- Benjamin Wiederkehr On Twitter: Yeah No Biggy At All: @tableau For Mac Download
- Benjamin Wiederkehr On Twitter: Yeah No Biggy At All: @tableau For Mac Free
- Benjamin Wiederkehr On Twitter: Yeah No Biggy At All: @tableau For Mac Pro
I was going to let this one slide, but people kept commenting, essentially trashing FlowingData, and that’s just not cool. As you might recall, I put in my picks for the a while back. They were the fine work of statisticians, designers, and computer scientists, all of them beautiful, and all of them built to tell an interesting story with the dataset at hand. None of them were traditional graphs or charts. Design Sucks In a post titled earlier this week, a friend of Andrew Gelman’s responded to my picks: “Does this stuff suck?
Search the history of over 336 billion web pages on the Internet.
Or am I missing something?” Andrew replied, “Yes, I agree. They all suck (for the purpose of data display).” I didn’t think all that much of it. I knew what Andrew meant (after I got over my ). My project picks don’t work as analysis tools, and that’s true, because they were made for presentation more than anything else. The comments that followed, however, were what got me going.
They serve as yet another reason for me to believe that statisticians (and a lot of the analytically-minded), in general, are clueless about (or unjustifiably against) visualization outside their own field of expertise. It’s this sort of narrow-mindedness that has kept statistical visualization looking pretty much the same for the past few decades. Sure, add some interaction here, change a color there, but take that away and you’ve got the same stuff John Tukey was writing about in Exploratory Data Analysis (1970). Don’t get me wrong. Tukey is great. This was before computers though. I just got done reading about how to draw my graphs with a pencil and to use a pen for extra emphasis.
Boo Technology Data has changed since then my fellow statisticians. We don’t draw our graphs with pencils and use a pen to make things bold anymore. We have computers, and believe it or not there is software and programming languages that work better than in some situations. Again, don’t get me wrong. R is excellent. I’m just saying you don’t have to do everything with it. Like data parsing.
Python is pretty good at that last time I checked. Look at the cool stuff coming out of the MIT Media Lab or HCIL at Maryland. We should be doing that type of stuff. Trying new things.
Computer scientists and designers are doing it every day. Some of the stuff might be a bit clunky or useless, yes, but at least they’re thinking about (and implementing) new ways to explore. That’s how we learn. Why not statisticians? It’s all about bar graphs, scatterplots, time series charts and ways to combine methods we already know.
Everything else is labeled chart junk, which seems to have developed in to the visualization equivalent of. Maybe this is because of a lack of technological know-how. After all, statistical computing is still a relatively new idea, but still, open up your mind to the possibility of something new. Traditional statistical visualization will only take you so far, and sooner more than later, the statistical tools that you are so accustomed to won’t be enough. You shouldn’t have to fetch a computer scientist to set things in motion. Don’t knock something just because it takes more than a moment to understand.
Garbage There was even one commenter who went so far as to call most of what appears on FlowingData garbage, which is absolutely unacceptable. Andrew, who I feel is more on my side on this one, disagreed.
I, of course, completely disagree. This isn’t just an insult to me and what I do, but to every person and group I’ve ever posted about. Stamen Design. Jonathan Harris.
Martin Wattenberg. The New York Times. I don’t need to explain why. As for one of those ending comments that said yesterday’s guest post was “possibly the worst, least informative, most gimmicky presentation of data that I’ve ever seen,” well, what can I say?
That commenter hasn’t seen much. Statisticians, of all people, you should understand there’s more to data than just the numbers. I know I do, but if it’s sparklines that you want, go ahead and stick to those, and I’ll continue with my garbage. Let’s compare notes in 10 years. Nathan, I agree with you. While I don’t agree on the top 5 for the year I do think they are not crap. One of the things I think that is being missed by the comments is that data viz as you, and I, appreciate it offers a new way of understanding and importantly engaging with data.
While there has historically been a push to measure “effectiveness” of data viz or charts, we have, with new technology and more importantly borrowing from stats, comp sci AND design, the ability to democratize data and take it out of the ivory towers that the people commenting on the other blog seem to reside in. There should be an obligation not just to make effective data displays BUT also to make engaging visualisations. If people can engage more with the story of the data through the use of impressive visuals and storytelling/narrative techniques all the better. I wonder if there was such a discussion when stories became silent films became block busters such as Star Wars.the story underlying it is as old as time but the WAY it is told beats anything that has come before.
I’d say that the statisticians are willing to play with the new technology, but they are not willing to make the leap you refer to – “the story of the data through the use of impressive visuals and storytelling/narrative techniques all the better”. A statistician, at heart, is trying to convey information through data visualization to show relationships, but the difference is they are trying to tell the story of the relationships of the data, not the story of the world. Purist statisticians (of which I have been trained by my share) will contend that the data is not supposed to tell a story, the reader should be able to see an objective set of data. Visualization is a tool for analysis and showing a density of numbers. The numerical relationship is the story, not as you and I believe the story beyond the relationship seen between the numbers. In other words, everything you said. Thanks for this, Nathan.
I appreciate that you’re taking the long-view on data visualization. I think it’s true with any highly specialized field — most people in the field are operating on the parameters that are already defined, trying to string together sentences by putting together words in an optimal arrangement. When a new word comes along, the gut reaction is to try to fit it into what we already know, when in reality, it’s could be a part of a new language.
The first films weren’t films; they were moving pictures. They merely visualized the data of still photographs laid in rapid succession. Hi Nathan I like your site.
Some of the stuff you find is great, some less so I would never trash it as ‘all garbage’. However the critics though overstated have a point.
You say: ‘It’s this sort of narrow-mindedness that has kept statistical visualization looking pretty much the same for the past few decades’ Yes the desire to most concisely represent or summarise the data with the least distortion does hold us back. As it should.
Computers are a huge advance in the ease of production of graphics– but not their actual form. A screen is still 2-D and the same rules apply. The one great breakthrough in form is the interactivity and animation that computers allow. So I like it when visualisations represent the data with simplicity and panache and use the strength of computers (Britain form Above)– but sometimes flashy graphics obfuscate the data (cough cough Circos). Nathan, I really understand your standpoint. Some of the comments really were unreflected and seemed driven by the mood set by the post itself. When it comes to data display some of the projects from 2008 were more focused on telling a story than analyzing the data to it’s details.
I think we’re on the verge to have a lot more data openly available (governmental, ecological, etc.). Thus a much larger audience that isn’t necessarily trained in data analysis but is eager to learn about the data must be addressed. We have to learn how to make this data digestable to this kind of viewers. Finding ways to communicate cause and effect in new ways may include some missteps but will ultimately make the data readable to a broader readership. I think we should embrace new technologies to discover better methods to communicate the ever changing datasets. Furthermore these methods should address the reading habits that have massively changed over the past decades.
Nathan, I love your burst of emotion. I do recognize myself in your frustration, even more than you can imagine. However, I think that almost of your commenters truly stated “their” truth, from their (“narrow-minded”) point of view, expertise and experience.
Realize that you are “preaching” to people who might shift, but will never convert to your view. This is because really, the examples you show here (and those on “information aesthetics” probably even more so) are not examples of data visualization or statistical analysis. Yes, a Tufte sparkline will always win, even against a Jonathan Harris.
Instead, your projects point to a new approach, a new field, one that still needs to grow its own definition, values and critique. Trying to push them as things they are not, will always provoke such harsh reactions from those protecting their turf. I also know these types of discussions, and totally agree with Andrew: These critics are comparing pears with peaches, so we should not make the same mistake. I do not think people in general are not open for the playful/artistic, but apparently many judge an artistic/experiential/metaphoric project with the same set of rules as a scatterplot or the Tableau software. Which, obviously, begs the question – what ARE established quality criteria for information-aesthetic works? Maybe we should work on that:). Well, I am a psychologist and I think data visuals you exhibit go a long way to drawing people into discussions where they can developed a shared sense of a situation and find ways to act collectively.
We still need back room statisticians and indeed the more people play with statistical displays, the more call there will be for statistical work and the more funding will become available. Trashing ain’t cool at all. There is a well known anecdote of about a young don who made some cutting comments in a seminar at Oxford. An older don drew his aside afterwards and said, “Everyone here is clever. The trick is being nice.”. Part of the problem is that the “visualization” label is slapped on so many different things that have different goals, approaches, audiences, etc. Everything from statistical graphics and visual analytics to info graphics and data art is called “visualization.” So it’s not surprising that different people with different goals will apply their criteria to what they see and come to different conclusions.
We need to figure out what different kinds of work there are, what their goals are, etc., and what to call them. Even within the academic field of visualization, people talk about exploration, analysis, and presentation – but the criteria for each are far from clear, and work still tends to focus on the first two. To an extent, I can also understand the frustration of people on the data analysis/statistical graphics side. The ugly but useful stuff doesn’t get much attention, it’s the pretty stuff that gets on Digg, etc. That ends up distorting what many people get to see when they look for visualization. If anybody is interested in another rant, I’ve got.
Nathan: I’ll reply at greater length on my blog (with an anecdote or two) but in the interest of avoiding a flame war between the commenters on my blog and the (far more numerous) commenters on yours, let me emphasize that I thought the graphics you displayed “look cool but I don’t think they do a particularly good job at conveying information.” I also strongly disagreed with the person who referred to the stuff as garbage. Beyond that, your comments above have caused me to shift my position somewhat. One more thing I should add: if we can figure out what the differences are between the different approaches, we can actually learn a great deal about what they really are. So these differences can drive us forward, if we’re willing and able to figure them out (and not just insist that our respective approaches are The One Way). I have work under review at the moment that discusses several criteria that help differentiate within InfoVis (the academic field) and also to separate it from different neighboring fields. Wonder if they, they ranting statisticians, have even had to sell an idea (or product), convince the public, or persuaded anyone of their story. Or if they’ve read “Made to Stick” or “Freakonomics” to broaden their myopia about how people learn, remember, and form their beliefs.
This emotionless view of the world is what we (everyone) continually underestimate. I think Alan Greenspan’s mea culpa last fall underlines the point that no matter how smart, or amount of resources, statistics, ideology and theory still never truly predicts human nature. Nathan, I stumbled on FlowingData at the end of 2008.
I started showing it to student friends and then professors who had net yet heard of your site. What you post is PERFECT fodder for imagining how to present data and information.
Not all info is quantified, but is, as you suggest, visual. Thanks for the inspiration in condensed form. It’s rare that anyone actually finds something inspirational. That fact that you have managed to compel people to do more and think more about these things, means that you’ve accomplished a great deal. As with all things good, keep it up! Nathan, I love seeins some of the ideas for data visualization here. You are an innovator in data vis., and as you have seen, innovation doesn’t always go as smoothly as we might like.
As a statistician myself, let me suggest two fairly straightforward takeaways. The first is on static data displays.
They should be chosen to tell a story that would be confusing in words alone. Thus, a static plot ought not use more ink than needed to clearly tell the story. Some extra ink can be useful. But too frequently (although NOT always), extra ink or so-called “chart junk” can bias the interpretation of the graph. In short, a good chart should follow the classic journalism ideals of brevity, impartiality, and “multi-facetedness” should be followed here. The second is on dynamic data displays.
These are desperately needed. However, the software to create these is not yet as widely available as it needs to be. Further, too many dynamic displays are too complicated to use to the fullest of their abilities. Sure, there are some wonderfully complicated interactions out there. We haven’t found a way to communicate many of these in ways that most average people (or even most Ph.
Statisticians and computer scientists) can understand without significant training and explanation. The lack of simplicity is a turnoff. I hope these points make sense. And please don’t interpret these comments as calling your work “garbage”. You are encouraging the development that NEEDS to happen in this field. Nathan I think the fact that people are having such a passionate debate about this stuff is a value. There will always be jerks who get petty and personal in lively debates, and it can be difficult to deal with them on the internet.
But there is also some substantive critical commentary as well. I don’t often comment here, but I personally like hearing people disagree on what’s effective and what isn’t and provide reasons. But, yeah, those just trashin’ it for the sake of it are a waste of space. I don’t ever post here, but I was amazed to see such a heated post and wanted to add my two cents. First of all, I think you should always realize that there will be people who don’t appreciate what you do.
I really enjoy this blog, but for those who have a problem with it, I would just forget about it. Although some of the people’s comments may have been over-the-top, I would call this response an overreaction.
For example, I went and looked at Gelman’s post, and to me it appears that you took the “garbage” quote a little out of context. The comment says “for an analyst who is trying to model the data, most of this stuff is garbage.” I would somewhat agree with this – not to the point of calling it garbage though. I think it all depends on the situation. I think the stuff on this site is great, especially for exploring ways to effectively communicate data. But in the analysis stage where I’m the only audience for my visualizations, I really don’t care about fancy animations and such.
Maybe once I have adequately modeled the data, I would look to examples such as those seen on this blog to better communicate the results. Hopefully this point makes sense, and maybe makes some sense out of why some people may not appreciate what you have here. Many years ago i went to a visualization conference, and one of the presenters gave a talk on how sophisticated rendering techniques had resulted in visualizations that were sexy-looking but uninformative. As an example of a “bad” visualization he used a picture of a protein surface that, incidentally, had been made by a friend of mine. To me it was very informative– i could even identify the specific protein and the active site.
He said it looked like a “handful of popcorn”. I think people have certain expectations of a visualization, and when it doesn’t immediately meet those expectations few are willing to look harder. As someone who creates a lot of the ‘pretty stuff that does well on digg’ I certainly get my fair share of hate mongering from the statisticians and neo-Tuftists.
But it really comes down to communication at the intended audience. You can’t please everyone and there will always be spiteful, jealous, or other wise inarticulate critics. This blog and your work are great though.
If you highlight some chart that isn’t up to snuff, then it will likely get savaged in the comments, that’s the purpose of discussion. People also need to chill out. Sure wordles are lame and should not be used in your PhD dissertation, but that’s not their intent.
Wordles are fun and interesting for 15 seconds. I just recently found this website by chance, and I must say, it has opened my eyes to something I hadn’t thought of before. All through my scientific life I’d been taught about how best to put forth data, whether they be graphs or tables. Usually this consisted of just making things readable and whatever conventions the professor at the time subscribed to.
This rather dry approach to data has made me loathe the lab sections of my courses but this website has given me a new appreciation for conveying data in an interesting way. I love what I see here, and I hope I can take away something and bring it into my academic life and make things that much more fun and interesting. Keep up the good work! Graphical display is key in my opinion for any statistical analysis of data. If you can’t visualize and display graphically a statistical conclusion then you are really limiting the understanding you have. And if you want to share a result with others who are not as deeply imbedded in the data and analysis as you, a graphical display is critical.
The key question for me is whether a graphical display conveys the right intuitive message. When someone looks at it, do they come away with the right intuitive conclusion. If a graphical display misleads or overstates or misrepresents the real relationships in the data then you have a problem. There are certainly cases where a graphic misleads, and often the popular press is the culprit. I think Flowing Data is excellent, it explores different ways to present data so those graphics can be discussed, improved upon, etc. There is nothing wrong with interesting and cool graphical representations as long as they don’t mislead the viewers. I am okay with a bit of “chart junk” if it makes it more pleasant to look at and interests new readers as long as it then leads them to an appropriate conclusion.
My experience in working with research scientists is that they generally have absolutely no artistic, design, or aesthetic sense what so ever. A clear example of this is the (huge) number of talks that I had to endure from outstanding scientists that were presented in Comic MS. Given that prototype data visualizations and frequently driven by not only the need to communicate but also to communicate beautifully, one half of the reason for many visualizations falls on unseeing eyes. The reality is that most people, although they may be fundamentally quantitative and capable of understanding numbers, algorithms and patterns, do not have commensurately developed ability in visual interpretation.
I hate to use the cliched left/right brain metaphor, but I think in this case it applies. One thing is certain, for readers of visualizations that are non-specialists, an attractive figure is much more appealing than a cold-hearted scatter plot. They are more likely to be drawn in, engaged and stimulated by a well designed visualization. The specialists sometimes forget that they are a minority and that it is as important to communicate their findings to the general public, who may be stimulated by an entirely different visual. I just came across FlowingData about two weeks ago, and now it’s my second favorite RSS feed to check every morning (sorry, xkcd still comes first but it’s a comic!). I am pretty stingy with the time I spend surfing the net, and only forward webby things when I feel they are truly exceptional. There is a very great deal of “wow that changes the way I see things” awesomeness to be found on your site.
(Even as I write that I am thinking of how I might visualize the relationship between the web-things I share with my friends and family, awesomeness and FD. See?!) Just wanted to add my two cents in the chorus of “keep up the good work; I love it!”. I have a degree in biology, and worked in the sciences for years. After a while, I decided to make a change and enrolled in law school. Despite the fact that the school I attend (Northwestern) is known for hiring empiricists on the faculty and enrolling primarily students with work experience, only an extremely limited number of my classmates have a good grasp on statistics. I’ve showed several of the visualizations to classmates and they’ve always been met with a positive reaction. A good visualization is an excellent tool for expressing data to people outside of the field.
Well illustrated data can tell the story teased out from the numbers in a far, far more accessible manner than a table or scatter plot could ever hope to. The need for well visualized data is great; there is a cottage industry of designers working to illustrate complex science and medicine in the courtroom.
The average jury (and judge) has even less experience with science than the attorneys. Major decisions are made on a daily basis for which well visualized data is invaluable. Despite the (apparent) tendency of statisticians to poo-poo such work, people outside the field applaud it. Keep up the good work! Nathan, In my opinion, FD is one of the best resources on the internet for anyone with an interest in data. One of the great challenges I see in the near future is the concept of data literacy. Now that so much of the world has more data to available to it than ever before, and that public store of data continues to grow at an ever increasing rate, the ability to reason and communicate about data is getting more and more important.
I love the way FD is unafraid to champion interesting ways to do exactly that, and by doing so, creates a truly interesting public conversation. I think the criticisms are inevitable, and I wish all were as reasoned as Andrew’s, but hey, this is the internet.
Writes to tell us that Apple's upcoming WWDC could be for the Cupertino powerhouse. They will most likely be missing Steve Jobs for star-power and have extremely high expectations to meet in order to maintain their edge. Thankfully it looks like Jobs will be with a good prognosis after facing severe health issues. 'The competition is now catching up. Palm, Google, Microsoft, Nokia and Research in Motion, maker of the BlackBerry, are all at varying stages of developing and introducing their own iPhone-like devices and software, along with easily accessible stores for the small programs known as applications, or apps, that run on those devices. In some cases, those companies are releasing a greater variety of phones, on more wireless carriers around the world, than Apple. To maintain its advantage, Apple must preserve the impression that it is far ahead of rivals when it comes to the capabilities and the 'cool' factor of its devices.'
IPod batteries as profit??? What a stupid, stupid argument. We have five iPods in our house, and we've NEVER replaced a single battery. We have a 2nd generation iPod up to the current Nano. Even IF these batteries ever die, the new iPods are compelling enough over their 3-5 year old counterparts to just buy a new one. There are more battery replacement services out there than Zune owners, so even when your granny's iPod battery dies, she'll have no problem getting a battery swapped.
User freedom? Remember, Apple managed to vault from late-comer to leadership in the first place. The blurb is just hand-wringing about things being as they have always been! Competitors are at 'all at varying stages of developing and introducing their own iPhone-like devices and software, along with easily accessible stores for apps'. 'In some cases, those companies are releasing a greater variety of phones, on more wireless carriers around the world, than Apple.'
That was all true even before the iPhone; Apple was among the last companies to introduce an iPhone-like device! Just as the iPod was one of the later mp3 players on the market, yet became the standard by which others were measured. 'the competition is now catching up' Assuming they've kept their edge, that statement is the key: They lead, they don't follow. That's why the competition are catching up to them, and not the reverse. Provided they keep doing that, there is little room for error to occur That's an amazingly arrogant attitude that Apple would do well to not share. Apple may have the edge in ease of use, but they never had an edge in anything else. If the competition can catch up on designing good user interfaces before Apple can catch up on hardware and features, there is actually very much room for error.
I get that the UI is most important for many, but it's lame to ignore everything else. You're right, but you're missing the piece that a lot of people don't see. Creating good software is hard. Cramming a new piece of hardware into a piece of plastic is the easy part.
Designing an interface that makes that piece of hardware more useful can be a lot harder. That's the only reason why a computer company was able to walk right into the phone market, and on their first try create something that all those old phone manufacturers are now rushing to catch up to. I'm willing to bet that Apple's employees overall spent way more time getting the software right than they did deciding what hardware to put into the iPhone. And then the app store is a whole other beast. Apple had a lot of experience from the iTMS, they had a ton of infrastructure in place, and they even already had end-user software in place to tie it all together. Most of their competitors have to build similar systems from scratch.
They've got a good example to follow now, but they've still got plenty to figure out. Why do they have to be held to a higher standard than everyone else? Apple's entire marketing and business model are based on their products being better. Some companies base their businesses on having good products at cheap prices. Apple doesn't do that and if consumers don't have the opinion that Apple has far superior products then Apple will have to redesign their entire business model. Mercedes Benz had this problem when they decided to over expand their product portfolio.
They were known for producing high quality 'german engineered' cars that were significantly be. So the competition has millions of devices in user's hands, a unified and attractive app store, and an established ecosystem? (And that's even ignoring the music juggernaut on the other side of the coin.) Which competition is even close to this kind of market? Not trolling, not flaming, just asking. Seems like everyone nowadays is granted a writing/analyst position if they can predict the fall of apple, or gloat about the upcoming features coming from microsoft.
(I'm also not saying that competition is bad, just that Apple right now doesn't face any coherent competition. Take Palm Pre as an example.
Different hardware models (for sprint and verizon networks), crashy app store, lack of apps, web-based apps, lack of actual customers, and worst of all, predicted shortages at introduction. WhoTF decided it would be a good idea to have that kind of a release against the upcoming iPhone v3?).
Just that Apple right now doesn't face any coherent competition You are apparently really just speaking of two of Apple's 'products' though: iPhone and Music. What about hardware, operating systems/software.? I would think the idea behind predicting Apple's downfall is really just counting how many of their eggs are in one basket, and how close others are at taking that basket.
OTOH, I'm not a fan of 'Apple stinks' or 'Apple is going down hill fast now that Jobs is gone' comments, either. I also generally dislike the idea that Apple's iPhone is the greatest th. I don't think anyone's predicting the fall of Apple, but rather just stating the obvious. The competition is catching up. Unless Apple unveils some big surprises next week, there's no denying that the competition is positioned much better than they were a year ago.
Apple's in no imminent danger here, but they are losing ground, and rumors about the next-gen iPhone suggest that there won't me any major innovations coming from them any time soon (and no, OS updates to include features the competition already has don't count). As for the Palm Pre, it hasn't achieved anything yet, much less established itself as an iPhone-killer, but it's a little premature to write it off due to lack of apps or lack of actual customers. It hasn't even been released yet! Most reviews have been very favorable and put it at least in the same class as the iPhone, which is a big step from where we've been for the last couple of years. From my MBA economics teacher, in today's information economy, a firm now has approximately two years to have market power, then the sheer number of other players in the market will destroy the first-runner's ability to lead. There are too many competators that can hire their own programmers and make their own hardware, competing products are bound to arrive. So, Apple has two choices: innovate or cut costs.
What will the iPhone+ be able to do that the current one can't do. Err, it already does music, ca. With all due respect, your MBA economics teacher seems pretty clueless about the actual market. Success in the market has almost nothing to do with hiring programmers and making hardware. In the vast majority of cases, it's all about marketing and product positioning, and most market segment leaders have held that position for far more than two years. Where's the 'iPod killer'? Who's displacing Skype?
Where's the auction site competing with eBay? Who's coming up to challenge Google, Craigslist, Amazon, Facebook? Some of these companies have been at the top of the heap for over a decade, with no serious competitor in sight. Many of these folks are leaders because of the network effect of their services - something programmers and hardware can't change. I certainly can appreciate the pure business mindset, but I can never understand it.
As a technologist, it is unnatural for me to try and create high barriers for entry to anything. A bit irrelevant to the topic at hand, but your statement made me remember that i will always be a terrible businessman. Anyways, Apple has a nice market penetration and mindshare, but the market is far too diverse and the competition way too strong for them to be complacent in any way. The iphone's absolute #1 advantage is the a. Google, Yahoo and MS are direct competitors. And nobody is saying lets Yahoo that.
Yahoo and MS might be around but Google dominates that market and has for a long time. They don't have an impenetrable product but until somebody steps up they'll maintain their market dominance beyond that MBA profs magical 2 year limit.
The same goes with the iPod, despite all the howling from the /. Crowd about product inferiority Apple has managed to maintain it's dominance of the market for quite a long time and it doesn't seem that anyone is coming in to take t. Where's the 'iPod killer'? Who's displacing Skype? Where's the auction site competing with eBay? Who's coming up to challenge Google, Craigslist, Amazon, Facebook? Some of these companies have been at the top of the heap for over a decade, with no serious competitor in sight.
I would say you're right on all of those except for Skype. And Skype is facing competition from Google which you already had on your list, so no biggie. I would say that the GP is missing the fact that Apple has the possibility to innovate beyond cutting costs. Nobody had thought of (or at least producing) a phone like the iPhone until Apple did it. Innovations are innovative because nobody thought of them beforehand and I'm hoping to see something spectacular (beyond cut & paste, for the love of Go. They can always run with the 40,000 applications in the App Store. A rather significant head start on the 12 demo non-native applications Pre is currently showing in their app 'store' (you can't buy anything yet).
Even beats out the 25,000 or so Windows Mobile apps Microsoft touts as aving. Plus they have the whole game-integration thing going with the iPod Touch. Plus binding all of those apps to a larger 'pad' media/game/reading device. And there's that patent that just popped up on middle-of-the-cal. Without trolling, or flaming, here is my answer: On February 3rd, 1637, everyone just woke up.
And the price of tulips went down the toilet, and everyone looked around and said 'why did I pay more than a tulip's weight in gold for this? It's just a flower'. Someday, everyone will just wake up. They will put down the ipods, and pick up pennywhistles, guitars, and harmonicas again. That's just how fads work.
Tulips and iPhones will still exist, but they won't be fetish objects to otherwise normal people an. Tulips and iPhones will still exist, but they won't be fetish objects to otherwise normal people any more, and so their prices will no longer reflect emotional baggage unrelated to function or utility. Except that emotional baggage isn't what sells iPhones. It's primarily function and utility. I am, of course, referring to easy-to-use function and utility. I can use my iPhone for pretty much any of its intended purposes quickly and without hassling with the interface. That wasn't true of the last phone I had: it did quite a few things, but it never seemed worth figuring out how.
The iPhone does a whole lot of things simply and intuitively. That means it has more effective functionality, for a great many people, than phones that are theoretically more capable. Moreover, the iPhone is a lot more fun to use. This doesn't mean the iPhone is unstoppable. It does mean that an iPhone killer is going to have to be easy and fun to use, and not just laden with functionality and a manual that's more text than the average American reads in a year. It does mean that any iPhone killer is going to be mocked by Slashdot as being lame, of course. Many Slashdotters are quick to label anything they don't immediately understand as irrational and unpredictable.
Nor do I think people are going to discard their iPods in favor of guitars. People have wanted recorded music since it became available (with the player piano, say). People are going to keep iPods or whatever gets popular instead, and quite a few people are still going to learn to play the guitar, because that fulfills a slightly different need. (And my wife still won't let me practice the nose flute in the house.). Yes Blackberry has millions of devices in the hands of users. They now have an app store.
Benjamin Wiederkehr On Twitter: Yeah No Biggy At All: @tableau For Mac Download
I will go with that ecosystem thing. Palm and RIM have a lot of experience with Smartphones so yes I would say they are catching up. Android has a lot of developer love but right now in the US is limited to T-Mobile.
Also Verizon and Sprint are both CDMA networks so no issues. I think Apple will finally have a fight on it's hands with the Palm Pre. It doesn't just have web apps it uses javascript but that isn't just for. Which competition is even close to this kind of market? Microsoft maybe, though their problems with getting a good vertical product are endemic, excepting perhaps the Xbox, but is that yet profitable?
Amazon, but they seem to be happy leaving personal computing, email, contacts, mobile media on the table. But Amazon seems to be much better equipped to roll out a vertical than MS, even if it hasn't demonstrated the complete wherewithal in the hardware department to pull off a media/comm device. Love my Kindle though. As Gruber pointed out the other day, the main.
According to reports, Apple will have a slew of iPhones from 4GB all the way up to 32GB. The data/rate plans will most likely also change. Apple is going to corner the smartphone market from the top down, like they did with the iPod. In fact to top things off even further, I bet they spun off Rubenstein and Co to make the 'Pre' to appeal to the more RIM business type crowd who see's the iPhone as just a toy, not a tool. The fact that the Pre id's itself as a 'Apple iPod' to iTunes for synching may mean Apple is turning a blind eye or somehow involved with Pre.
Oh yea, prepare for a market assault by Apple. Just as soon as the iphone gets push email, a keyboard, real management features, and real security.
Here are blackberry.com. Who has audited the iphone? Nobody, because it has no security. Come Monday I'll think you'll find most of this will be addressed. Look for a complete end-to-end solution involving iPhone and Mac OS X Server 10.6 (Snow Leopard) at a price point no one else will be able to come close to; eg. No more per seat licenses, bu-bye Microsoft Exchange.
Everything else will fall into place shortly thereafter. Push email, management, security and certification, all of it and maybe even other things that the others haven't thought of yet. As for a keyboard. Apple will never make a ve. I'm hoping for better PIM tools. I'm currently using an iPhone at work (I can pick any device so I change regularly) and having spent a lot of time with Windows Mobile I'm missing a lot of its basic functionality.
For example with the iPhone I cannot:. Sync notes even though there is a notes application. Sync tasks, as there is no tasks application (why?
It's pretty basic!). Label a calendar appointment as private. Everything is visible to people who have read access to my calendar until I set it on the PC. Set the location of a meeting as free, out of the office or tentative. Everything is busy. Differentiate between tentative meetings and ones that have been confirmed.
Snooze a reminder. It either nags you or gets dismissed when you unlock the phone and never comes back. Get the right mouse button to work on an appointment in Outlook that has been created in the iPhone (not sure if that is my work setup as it's very odd). Use something which is lighter than iTunes to manage my contacts and calendar syncing - iTunes is a heavy beast for something which should be running in the background.
I never thought I'd wish for ActiveSync. Search the whole device for something.
There is a wedding coming up in the next couple of months. Only way to find it?
Hunt for it manually. Now to be fair, I'm probably limited by the fact I use Outlook on the desktop and have no desire to use MS Push (who wants work emails arriving on a weekend?) or send all my data to Google's services - but some of this is pretty basic that even Palm had in when they were king of the world and pushing out black and white V series products. If they put all that in, then I'd never need to go back to Windows Mobile. Fingers crossed. I'm hoping for better PIM tools. I'm currently using an iPhone at work (I can pick any device so I change regularly) and having spent a lot of time with Windows Mobile I'm missing a lot of its basic functionality. For example with the iPhone I cannot:.
Sync notes even though there is a notes application. Sync tasks, as there is no tasks application (why? It's pretty basic!). Label a calendar appointment as private. Everything is visible to people who have read access to my calendar until I set it on the PC. Set the location of a meeting as free, out of the office or tentative. Everything is busy.
Differentiate between tentative meetings and ones that have been confirmed. Snooze a reminder.
It either nags you or gets dismissed when you unlock the phone and never comes back. I also use my iPhone for work and find its PIM tools lacking. What's worse is Apple has apaprently decided to go with data stores that are not accessible to other software apps; so iambic / CESD / et.al. Need to create new data files if they want to create an iPhone app.
That probably means no push synch, which would make those apps useless for me. Of course, that's in keeping with Apple's insistence on total control of parts of teh user experience; which while useful in maintaining the end user experience. I recently replaced my 5-year-old Palm-based Samsung i500 with an iPhone. Overall, it's quite an upgrade, especially in the display screen, sound, memory (16MB - 8GB), GPS, and downloadable apps. But here is a comparison of what it takes to enter a new appointment with an 5-minute warning alarm: Palm: 1) open (clamshell) phone 2) press 'Calendar' button 3) use fingernail to click on the timeslot 4) use Graffiti to enter text 5) close phone Apple: 1) turn phone on 2) slide to unlock, passcode if bey. That's starting to slip as iPhone and iPod prices come down Ummmmm excuse me? Which iPhone or iPod price drops are you talking about?
Benjamin Wiederkehr On Twitter: Yeah No Biggy At All: @tableau For Mac Free
Since the iPhone was out last year it's been $199 for 8 GB and $299 for 16 GB. I can go to the store right now and see the exact same price. Apple's reaction so far has been to raise iTunes prices iTunes prices did not increase. They adopted a variable price method so popular songs could be more expensive during their popular period while less downloaded songs could be cheap. 'what company isn't all about profit margin?' Economic theory states that in an ideal capitalist system, all industries' profit margins will approach 0. They will make enough money to pay off their costs, employees, research, etc, but nothing else.
This is because if company A is making a high profit, company B will come in with a competing product/service and undercut them. Of course, this isn't entirely true because of several factors, like: barriers to entry (as Palm has proven, spending 100s of millions o.
'Palm, Google, Microsoft, Nokia and Research in Motion, maker of the BlackBerry, are all at varying stages of developing and introducing their own iPhone-like devices.' So Apple, as a newcomer to the industry, is now making others in the same space play catch up to them. Real competition is a good thing.
Definitely Palm, MS, Nokia and RIM had more than enough time and expertise to make a iPhone like device before Apple did, yet they didn't. So now they get to play catch up.
I hope they do create real iPhone killers, because it then puts Apple on the spot to improve. Definitely true. Palm should have had an iPhone, 2 years before iPhone. Instead they gave up much of their touch-screen real estate to a chicklet keyboard, and other established advantages, to build a blackberry clone. Big mistake on their part. Making something like an iPhone that relies entirely on a touch screen means having a software stack that supports it. Once Palm had already made the big mistake of going with a more or less unchanged PalmOS for the Treo, replacing Grafiti with a qwerty pad was prob.
By 'iPhone-like devices,' they usually mean 'thing with no actual keyboard.' I don't want one like that. I like physical keys. Because they actually work. You've always been able to get apps by searching around a bit for Windows Mobile based phones, and probably for others as well, so the App Store idea is just collecting and monetizing them. Frankly, an iPhone isn't that special, beyond the large touch-screen. Everything about it had been done before in one manner or another.
Apple just gathered it in to o. You've always been able to get apps by searching around a bit for Windows Mobile based phones, and probably for others as well, so the App Store idea is just collecting and monetizing them. Nah, you've always been able to pay for apps for Win Mobile. So, it's not about monetizing. The biggest problem I found when looking for Win Mobile apps was that it even if you did manage to find the ad-filled webpage that had the file, there was generally no way to distinguish, say, two SSH clients from one another, so you just have to install them both and hope that one of them doesn't fuck up your phone. So Apple, as a newcomer to the industry, is now making others in the same space play catch up to them. Right, and I think that's why the news media is demanding (wrongly) that Apple blows the door of the hinges at WWDC.
They saw Apple go from nothing to an industry leader (in the mobile industry) in the space of a year or two, and they're thinking to themselves, 'How can Apple keep that pace up?! They're definitely going to falter!' Bu the truth is Apple doesn't need to keep that pace up. All they have to do is release solid updates that will fix some of the problems people have with their products, thro. That's why I'm rockin' android and will never buy an iphone in its current crippled state. A real shame, as the device definetly has potential.
It's not about hating apple, it's about hating that locked down feeling. That is probably not an issue for most people out there, but for me they are dealbreakers.
Good for you. Have fun with your device of your choice but you should realize that your expectations are part of a small niche and most people just want a device that works well on a consistent basis. Wow what a horrid technology article. First it informs the readers that RIM is the maker of the BlackBerry (you don;t say!) and that programs are applications also known as 'apps'(yet another shocker to me). Then the whole article is about how Apple faces competition from rivals ( I can only muster a blank stare at this moment). Was this article written at an airport terminal before boarding? Wow, what impressive journalism the NYTimes has.
They assembled what has to be the best crack team of reporters in the business. Digging deep and bringing the public the most obvious and non-news worthy information to the masses. Its why Apple has managed to dominate the market with a functionally inferior (in terms of feature set) MP3 player (and many would argue the same about the phone).
Perhaps the device itself is functionally inferior (in the event you have things other than MP3s, AACs, or Apple Losslesseses), but due to its exposure, compatibility made my decision for me. As in, for effectively any modern make of car stereo, I can find some way to directly interface my iPod to it.
Benjamin Wiederkehr On Twitter: Yeah No Biggy At All: @tableau For Mac Pro
Not through some line-in hack or other 'just spit audio out the car speakers' method, but through some interface wherein I can keep the iPod itself stuffed in my glove box (negating the 'cool' factor if nobody sees it) and control tracks and such from the radio's front panel. Anything else, I'd have to keep the player out in the open, make sure it's not going to fall all over the place, and fumble for it rather than the radio if I want to skip a track. The same goes for a whole horde of other 'iPod compatible' devices (countertop radios, alarm clocks, etc); they all go through the docking interface, allowing them to control playback in addition to playing the music, and not resulting in a line-in hack that just drags out another redundant set of buttons. I've seen it said before on Slashdot: If the rest of the MP3 player market would get together and make a single, unified interface and protocol like the iPod's docking cable that allowed control and audio output without having to care who made the device, what model it is, etc, etc, THEN Apple would be on the run. But as it stands now, you have the iPod and you have a bajillion other viciously incompatible MP3 players. Will I be able to get an interface cable for my three-year-old Kenwood car stereo for a Zen?
What model Zen? How about a Zune? The no-name piece of junk that came free with my Dell? But I can Google 'Kenwood iPod adapter' and quickly figure out what MP3 player I'm picking up without hassles or guessing. Make no mistake, I'd rather have a cheaper MP3 player available to me, but for compatibility's sake, I'm sticking with my iPod. I don't agree that it's popular mainly or even largely because of the 'cool' factor. Or even if you think it is, how in fact did it become viewed as 'cool'?
I believe it's because it's easier to use than other phones. So the features that it does have, even if they are fewer compared to other smartphones, are easier to access.
So the user's experience is more powerful overall. It's kind of an Ahmdal's law of interface design - adding more features at a certain point makes no difference to the user. You also need to make those features usable. Hell, my iPhone is easier to use than my Mom's 'simple' Nokia. If you're using the car's radio to control the iPod then what is the point in having the iPod in the first place? Why not just make cars with built-in MP3 players and 160GB SSDs for storage? Add WiFi to the radio so you can sync the songs between your car and home PC while it sits in the garage overnight.
The only thing halfway 'cool' about iPods were they had a pretty decent user interface, although the requirement to use iTunes to sync your music over instead of just drag and dropping music into a musi. Sure it's only $200 out the door, but I think that also commits you to 24. 30 = 720 of data plan charges over and above what you are already paying for line rental. The incremental cost of AT&T providing data service just isn't that high, so some of that money is surely subsidizing the phone. Personally i find the TCO of our two androids quite manageable, but I think our car payment and mortgage are the only higher monthly expenses. There's a LOT of room to reduce the total cost, and I think the low end. If Apple does not release a new version of the iPhone at this conference, or soon there after I think it will be a mistake.
Define 'soon.' Actually, Apple is at the top of the heap and people will consider waiting on them. So imagine this scenario: WWDC. Apple gives it's song-and-dance about iPhone OS 3.0. Basically, the same one they gave back in March.
They reiterate that it will be shipping 'This Summer.' Of course, they have lots of sessions at WWDC about iPhone OS 3.0. Various rumor sites insist that it will be July, then August, then September. Finally, around September 21st, Apple gives the press the word that they'l.