Hasta La Gadget!

I bought a bag. It looks like a purse. It’s my fault. I knew this was a distinct possibility, but I went ahead and ordered it anyway. I skipped a few bags trying to play themselves of as satchels. Even the one branded “Indy,” in honor of Indiana Jones wasn’t fooling anyone. I’ve played the satchel game before and ended up wearing a purse. This time I thought I would go for a carrying case instead. A carrying case I bought, and a carrying case arrived. Unfortunately, my carrying case looks like a purse.

Why can’t I just wear a purse? I certainly can, there’s nothing illegal or wrong about it. In technology and gadgetry, there’s an assumed scale of masculinity to femininity. I don’t agree with the scale, and I generally try to ignore or actively buck these trends. Still, they exist, and here they are, laid bare.

First, there is the outright masculine end of the scale. Don’t think about male body parts, think Jeeps. Jeeps are very ugly and highly functional. They have little aesthetic decoration, but every detail serves a purpose. There is a teeter-totter of utility on one end and aesthetic on the other. As we give up utility in favor of beauty, our gadgets are widely perceived as more feminine. Add colors design finishes, start removing features and wanton capabilities of questionable benefit and you end up with a feminized device.

“Mix colors with red, it seems, and you remove their male potency”

There is also a question of color, which makes far less sense to me. I’ll never understand how colors became gendered, in the same way I wouldn’t understand gendered flavors or gendered musical notes. Some colors carry an undeniable association with gender, though, even when the color seems completely neutral. Pink is the most obvious gendered color. Purple comes a close second. Mix colors with red, it seems, and you remove their male potency.

Some gendered colors surprise me. I remember the first product I purchased that carried a gender stigma of which I was unaware: the white iPhone 3G. I loved that device in that color. Black seemed too industrial. Black was too normal, like so many other smartphones on the market. It was uninviting and, frankly, for my tastes, too masculine. So, I shouldn’t have been surprised or embarrassed when I showed off my brand new iToy and was greeted with some harmless ribbing by my male colleagues. Even some women I showed it to, including my now-ex-wife, thought it was a bit too feminine, even for their own tastes. Personally, I just liked it better. When it comes to deciding which color gadget to buy, I make an entirely emotional decision. Whichever color appeals to me most at the moment I make the purchase is the one I take home.

I believe in the legitimacy of this emotional response to our gadgets, and that’s certainly what I was feeling when I decided to buy my new tablet a purse … I mean, a carrying case. I scoped out my favorite bag makers and decided on either a Tom Bihn Ristretto or a Waterfield Ultimate SleeveCase. Both seemed a little effeminate for my needs, but both were exactly what I wanted.

Here’s my full disclosure. Usually here’s where I mention day job is with Samsung blah blah blah. Today, though, I’m disclosing that my father used to carry a purse. A satchel. A man’s carry-all bag, in the European style. He had many of these, leather and canvas. His use of the purse predated tablets or even smartphones, so there was no form-fitted purpose to his carrying a purse. It simply made sense as a way to store his wallet, keys, StarTAC, and a few papers or receipts or whatnot. He gave it up a few years ago, and I have little doubt he was simply tired of the comments. He was tired of being labeled the guy with the purse. He still has the bags, stuffed away somewhere, holding onto receipts that predate Check Cards and email.

Why can’t I just carry a purse? Actually, I can. There’s nothing really stopping me except the ideas in my own head. I can ignore looks and comments from people around me and simply do what I like. It’s just that easy. Right? Unfortunately, no. We’re humans, and humans are coded to work better in groups. We hardwired to be acutely aware of those around us and how they are responding to us. We’re supposed to change and conform. We feel awkward. We stick out. In prehistoric cave times, this instinct keeps you from being culled from the herd by a hungry tiger. Today, it makes me feel awkward about carrying a purse.

“I have pink phone cases (that I use with my big white phone)”

It’s especially weird that I should feel awkward about this because I already own plenty of pink. I have pink iPods. I have pink phone cases (that I use with my big white smartphone). I have shirts and gadgets and decorations at home that veer into the feminine end of the color spectrum, though I wouldn’t say they are especially feminine in design, if there is such a thing.

There is also a strange divide between fashion and utility when it comes to bags. I may feel like my Ultimate Sleeve Case looks too feminine wearing it about, but it’s nothing compared to a Coach bag or a fancy Italian designer case. When a bag literally borrows materials and design accents from a famous women’s clothing house, it falls deeper into feminine territory.

At once, my free-thinking and liberal mind is watching all of the sinkholes open in my argument. The secularization of men’s and women’s clothing is problematic. My definitions of masculine and feminine in design, with utility on the masculine end and aesthetic on the feminine, is reductive and perhaps dangerous. It results in pink versions of under-specced phones with dangly accessories tacked onto them. There are problems with my color assignments, especially as color and design preferences vary greatly by culture.

I know it. I see the pitfalls. I understand this is an argument about which I’m hardly qualified to rave from a distressed male perspective. But the bottom line is that I just want to carry a nice purse. I love my tablet, I want to pare down so I can just carry my tablet and some essentials, and I want to sling that all over my shoulder. To meet my needs, I’ll buy whatever I need. I’ll just buy it in black, with some distressed hide leather. And I’ll get a really ugly, utilitarian strap.

I Bought A Purse is written by Philip Berne & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Apple’s success in the technology industry has been well-documented. During the fourth quarter, the company generated a $13.1 billion profit – a massive sum that makes it the world’s largest technology firm. Apple’s success has been built on the iPhone and iPad and surprisingly, Macs are starting to gain real traction among corporate users. Apple is officially a company that can deliver outstanding products and services to every customer, and those customers are buying its devices because of it.

At the same time, issues are arising at Apple. The company’s $700+ stock price is now in the $400s. And although the iPhone was able to outpace Samsung’s Galaxy S III in the fourth quarter, it appears to be fighting a battle against Android that it can’t win.

So, I pose this question: is it getting easier or harder to not buy Apple products?

Those who say it’s getting harder might be making a good point. Apple is delivering some of the best products out there, and it’s doing so in the industries that excite us most. For instance, Apple is delivering the most popular smartphone on the market as smartphones increasingly gain traction among consumers and enterprise users. And although several Android tablet vendors are trying to take down the iPad, so far, they’ve been incapable.

“Apple has a secret weapon in its battle with Microsoft: Windows 8”

Even on the computing side, Apple is making it harder to buy competing products. The MacBook Air is still the best thin and lightweight computer on the market, and its software is top-notch. When compared to Windows 8, it’s getting harder and harder to buy a PC over a Mac. Apple has a secret weapon in its battle with Microsoft – Windows 8.

Others, however, disagree. They say that the logic that Apple is still making the best products in the mobile space and thus is the only worthwhile choice is outdated. They point to devices like the Samsung Galaxy S III, Google’s Nexus 10, the Amazon Kindle Fire HD, and others to prove their point. And although Android didn’t necessarily top iOS when it first launched years ago, it’s now delivering more (and perhaps better) features than its chief competitor.

On the PC side, Apple detractors point to the increasing popularity of Ultrabooks to question the desire to buy a Mac. Ultrabooks, after all, are well-designed and lightweight and later this year, will deliver tablet-like functionality, giving them an advantage over devices like the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro with Retina Display.

In the end, though, I still think Apple wins out. The company’s sales seem to indicate that people are still finding a lot of value in its products. And try as competitors might, they’ve yet to find a way to beat Apple in terms of design. And in today’s technology industry, that truly matters.

So, perhaps it really is getting hard to not buy Apple products. And Apple is laughing all the way to the bank because of it.

Is It Getting Easier or Harder to NOT Buy Apple Products? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

The PS4 launch was a huge success. Forget what you’ve heard. You’ve probably read on tech blogs that it was too long. They showed too many demos. Worst of all, they never showed the actual PlayStation hardware. How could they have a PlayStation launch without showing the hardware? If a PlayStation launches in the woods and there is no hardware, does anyone hear it?

Of course. First, let me tackle that last and most ridiculous point. It’s not a PlayStation launch if they didn’t show the hardware, right? No, that’s completely wrong. What is the hardware? It’s a box with a gaming computer inside and a bunch of ports on the outside. It should look reasonably attractive sitting underneath my television, but if it doesn’t I’ll just hide it behind something else, like my Xbox. It should be slim enough to fit in my cabinet, but my receiver is pretty big, so I don’t mind a little heft. Since the Xbox 360, design has become more important, as gamers realized they could have a console that wouldn’t offend the sensibilities of non-gaming spouses; but if this is a priority for you, you’ve gotten your priorities screwed up.

You know what I really want from my PlayStation box? I want it to play really freaking awesome games for the next 6 years. Every time I turn it on, I will spend exactly 5 seconds looking at the box and 30 minutes to 8 hours looking at the content it blasts onto my TV screen. If the box protrudes hairy tentacles and screams obscenities at me every time I turn it on, I can live with that if the games are good. If the ports are covered with Man-O-War tentacles that sting me every time I plug in a controller, I’ll buy some ointment and keep playing. If reaching into the box is worse than pushing my arm into the foul and stinking moist womb of Beelzebub’s mother, who the heck cares if it plays games that make me forget the horrors of my life and the cruelty of my own impending mortality for more than 15 minutes!?

If you care so much about the box, you are the problem with the games industry: style over substance.

For disclosure sake, my day job is with Samsung Mobile, so I know a thing or two about launches. As a former tech journalist, I covered Apple events and Nokia events, so I’ve seen the best and worst a launch event can be. But launching a phone is very different. The problem is that the tech press has grown accustomed to fast-paced phone launches. Every 4 weeks the coolest phone you’ve ever seen hits the market. The tech press is spoiled. They want cool hardware design, which is much more important with a phone. They want a full explanation of the device in 30 minutes or less. They want to leave the press room and walk into a store to buy it (or at least walk into their Brooklyn apartment to review a sample unit).

That doesn’t just mean that our press is jaded. That means you don’t have to say as much with each phone launch. You don’t have to detail every feature. You can build on what the audience already knows. You can highlight the new and confirm the old.

A phone is a very personal device. You will touch and caress it for the next two years. You will tell it your secrets, share your relationship photos, and stick it in your pants. When you buy it, you expect to know much of what it can already do.

Sony is not selling you the hardware. You need the hardware to play the games, but for the first year or so, Sony will lose money on the hardware. A lot of money; maybe a couple hundred dollars per console. Where do they make their money? Games. The money comes from the games they make internally and the licenses they sell to EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard and others.

“The box is a necessary evil to get you to buy the game”

So, when Sony hosts a launch event, they aren’t selling you on the box hardware. The box is a necessary evil to get you to buy and play the game. If you only bought the box and watched Netflix and never played any games, Sony’s PlayStation division would be out of business in this generation.

Games are a hard sell, especially when they cost $60 a piece, brand new. They cost as much to make as a Hollywood blockbuster, and like a hot movie they make most of their money in the first week they are available. What’s worse, the movie producers make a ton of money months later when the movie goes to DVD, but game producers don’t see that kind of profit. Why should Sony ever support used games with the economics of the gaming market already tilted so heavily against them?

At a PlayStation launch event, Sony needs to prove that a 20-60 hour game on unproven hardware is worth 4 to 6 times the price of a movie ticket. How can you possibly fault them for showing 2 hours of game previews? Sure, the jaded press in the audience will get bored, but diehard fans will pore over those previews for 7 months until the console is in stores.

Go ahead, Sony, be proud of your launch event and ignore the critics. Every one of them is a fan. They all lusted over at least one of those games, and lamented the beloved titles you didn’t show, but probably will at another 2-hour event at E3. The same press will complain again there, because it’s their job to by cynical; but they’ll be first in line to buy one. In the end, it’s not about the event, or the box. It’s all about the games.

But seriously, Sony, enough with the updates. Just let me play the game and forget that the rest of it – the box, the controller, the world – exists, even if it’s only for 30 minutes.

Why you’re wrong about the PS4 launch is written by Philip Berne & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

The recent announcement of NPD’s game console numbers had me thinking about the industry and what it has become. Each month, we examine those figures to see where the market stands and fans of all three major consoles take up arms to explain why their product is best.

But all of that debate and all of the talk about the success or failure of devices like the Wii U make me question what the future looks like. We’re expected to see more game consoles hit the marketplace in the next year or so, and Steam is also planning to enter the fray. Add that to OUYA and the possibility of Apple gaming, and it becomes clear that the console market will only grow in the coming years.

All of that growth in the number of consoles might sound nice to gamers. But what if I told you that the future – the ideal future – would not rest on more game consoles, but on less?

The way I see it, a single, universal console should dominate the future.

I know I’m not the only person to ask for a universal game console, but I think it’s for the best. In order to get the most out of our gaming experiences, we’re forced to buy several devices costing hundreds of dollars. From there, we need to buy extra controllers and sign up for Web-based services. And that’s all before we even buy different games for the consoles.

In a world I’d like to see, all of that would be stripped away. We’d have just one new console to buy every few years and the top game publishers in the world would deliver titles for that device. We’d only have to buy one set of controllers and sign up for one online-gaming experience.

Industry observers might reason that such a scenario would actually hurt the gaming industry. After all, we’d be spending a lot less cash in that scenario than the current one, they say.

“Hardware savings would increase spending across the software market”

But is that really true? By saving all of the cash on hardware and online services, we might be able to dedicate the same amount of money to the games themselves. All of the savings would increase spending across the software market. The result? The possibility of an even stronger game industry.

Of course, which company would actually deliver the console is up for debate. Some might say that Nintendo is the best option, since it’s been building consoles for years. Others might suspect that Microsoft or Sony could get the job done. Even Apple might be a candidate.

The nice thing about a universal console is that it really doesn’t matter which company builds the hardware. In my dream world, gaming goes back to, well, gaming, and does away with the obsession with hardware.

The game industry needs to change. And it needs to realize that the console wars need to go. If they do, we all win.

Why the World Needs A Universal Game Console is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

All of a sudden, I’m excited about HTC again. After a dire 2012 and a dreary line-up the twelve months before that, the HTC One is a blast of fresh air and has a real “return to form” feel for the company. I was lucky enough to spend some extended time with the One ahead of today’s launch, and came away impressed with HTC’s attention to detail and concerned that it would struggle to communicate its message. Rather than follow the trend of more megapixels, HTC opted out and went for a photography system that, it claims, is far more relevant to how people actually use their smartphones.

First the good news. The One feels excellent in the hand, and while people have commented that – in the leaked shots at least – it bears a resemblance to the iPhone 5, in the metal it’s very different. It’s one of the sturdiest, most premium-feeling Android devices we can recall, and that effort will hopefully pay dividends when it comes to distinguishing itself against other phones in-store.

“It takes us back to the days of the HTC Hero”

It takes us back to the days of the HTC Hero, which was an incredibly exciting device, one that encapsulated the idea that Android was tremendously liberating in some way. That Google pushed out this platform which gave manufacturers great breadth of freedom to innovate on top of it. Android at the time looked relatively basic, and things like HTC Sense weren’t just reskins for the sake of differentiation but a completely new environment in which to operate.

Since then, of course, Google hasn’t been standing still. Most of the key elements that HTC introduced with Sense – the social networking integration, for instance – got gradually integrated into the core OS, and over time HTC’s software felt more like visual change for the sake of it. New UIs aren’t a bad thing in and of themselves – one of Android’s strengths is its flexibility, after all – but when they delay firmware updates then users unsurprisingly sour on them.

HTC One overview:

HTC has moved to address that, building in support for incremental updates into Sense 5, and giving its engineers the ability to tweak preloaded apps like BlinkFeed and the Zoe photography system without having to wait for a full ROM to be carrier tested and distributed. Meanwhile, the apps themselves are the most compelling we’ve seen on an HTC device for some time: BlinkFeed, and its “snackable” approach to news and social consumption does make some sense considering how people use their phones today, while Zoe – though initially confusing – gets more fun the longer you interact with it.

HTC could still shoot itself in the foot, if it doesn’t make good on its promise to develop what its shown us in fledgling status today. I’ve criticized the company in the past for introducing with solid ideas but then failing to capitalize on them – OnLive gaming, for instance, or Sense Online – and so while Sense 5 is a welcome revamp, only time will tell whether HTC has the sticking power to give it the refinement it deserves and the longevity users demand.

That’s not the big problem, though; that has a Samsung logo. The Korean company’s marketing spend around the Galaxy S III has been vast, and shows little sign of abating as the much-rumored Galaxy S4 approaches. No matter how good last year’s HTC One X and One X+ might have been – and we were pretty impressed at the time – they were simply buried by the Galaxy hype, to the point where the smartphone market became in effect a two-horse race: do you go iPhone or do you go Galaxy S III?

“Marketing and promotion is HTC’s weak link”

HTC undoubtedly recognises that marketing and promotion is its weak link; unfortunately, the knowledge you have a problem doesn’t put any more cash in the war-chest, and HTC simply can’t afford to match Samsung’s huge campaigns. That’s bad enough when you have devices, like the One X, which directly compete on specifications with rivals, but it’s a potential kiss of death when, in the case of the HTC One, you’re having to explain complex and confusing decisions you’ve made, such as UltraPixels and the whole Zoe system.

Specifications may “be dead” as we’re regularly told, but consumers still play spec-sheet bingo in stores, comparing the raw numbers of one to the numbers of another. Will they spend the time to figure out why HTC’s 4-megapixels might, in fact, be better than the 8- or 13-megapixels of another device? Or will HTC’s phone simply earn a spot at the bottom of the table?

The only way to compete on that front is education: teaching customer services reps how to teach would-be buyers why they should care about one thing and not just take numbers at face value. That’s not something HTC’s “Quietly Brilliant’ marketing strategy of old has proved particularly good at, and there’re expensive lessons to give, when few sales people will ever be criticized for recommending Apple or Samsung.

If all things were equal, the HTC One would be an inescapable contender in 2013. The hardware is incredible, the software a promising return to old form, and for once there’s a sense that a manufacturer has stopped to consider what users actually do, not what might sound best in “mine is bigger” advertising. Equality is a pipe-dream, though, and the HTC One will have to fight tooth and nail – and HTC make the very most of its limited marketing budget – if it wants to raise its head above the rest of the smartphone noise.

Find out more on the HTC One in our hardware hands-on, plus our rundown of Zoe and UltraPixels, and the new Sense 5 and BlinkFeed technology.

Will 2013 be the year of the HTC One? is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.