Touch is offering. But instead they mock us, chucking out irrelevant junk like the E series and the S series. The only decent offering being the A series, which satanically isn't available in the states and has been removed from the market here in Australia. The Xperia phones are nice aren't they, but I've already got a phone, I'm not a mountain of money. Not to mention the Xperia phones don't even carry Walkman brandng for their music players - no thank you says Walkman fan. Additionally a dedicated Walkman phone doesn't appeal to any of us, because it's just not the same, it doesn't offer the legendary sound quality we've all been spoilt with and it's really just fan bait. I get the feeling that Walkman phones only take advantage of the loyalty of Walkman users.

'Oh, our smartphone business is a little down, don't worry we'll chuck a 'W' on one of those phones and those fanboy suckers will be salivating more than a twelve year old reading Twilight.' 

There's nothing differentiating in terms of their functionality, they just have a nice orange 'W' slapped on. Sony I hate to tell you, but your Walkman devotees have a sweet bevy of alternatives at their hands: Zune HD, certain Cowon models... We're not readily just going to pick up a Zune and just ditch the Walkman. But Sony's tempting an exodus.

It's confusing, what do they want to do with the Walkman. Are they just going to ditch a brand that literally carried them for 30 odd years, one of their most famous and beloved brands thrown into the dust just like that? Are they really that morally deficient? I don't know, perhaps for the sake of business sense. Nobody can know what's going inside the heads of the Walkman department at Sony HQ, but I think they're confused. Stuck between saving an old brand, or utilising other methods to get themselves started in portable entertainment. But all this time while they're stuck deciding, my Walkman X gets older and older. New iOS and Android devices keep on pouring in, pushing my Walkman further and further behind the times. In a few years time my Walkman will be like the tortoise in the the tortoise and the hare, but this time, the hare never stops. Yet, when my Walkman's time is up and no new quality Walkman comes out...I'm in uncharted waters.

Do I think Sony's going to roll out a new Walkman? No, but I still want one all the same. I'm hesitating in getting a new PMP or maybe a smartphone simply because there is still an inkling of hope I will be able to enjoy Walkman again in a beefy new flavour. If I make the leap and switch somewhere else, I would sorely miss the sound, and the Digital Noise Cancelling. But do these features and that 'W' logo really measure up against the sacrifices I've had to make to obtain them. I used to think so, but in a growing and expanding age I'm beginning to doubt it now. Zune HD will give me great sound with some apps and a decent browser. iPod Touch will give me everything with forgiveable sound. And an Android smartphone will give me everything too, with decent sound also I suspect. Perhaps it's time to make the leap, I'm beginning to think waiting for a new Walkman won't bear me any fruits.

I don't regret my purchase of the Walkman X mind you. It's a great media player and the noise cancelling has really assisted in shutting up the noisy private school snobs on the tram. However when it's time for upgrade and there really is no upgrade, I have no choice but to jump ship. It doesn't leave me, a Walkman diehard in a good place, to me, it's a moral dilemma. I take this stuff too personally. In the face of stiff competition and continual releases of new devices, the limitations and sheer backwardness of Walkman X really come to light. Thus I've come to the realisation and many other anxious Walkman fans that we can't let the connection for the 'W' hold us back any further. How can we expect to cling on and have faith in a brand that really doesn't have any faith in itself.

I'm sticking with Walkman X for now, it's not the time yet. But remember Sony, time to get the act together, or you're losing me too...