Michael Dell in an interview Sunday took a stance that there was no such thing as a post-PC era. In spite of struggling PC sales, he argued to the FT that the PC industry was still growing… Smartphones and tablets weren’t “necessarily” replacing PCs, and long-term forecasts suggested that would stay the case for years to come, he said.

via Electronista

The iPad is the king of tablets and might hold that title for years to come. However, there are a ton of alternatives that we’ve featured over the last few months… But since [then], a lot has changed and while some managed to make it to the market, others were delayed or scrapped entirely.

Nice article describing what’s happened to alleged iPad alternatives (are they called alternatives to recognize the iPad has no competitors?) in the last few months.

I’ve written the iPad has no “alternatives”, and CrunchGear makes it’s easy to see why. We can dismiss seven of them out of hand: 

• ModBook – This is a MacBook reconfigured. A laptop with a desktop OS.
• Viliv X70 – A tablet with a desktop OS (XP, no less).
• Archos 9 – A tablet with a desktop OS.
• Viliv S10 Blade – A “convertibile” device. Again, a laptop with a desktop OS.
• Spring Design Alex – This is an eBook reader, what’s it doing here?
• Lenovo Skylight – A netbook, not sure how it made even an exaggerated list of competitors.
• Lenovo IdeaPad U1 – Another “convertibile” that comes apart. Desktop OS as PC, and maybe Android as a tablet?

Some of these are not even available, but even if they were they’re not iPad alternatives. They’re not iPad tablets in any sense. It’s not just about form, it needs a touch, not desktop, OS and apps. The human finger doesn’t have the precision for software written for the precision of a cursor tip. A stylus can address that, but styli are a big failure, no one wants them. Why would any hardware maker (or anyone else) ignore the decade of failure “desktop tablets” have had in the market? 

After weeding out the above, of the six remaining (I left the HP Slate because rumors say it won’t run a desktop OS), four of them—Notion Ink Adam, HP Slate, WeTab, and ExoPC—are nowhere to be found. These devices are delayed, or maybe even killed altogether. In any case, they can hardly be called alternatives now. They’re vapor, and I remain convinced the iPad will outsell vapor. 

So that leaves just two devices: the enTourage eDGe dualbook, which isn’t any good; and the Dell Streak, whose too-large-for-a-pocket but too-small-for-a-tablet form factor isn’t winning any converts, and it’s not yet available in the US. 

The tech press loves for Apple to have competition, and sometimes go out of their way to invent it. In the case of the iPad, however, it simply doesn’t exist. Not even close. Maybe by the end of the year, but certainly not now.

[The Dell Streak features] A customized multi-touch version of the Google Android operating system that features Dell user interface enhancements

The device is not yet available, but when it arrives it’ll be running the older Android 2.1. An OTA upgrade to 2.2 is said to be in the works for “later this year”.

This is what Android has wrought. To differentiate their devices from others running the same OS, manufacturers must implement custom interface tweaks. It becomes an issue with Android upgrades because the manufacturer must ensure their custom tweaks, as well as the hardware, work properly.

After reportedly passing around prototypes of a phone that everyone passed on due to being to boring, Dell must have either stepped up their game or hired a new design team. A number of “leaks” have revealed some pretty stylish devices…

Let’s start with the worst, the Aero is plain when viewed from the front, and downright ugly from the side and back. It’s claim to fame is that it comes with a stylus and handwriting recognition. I’ve made my feelings on that clear, so I see this thing as ugly and old-fashioned. 

Then there’s the two tablets. The much-discussed Streak (a.k.a. the mini) and the Looking Glass. The Looking Glass has the cooler name, but with the same resolution as the Streak is kind of a waste of space. 

The Streak intrigues me quite a bit. There’s talk of a WiFi only model and, depending on the price, I just might snap one of these up. My biggest complaint is that it won’t ship for months, and even then will only have Android 2.0, with an upgrade to 2.1 schedule for September (by then, of course, the current version of Android will be…?). Point being my biggest beef with Android is there’s no consistent release to which one can expect to upgrade for any given device. Still, if this thing has decent performance it’d be a nice Android supplement to my mobile kit.

Going back to phones, there’s the Smoke. A permanent physical keyboard (“there whether you need it or not”), in portrait mode, no less, makes this undesirable for me. But the overall design is nice, and for those who can’t get over the software keyboard thing you’ve got an Android alternative. 

The Thunder is quite attractive, and promises Hulu, Flash 10.1, Facebook/Twitter tie-ins, Snapdragon processor, and more. My biggest concern with this phone is it’s long on promises. I have doubts about Flash, seems everyone is tying in social networking, and I think Hulu will be Flash-less before this thing is released anyway.

The Lightning is a Windows 7 Series phone. Another nice looking device with a slide-out keyboard may be the best of both worlds for some. Of course, who knows when W7S will be released, so this phone may be the farthest off of any of them. 

Finally, theres the Flash, pictured above, which I think is beautiful. Dell says it’s fashioned out of a piece of curved glass. Specs look good, and this will be another Android device. 

Even the lesser designed devices here have some character; they’re not just “cookie cutter” designs. Whether Dell can deliver them all remains to be seen, and whether they’ll have responsive performance, and decent build quality (not Dell’s long suit) is also greatly in question. Still, as far as vaporware goes (and I believe the Streak and Looking Glass are more than vapor), Dell gets high marks for effort. It remains to be seen how they’ll be graded for execution.

I’ve heard anecdotal reports from media types who are lukewarm about the forthcoming HP (HPQ) tablet. But here’s a rave mini-review for Dell’s (DELL) Streak from Greg Clayman

The alleged “rave mini-review” is a tweet. That’s right, a tweet.

It’s sad that Peter Kafka can compare the iPad to the Streak (in his article’s headline) and back it up with only a 10-word tweet. Kafka’s piece is such an obvious hit-whoring affair I refuse to link to it.

Mind you, not one of those companies is (as yet) selling a competing tablet, and it’s not like there’s some magical formula that will make 720p Flash video run smoothly on a bare Atom CPU (remember, Ion GPU acceleration is not yet available for the Linux-based JooJoo), but who are we to stand in the way of a carefully worded damage limitation statement?

As if Adobe’s management hasn’t been misguided enough — putting the survival of Flash above all other priorities — their PR group has lost it, too.

The sales growth of netbooks, priced from $200 to $500 and resembling shrunk-down laptops, slowed markedly in the first quarter, according to market researcher IDC.

This should come as a shock to no one, but of course it will. The netbook is a cheap cheap laptop, OK? That’s all it’s ever been. Nothing more, nothing less. Laptops went from well over $1K, to cheap laptops in the $600 range, and netbooks brought them down to $300.

Those lower divisions brought cheaper components, lower quality, weak processors, etc. They had to. For some that might be good enough, but it doesn’t change the fact that netbooks are a significant compromise to the laptop they emulate. For many, the netbook brought disappointment when they found out there really is no such thing as a $300 laptop.

As for manufacturers, they found out that, while they could brag about sales in terms of number of units, there’s little profit. No wonder the big names are scaling back.

So Dell is retiring the Mini 12 netbook. According to them it’s because 10-inch netbooks are the “sweet spot” for consumers. I find this odd because Dell has built its entire existence on providing so many choices it’s sometimes difficult to get out of the configuration maze once you get in.

Dell has 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 inch laptops. They have laptops geared for businesses, and for consumers. They have the Alienware models. Heck, they’ve even got an aphrodisiac laptop! In short, they’ve got choices out the wazoo. Surely somewhere in that mess of configuration options are other “sweet spots”, yet with netbooks they’re stopping at 10 inches.

TechCrunch isn’t convinced by Dell’s reasoning, and makes a case that Intel has a lot to do with it:

Intel doesn’t like 12-inch netbooks because they are deep into dual core territory, where Intel has much healthier profit margins… Intel has put pressure on OEMs to build netbooks that have 10 inch or smaller screens.

I don’t doubt this — and I’m not the only one — but I believe Microsoft may have something to do with it as well. Windows 7 is almost here, and the “netbook” version (Starter Edition), is not available for netbooks with screens over 10 inches. In an article I wrote for GigaOM Pro (subscription required), I said that “[s]ome have called the strategy price-fixing. While that may be debated, at the very least it’s “hardware fixing.””

Without Starter, a 12 inch netbook requires at least Home Premium, and the associated price hike that takes it out of typical netbook territory. This is doubly true if Intel charges by screen size as TechCrunch states. These two corporations have made it all but impossible to build a 12-inch netbook for appreciably less than, say, a 13 inch cheap laptop.

If a 13-inch laptop is only a little more then why wouldn’t you prefer it? Because it’s not a netbook. It’s bigger, bulkier, much heavier, runs hotter and has much less battery life. If you just wanted a netbook a bit bigger than 10-inches, with a keyboard less cramped, a 12-inch could be perfect. Perhaps too perfect in Intel’s and Microsoft’s eyes.

So Dell is retiring the Mini 12 netbook. According to them it’s because 10-inch netbooks are the “sweet spot” for consumers. I find this odd because Dell has built its entire existence on providing so many choices it’s sometimes difficult to get out of the configuration maze once you get in.

Dell has 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 inch laptops. They have laptops geared for businesses, and for consumers. They have the Alienware models. Heck, they’ve even got an aphrodisiac laptop! In short, they’ve got choices out the wazoo. Surely somewhere in that mess of configuration options are other “sweet spots”, yet with netbooks they’re stopping at 10 inches.

TechCrunch isn’t convinced by Dell’s reasoning, and makes a case that Intel has a lot to do with it:

Intel doesn’t like 12-inch netbooks because they are deep into dual core territory, where Intel has much healthier profit margins… Intel has put pressure on OEMs to build netbooks that have 10 inch or smaller screens.

I don’t doubt this — and I’m not the only one — but I believe Microsoft may have something to do with it as well. Windows 7 is almost here, and the “netbook” version (Starter Edition), is not available for netbooks with screens over 10 inches. In an article I wrote for GigaOM Pro (subscription required), I said that “[s]ome have called the strategy price-fixing. While that may be debated, at the very least it’s “hardware fixing.””

Without Starter, a 12 inch netbook requires at least Home Premium, and the associated price hike that takes it out of typical netbook territory. This is doubly true if Intel charges by screen size as TechCrunch states. These two corporations have made it all but impossible to build a 12-inch netbook for appreciably less than, say, a 13 inch cheap laptop.

If a 13-inch laptop is only a little more then why wouldn’t you prefer it? Because it’s not a netbook. It’s bigger, bulkier, much heavier, runs hotter and has much less battery life. If you just wanted a netbook a bit bigger than 10-inches, with a keyboard less cramped, a 12-inch could be perfect. Perhaps too perfect in Intel’s and Microsoft’s eyes.

this is the first Dell that has me slobbering in a very long time.

And with that ringing endorsement he also says he’ll be “dumping” his Mac. OK.

From the photo it seems like a nice looking machine, in that black MacBook sort of way (which is a nice looking machine).

But isn’t that kind of a “been there, done that” design? And it still runs Windows, right? I couldn’t help but notice it has the requisite PC stickers on it. Further, was Scoble only interested in Macs for their hardware/design? The Mac OS meant nothing?

You can see more about the new Latitude Z here. Meanwhile, don’t dump your Mac, Robert, sell it. Or send it to me.

this is the first Dell that has me slobbering in a very long time.

And with that ringing endorsement he also says he’ll be “dumping” his Mac. OK.

From the photo it seems like a nice looking machine, in that black MacBook sort of way (which is a nice looking machine).

But isn’t that kind of a “been there, done that” design? And it still runs Windows, right? I couldn’t help but notice it has the requisite PC stickers on it. Further, was Scoble only interested in Macs for their hardware/design? The Mac OS meant nothing?

You can see more about the new Latitude Z here. Meanwhile, don’t dump your Mac, Robert, sell it. Or send it to me.

Those aren’t my words (thank heavens), but rather Dell’s own. Check out this video. It’s OK to admit it, I almost threw up too.

All this talk about the “love of industrial design” and “exceptional materials” coming from Dell is rather odd. And could they copy Apple any more in terms of their design discussions? Let’s see…

Read the rest of this article on theAppleBlog >>

Dell unveiled a tablet PC, but I’m puzzled as to why they’d do this.

From a specs perspective it fits in nicely with what one would expect based on the 50 or 60 tablet PCs sold so far. A 12” screen, finger and tablet input, swivel screen so you can use a keyboard, relatively small and light, etc. Oh, and expensive, don’t forget expensive. But the whole thing puzzles me.

Consider that Dell is on a slow spiral downward. Is making an expensive niche product the way to go here? I can understand the One (disappointing though it is), but a tablet?

Tablet PCs have a very narrow market. They’re somewhat popular in the medical industry, and a few others, but you don’t see them too many places. In any case, it’s usually a pretty vertical app being used to take advantage of them. Besides, does anyone think Windows Vista is the best tablet OS? I mean, are you kidding me?!

If you want my opinion (and since you’re reading my site you’re gonna get it whether you want it or not) Dell is doing this partially because they’ve heard enough rumors about Apple doing it that they’re trying to beat Apple to the punch. They’re trying to “steal” a rumor, and introduce theirs a month before Apple does at Macworld (if the rumors are true).

I think Dell is nuts, but I also think Apple would be nuts if they introduced a conventional tablet PC. Luckily, I believe Jobs knows the tablet market is too small to go after, even though Apple has a better OS for tablets.

I do believe that at least one new laptop, whether redesigned MacBooks or MacBook Pros, or a new ultra-portable, is pretty likely at Macworld, but not a tablet. At least not a conventional one like Dell has done here.

I think the iPhone and OS X have shown the beginnings of what great things Apple could do with an unconventional tablet PC. By “unconventional”, I mean one that wouldn’t have to be so specialized. Something that wouldn’t require such vertical apps, so regular people could find practical uses for it right out of the box. But I just don’t think Apple is there yet. Get 6-12 months of iPhone SDK development in 2008, and see how many of those apps and ideas will translate well to a larger form factor. Then you have reasons for a tablet that would appeal much more broadly.

Until then, Apple’s not sitting idle because they’ll be making continual improvements to Multi-Touch for the iPhone. In essence, Apple’s “tablet OS” was introduced first on a smaller device, where it was immediately usable, while it continues to mature for utilization in a larger device when the time, and practical applications, make sense.

While technically not available until Monday, 11/19, you can actually pre-order Dell’s new XPS ONE PC now for shipping later this month. Gateway’s latest AIO machine is also called the One, so I wonder why Dell used the same name. Will Gateway sue? Can they? Would they even care? I didn’t write up Gateway’s machine because, frankly, it’s unimpressive. Only a 19” screen, weaker processors by iMac standards and too expensive for what you get.

Based on the information available on Dell’s ordering site for the One, here are a few observations on the machines and a comparison to Apple’s latest iMacs:

Processors – The two low-end Ones use mobile Core 2 Duos at 2.2 GHz on an 800MHz front-side bus. Since they start at $1,499 that makes them slower than what Apple uses (2.4 GHz) at the same price. However, the high-end Ones use desktop C2D processors at 2.33 GHz on a 1333 MHz FSB. Apple’s two high-end models use 2.4 or 2.8 GHz mobile processors on an 800 MHz FSB. How much of a difference will the slower clock but higher bus speed make? Don’t know, but it’s an interesting design choice by Dell. (Now we know, see the update below.)

Display – The Ones all have a 20” display; not sure why they don’t offer something bigger. It doesn’t say the resolution, but I assume it’s 1680 x 1050. Apple offers 20” and 24” displays.

Graphics – This is where Dell saved their money, and it’s too bad. The two low-end Ones use integrated graphics, and that’s a shame. With more and more use of a GPU in software these days, and more sophisticated photo and video software used even by the average Joe, I think a desktop machine should have a dedicated video card. Certainly one starting at $1,499 should. Meanwhile, the two high-end Ones come with the ATI Radeon HD 2400 Pro, which is still a step behind the lowest-priced iMac ($1,199 with an HD 2400 XT). Think about that: Apple put a better graphics card in their low-end model (at a price Dell doesn’t even offer) than Dell put into their high-end models! Meanwhile, all other iMacs come with the next-generation HD 2600 Pro.

Wireless – All models include a wireless keyboard and mouse. They also include Bluetooth and b/g/n networking. Dell should have chucked the wireless KB and mouse (from Apple they’re $59) and put in better graphics.

Memory – All models include 2GB RAM. The truth is Vista Home Premium really needs this, but it’s a good decision nonetheless. The iMacs are 1 GB except for 2GB in the Extreme edition.

Drives – For the four Ones it’s 250, 250, 320, 500. I see no option in the BTO to change any of these. A shame, in my opinion, though these are good sizes. Apple offers 250, 320, 320, and 500, with BTO options up to 1TB.

TV Tuner – All Ones include a TV tuner and remote. Personally, I just don’t think it’s of much use to the majority of people getting a computer. Still, there it is. All iMacs include a remote.

Media Reader – All Ones have an 8-in-1 card reader. I wish Apple would put these in the iMac. Lots of people are buying a computer for that whole “hub of my digital life” thing Apple talks about. A card reader makes it a lot easier to get your digital life into your machine.

Software – Dell stepped up here, and it was a smart move. They include Adobe Elements Studio on every model. Until I switched to Mac, I ran Adobe Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements and can tell you they’re fine products. Studio also includes Soundbooth CS3; I ran a trial of that and found it be a good product as well. Clearly, this is Dell’s way of countering iLife on the iMac. Instead of relying on Vista’s weak photo and movie software they got something that could actually compete with iPhoto, iMovie, and Garageband. Further, the two low-end Ones get MS Works (OK, OK, big deal), and the two high-end Ones get MS Office Student and Teacher addition. Bottom line is if you buy either high-end model you’ve got all the basics covered with great programs in all categories. Well done, Dell. All iMacs includes the excellent iLife, and iWorks is available for $79.

Price – The One’s price seems reasonable, and a good value. Starting at $1,499 you get a 2.2 GHz C2D mobile processor, the Adobe suite, MS Works, built-in TV tuner, 2 GB RAM and a 250 GB hard drive. The weakest link, by far, is the on-board graphics. I especially think Vista and the Adobe suite will be hampered by the lack of video oomph. The next model is $250 more and kind of silly to me; it simply increases the warranty and includes wireless headphones. The next model is the one I like the best. At $1,999 it drops the headphones but adds the desktop 2.33 GHz C2D, the ATI 2400 HD Pro, a 320 GB drive, and MS Office Student and Teacher. Finally, there’s a $2,399 model that bumps the drive up to 500 GB and adds a Blu-Ray DVD.

Summary:
It looks to me like Dell paid attention to the latest iMac announcements. Their pricing is pretty competitive. For $1,499 you can get a 20” iMac or One. If the inclusion of Adobe Elements Studio negates the iLife advantage, then the One has advantages in RAM, the card reader and the TV tuner. The iMac has advantages in the faster C2D processor, ATI HD 2600 Pro card (a huge advantage over built-in graphics), and a 320 GB drive. Take your pick, but I believe the iMac has a clear performance advantage.

At the higher end, take the One’s $1,999 model and the iMac $1,799 model. To the latter add iWork; now it’s $1,878. The Dell has advantages in RAM, the card reader, the TV tuner, and the desktop processor. (This is not an advantage, see update below.) The iMac has advantages in the 24” screen (which is a big thing, no pun intended), faster ATI HD 2600 Pro graphics, faster processor (see update below), and a lower price. Again, take your pick but both very nice machines.

As for aesthetics, I like the look of the Dell except for the speaker “ears” hanging off the side. These are already wide-screen machines, so making them even wider with the speakers looks awkward to me. Still, I think it’s a decent looking machine though I like the aluminum iMac look better. One aesthetic I can’t gage is volume. I expect the high-end Ones with a desktop processor to probably need some fanning. While even the iMac 24” with C2D Extreme at 2.8GHz makes not a sound, it’ll be interesting to see how quiet the Ones are.

Only time will tell regarding overall quality, performance (we know about performance, see update below), etc., but on the surface I think Dell is off to a good start with the One. They certainly appear to have avoided most of Gateway’s mistakes in terms of features and price.

[UPDATE:] C|NET has reviewed the Dell high-end (Blu-Ray drive) model, and the iMac 2.4GHz (with an extra GB of RAM added) soundly beat it on every performance test.

In some ways I’m actually a little disappointed in this. I thought the move to a desktop processor was a pretty bold one for Dell, and while I had concerns with extra fan noise (or even overheating), I though that the slightly slower clock speed (2.3GHz) would be made up for by the much faster bus speed (1333 MHz vs. 800). Obviously not. I guess Dell didn’t do their homework enough, or perhaps Apple did.

Maybe Dell just went with bottom-line savings (I assume desktop processors are still less expensive than their mobile counterparts). Either way, Dell’s high-end configuration got trounced by Apple’s mid-level machine (remember, Apple’s high-end is a 2.8 GHz C3D Extreme).

In my article I talked about the performance advantage the $1,499 iMac should have over the same-priced Dell. Given these scores from C|NET on Dell’s best, I’d think the comparison of the $1.5K models would be an embarrassment for Dell.

C|NET does agree with me on software:

“As it did with its new XPS 420 desktop, Dell again closes the gap with Apple on this system with its software. Argue about Vista vs. the new Leopard OS all you want, but we’re referring to Adobe’s Elements Studio suite that competes strongly against Apple’s iLife 08 software. No other PC vendor offers an answer to iLife, and this remains a selling point for Dell.”

As I said, the Adobe suite is nice. Mac Daily News poo-poohs the software, but they’re wrong. However, the Adobe suite is not a package that takes to slow machines kindly. If I had any complaint it was its sluggishness. The fact that even the high-end Dell is not an impressive performer does not bode well for it. Further, I think the Adobe suite on the entry level might be exasperating. Note to Dell: don’t include useful software if you can’t include hardware to run it on.

So, does the new performance data take the shine off these new Dells for me. Yes, a little. I think Dell sunk perhaps too much money into software and went cheap on the graphics and CPU power. Perhaps they had no choice. They needed a counter to iLIfe, and they needed to keep the prices in line with iMacs. I guess shooting for the iMac isn’t so easy after all, but I still believe Dell came a lot closer to the target than Gateway did.

[UPDATE #2] PC Magazine just published a biased review and likes the One better than the iMac. How do I know it’s biased? They used the older Adobe Photoshop CS2 as one of the tests. Since this does not run natively on Intel Macs, the Dell was able to beat the iMac (though not by much). Pretty pathetic on PC Mag’s part, but whatever.

Even with the grossly unfair testing, the iMac still won half the tests. Bottom line is that even when running Photoshop natively the One could only beat the iMac by eight seconds running Photoshop in emulation! Heck, even PC Mag’s own scores show the iMac over three times faster on the 3D benchmark test! In other words, the iMac blows the doors off the One, just as C|NET had shown.

But all of that is glossed over as the reviewer is awe-struck by the AIO design, saying

“The XPS One shows once and for all that the future of desktop PCs is in the all-in-one form factor.”

Um, no, the iMac showed that years ago. He also says

“Your friends will walk in the room and ask, “Where’s the rest of the PC?””

You mean like “Where did the computer go?”, Apple’s tag line for the iMac years ago? Geez, is this guy 19? Did he just start reviewing PCs? Maybe that’s why he hasn’t saved enough money from his paper route to get the current version of Photoshop. Pathetic.

Oh well, I guess sometimes “PC Mag” has to live up to its name, but this is very blatant bias in my opinion.

As I continue to fight off some sort of cold, or flu, or death, or whatever it is, it’s time for another review of recent headlines.

Leopard’s Translucent Menu Bar.

OK, I’m convinced I’m the only one who likes the Leopard menu bar. Fine, sue me. As near as I can tell every Mac user on the planet but me cannot sleep and will not rest until the menu goes back to its (*yawn*) former self.

That’s fine, and as long as I can keep mine the way it is I’m all for people getting back to the Tiger bar if that’s what they want.

However, some of the arguments against the new bar are just silly. Not least of which is the one presented here. OMG! The “o” in an iTunes menu looks weird! How could Apple not have caught this in QA?! This is clearly proof that Apple doesn’t know what they’re doing!

Whatever.

Oh, and those of you who hate the new Dock, I disagree there, too. Oooh, there are multiple shadows on the iconc, it’s a travesty of design! Are you people only ever in a room with one light source? You got a spotlight on you all the time? I frequently see items with multiple shadows, and so would you if you were half as observant in the real world as you’ve been with the Dock.

That said, I believe the color of the Dock shelf is too light for the desktops I tend to choose, so I went with a darker color and love it. With or without the color change, Tiger’s Dock looks lifeless, flat, and so 2000 to me now.

Again, whatever.

MS Surface Delayed Until 2008.

BWAAAAAAHAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!!

Does this surprise anyone? The demo video Microsoft put together is known to be half-vapor anyway, and the technology is nothing new. But as I pointed out at the time, in the iPhone Apple’s technology is not just a different approach than Microsoft’s (and others’), but also a practical one. Since then, Apple has sold a million and a half portable, real-world touch-screen devices in the USA alone, while MS has had to delay their “big ass table”.

Linux Question And Answer.

I found this interesting because it’s a great example of outlining a lot of stuff that can never happen to claim what will make something a success. It’s like saying if Mercedes Benz could sell their cars for half-price they’d be more popular. So? It’s never going to happen.

When I look at this list, frankly, I see items 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 as never happening. Indeed, don’t 3 and 12 run counter to Linux distros? Why tout “free”, then include licensed items? And you can’t ignore the “nerds” because they’re the ones that kept you (and are helping to keep you) alive. In fact, aren’t they the ones contributing the most code?

I think the items require a degree of agreement that the various parties required simply won’t ever come to.

Let’s face it, Linux’s primary feature for the consumer is that it’s “free”. But it’s only “free” if you happen to have a PC hanging around on which to install it. If you buy a PC with Linux pre-installed, where’s the “free”? Seriously. I can get a Vista laptop from HP or Dell, or a MacBook from Apple, or a Ubuntu laptop from System 76. The latter’s Gazelle, outfitted similar to a base MacBook, is $1,027. At only $74 more, the MacBook includes better software in iLife, a web camera, longer battery life, “N”-spec wireless networking, in a smaller, lighter package. (You can get better video and a webcam in the Gazelle for $200 more).

So, where is the “free”? The fact is the OS is not that great a cut of the computer pie at anything other than the dirt-cheap level, and anyone buying there is, frankly, not that particular about what they get.

Dell Price Advantage Disappearing.

Like a lot of Mac “news”, the price advantage shrinking between Dell and Apple has actually been true for a while.

At the mid- and high-end of desktops, Apple has been competitive with similarly configured PCs for a while. They’re not always the least expensive but they’re competitive, especially given their aesthetic and software advantages. I wrote about this in the areas of price and software shortly after I got my iMac.

Apple has a better price edge in their laptop line than in desktops. In other words, starting where Apple enters the laptop market (i.e, the base MacBook) they are immediately competitive with similarly configured laptops. This is different than desktops, where Apple enters the market with the Mac mini, which is not particularly competitive against similarly configured PCs.

Excellent Music Commentary: The Greenfield Report.

A couple of my favorite quotes:

“The major labels will not rule the music landscape in the future. No way. They’re just too fucking stupid. Holding on so tightly to what they had, and wanting acts to give them ever more. It’s not about the disc business, or the t-shirt business, but the FAN BUSINESS! And the majors have disrespected fans FOREVER! Until the majors realize THEY made music free, they’ve got no hope.”

“Oh, what a long strange trip it’s been. And who do we have to blame? Industry strongmen Doug Morris and Zach Horowitz. Who not only refused to embrace Napster, but sued Bertelsman and everybody else involved. Winning the battle, but losing the war. Making some money now, but destroying the future.”

I still think the future of music business and sales is up in the air. People point to Radiohead’s online distribution of their album as the future, but I disagree. At least I disagree with the way Radiohead did it, which I considered to be as disrespectful to downloaders as the labels have been. Clearly, some artists want to dictate how their music is consumed, the customer be damned. Ultimately they will do no better than the labels.

I keep waiting for some label to approach Apple (or Amazon) with something truly different: DRM-free music, individual tracks no greater than 79 cents, albums no greater than $5.99. The fact is the biggest issue even with DRM-free music files is that $10 for an album is too much. If YourMusic.com can sell physical CDs (all of them) for only $6.99 each, and eMusic can sell downloaded albums for an average price of around $3.50, then iTunes and Amazon charging $9 or $10 is borderline robbery.

Movie Rentals May Be Coming To iTunes.

This is just a rumor but I thought I’d comment on it anyway. I am not a video guy, but I really think an iTunes video rental would be a great idea. People like to rent videos, and iTunes could pull it off nicely since I think the terms would be relatively generous, and we know the user experience would be nice.

Biggest question I have is if the content providers (which provide Apple squat for video sales) would be any nicer about rentals. They’re trying to kill Apple in the video market, so it will be interesting to see if they’d open their catalogs for rental. If not, then this cannot possibly be the success it could otherwise be; currently there’s simply not enough video content in iTunes upon which to build much of a rental store.

Google’s New Non-phone.

Wasn’t Open Social vapor enough? Now Google has formed a handset alliance and, no matter how you read it, it’s purpose is to allow Google to get ads all over your phone. Who really wants this?

And with 30 companies involved, how can the resulting designs avoid the “designed by committee” look and function? That’s never a good thing. Or, if they don’t all follow each other, then how can they avoid being just as different from each other and carrier-specific as they are now, so then what’s the point? It seems like a lose-lose to me (except for Google, of course).

It’s interesting how quickly second-rate or desperate players in the game will line up behind a big dog even when the big dog is attempting something that dogs don’t normally do. Why believe that Google can suddenly write killer software? Why believe users will have no issue with ads plastered on their phone? Why believe Google is even remotely interested in the alliance members and won’t ignore or drop those that don’t seem to be doing them any good?

With these phones at least a year off it means a lot of players who might possibly (though not likely) have competed with the iPhone are now tied up for a year. A year in which Apple will not stand still, that’s for sure. A year from now there will certainly be more than one iPhone model (and price point) to compete against.

Meanwhile, as we all wait to see the fruits of this alliance’s collective wisdom — and our phones covered with ads — keep in mind there’s at least one other attempt at advertising that’s even worse.