Editorial: The most exciting Xbox SmartGlass application isn’t what you’d think

The most exciting SmartGlass application isn't what you'd think

In Microsoft’s ongoing battle to alter your association between “Xbox” and “Video Games,” SmartGlass is its latest volley. Employing your favorite mobile device — Windows Phone 7.5/8, Android, and iOS devices are all supported — SmartGlass enables you to control your Dashboard experience, explore the web, input text, and much more. But what Microsoft’s really banking on is its “second screen” functionality, essentially enabling another layer of interactivity with video, music, games, and the Xbox 360’s other, less ballyhooed service: sports.

It’s this final layer that I found most enticing during a recent hands-on meeting with Microsoft. Could sports be the “killer app” that MS needs to get SmartGlass out of its tiny niche and into the hands of the masses? I think so.

Continue reading Editorial: The most exciting Xbox SmartGlass application isn’t what you’d think

Filed under: , , , , , ,

Editorial: The most exciting Xbox SmartGlass application isn’t what you’d think originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:01:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments

Editorial: Turning point for the tortoise and the hare

Editorial Turning point for the tortoise and the hare

That meteor shower was a bust. I’ll never get back the five minutes I spent waiting to be awed. Anyone similarly impatient will be in gratification heaven for the next week, as the biggest cosmic bodies in the tech cosmos streak across the sky with announcements, device releases, price shifts and earnings reports.

Tossing astronomy aside for its failure to bedazzle, I turn to astrology to illuminate the upcoming eventful days. From a This Week in Astronomy blog: “A Venus-Pluto-Uranus T-square will be testing relationships and finances. The Sun enters Scorpio and aspects every slower planet except Pluto, and there’s an intense Mars-Jupiter opposition.” I don’t understand most of that, but I know about opposition. That fits. The energy of opposition crackles in the ecosystem warfare waged this week by Apple, Microsoft and Google.

Switching now from inscrutable astrology to fables (because next to cosmic messaging I like simple allegories to explain life), we can see that the slow-but-steady tortoise is placing the most audacious bet.

Continue reading Editorial: Turning point for the tortoise and the hare

Filed under: , , , , ,

Editorial: Turning point for the tortoise and the hare originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:54:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments

How Many Tablets Do You Really Need?

Now that Apple has announced that it will hold a special event on Tuesday, just about everyone believes that the show will be used to unveil the iPad Mini. That device, which has been rumored for months, will complement the current iPad and take on the Nexus 7 from Google and Amazon’s Kindle Fire HD.

As with every other Apple announcement, the excitement surrounding Tuesday’s event is palpable. Both Apple lovers and haters are wondering what the company will offer up, and chances are, many of those folks are getting their wallets ready to plunk down cash to preorder whatever it is the iPad Mini becomes.

I recently held impromptu discussions with iPad owners I know to see if they’ll be buying an iPad Mini. I figured that they wouldn’t, since they already own an iPad, but thought it was worth asking. The results of my informal survey were shocking, to say the least.

Nearly every person I spoke to, including those who bought an iPad just months ago, said that they would at least consider buying an iPad Mini. I was shocked. Why in the world would folks who own high-end iPads want to buy a cheaper, low-end iPad?

Surely thinking that it had something to do with my friend list, I surfed the Web to see if others in Apple forums held the same beliefs. Once again, I came across many folks who said that although they already own an iPad, they would likely buy the iPad Mini.

Those responses have led to me a simple question: how many tablets do we really need?

“Some said their kids constantly play with their expensive iPads, so a cheaper mini is worth it”

Admittedly, I understood some of the points the could-be buyers were making. A few respondents said that their children are constantly playing with their expensive iPads, and they’re concerned that more use might render it useless after a bad fall off the counter. To those folks, buying a cheaper iPad Mini for the kids is worth it.

Although that was the best reason I’ve heard, I was willing to accept that some folks like the idea of having a smaller, lighter iPad with them on the road, and then switch over to the bigger model at home. To those users, it’s about convenience. And as someone who enjoys convenience as much as the next guy, I can appreciate that.

But beyond those reasons, I can’t justify buying a smaller, underpowered iPad if I already own the larger model. What is the benefit? The device will ship with iOS 6 and its feature set will likely be sub-par compared to its bigger brother. Plus, it’ll cost at least a few hundred bucks, making the addition to the tablet family awfully pricey.

The way I see it, for the vast majority of customers, having a single iPad is just fine. The device is extremely capable and helps folks get work done without much fuss. To have another iPad handy for no other reason but to have it makes little sense.

It’s an amazing feat when a company can get customers to buy a product they don’t really need. But time and again, Apple has done it. And before long, Apple will be touting preorders or sales to current customers.

My hat’s off to you, Apple. If nothing else, you’re a capitalist inspiration.


How Many Tablets Do You Really Need? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Why do we care about the iPad mini?

Not as big as the new iPad; not as small as the iPhone 5 or iPod touch; it’s Apple’s own “tweener” and by all rights and intents the iPad mini should be nothing more than a gap filler. Yet anticipation is high for the presumed 7.85-inch iOS tablet, and while spirits always tend to get, well, spirited in advance of an Apple event, sometimes the justification seems more inexplicable than others. Arguably, in the context of the tablet market – and post-PC computing as a whole – Microsoft’s Surface is far, far more important than the iPad mini.

Windows 8 is the centerpiece of Microsoft’s next-gen OS strategy – the hub of desktop and mobile computing, as well as pulling together Windows Phone 8 and Xbox gaming – and the company’s future as an industry heavyweight is dependent on it getting that right. That also means showing how Windows RT – as on the first Surface model – fits into that equation, something so far we’re yet to see summed up in a consistent, easily communicated message.

As Microsoft’s Surface chiefs pointed out, though, their tablet project approaches slates from a different direction to others already in the market. Windows RT may be a pared-back version of Windows 8, but it’s still Windows-from-the-desktop boiled down into tablet form. In contrast, iOS on the iPad and Android on tablets running Google’s OS both take their cue from phones scaled up. What will be really interesting – and deserves attention – is seeing how full apps translate to finger-use and whether the detachable keyboard accessories Microsoft is so proud of turn out to be essential rather than just eye-catching.

With some calculated timing, though, Apple knocked Surface from the top of the headline pile: the preorder news had its few minutes of attention, only to be swallowed up by the invite for Apple’s event next week. Yet in comparison with Surface – which, for Microsoft is pivotal – an iPad mini would simply be filling in a line-up gap for Apple. So why all the attention?

“It’s iconic founder Steve Jobs who has to be disproved”

In no small part, it’s because the biggest challenge Apple has to overcome with the iPad mini is… Apple itself. More accurately, it’s iconic founder Steve Jobs who has to be disproved, after he so vocally and memorably blasted smaller-than-iPad models back in 2010. Tablets that size, Jobs pointed out, don’t just offer a slightly reduced display area of 9.7-inch iPad, but a considerably smaller touchscreen to play with. Vendors would need to supply sandpaper, he joked, so that users could file down their fingers in order to tap on-screen graphics with any degree of accuracy.

Jobs was undoubtedly a master of misdirection – telling you today that Apple had no intention of entering a segment, then launching a product to do just that tomorrow – but with his near-deification since his passing last year, and his comments on tablets still getting broadly circulated, all eyes will be on how Apple itself has addressed those complaints. If the iPad mini really is just a smaller iPad (which you may recall is, according to some, just a larger iPhone) then there’s a legitimate question of whether Jobs was actually talking codswallop back in 2010. Just as the iPod nano does its touchscreen interface differently to the iPod touch, taking into account the smaller display size, so Apple needs to demonstrate that there really was a challenge to overcome, and prove that it alone has addressed it.

Looking more broadly, though, all eyes are on the iPad mini because of doubts in the small tablet segment as a whole. When Steve Jobs roundly dismissed 7-inch “tweeners” as unnecessary and useless in the market, that’s because at the time they were pretty much pointless. 7-inch as a form-factor has, so far failed, unless it’s been cheap as chips like Google’s Nexus 7. That, with the heft of Google branding and a strongly competitive price – two Android tablets for the price of one iPad – has made the Nexus 7 the exception not the rule so far.

“Apple may have to compromise to make iPad mini a success”

Apple may have to compromise to make the iPad mini a success, and compromise is not something the company does all too often. Too ambitious, too whizz-bang, and the smaller iPad won’t be able to hit a competitive price point. Too humble, or built to too strict a budget, and it will lack the premium cachet the brand is known for. The smaller devices are, often the more complex they are to piece together – gathering the right blend of components for a tiny phone is more of a challenge than for a 10-inch tablet, where they may be a little extra wiggle room to play with.

The iPad mini lacks that room to wiggle, and the excitement around the product launch isn’t simply because lots of people want a smaller tablet (though some undoubtedly do) but because we want to see whether a firm with a track-record of convincing consumers it has solved the equation can do the same under arguably tougher constraints. The world may not need a “tweener” iPad, but if Apple decides that it range does, then it needs to demonstrate it can do it with more than just a bloated iPod touch or a shrunken new iPad.

SlashGear will be liveblogging the whole iPad mini event at live.slashgear.com from 10am PT on Tuesday, October 23; for more on Microsoft Surface, check out our behind-the-scenes tour with the Surface team.


Why do we care about the iPad mini? is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Editorial: Betting on BlackBerry (or hoping)

Editorial Betting on BlackBerry or hoping

Carrying a BlackBerry Storm requires a certain capacity to face scorn with pride. You have to have a thick skin for pity, too. Also condescension. And incredulity. BlackBerry’s reputation is in the gutter, but that’s better than being down the sewer, which it was before RIM started showing prototypes of the BlackBerry 10. On the strength of an undeniably cool interface, the BlackBerry brand has clambered back up to ground level, where it sits in delayed-launch limbo. RIM is smartly spending the extra time exposing BB10 prototypes to the smartphone-using audience (and, crucially, app developers).

It is not only to escape scorn, pity, condescension and incredulity that I place an emotional bet on BlackBerry 10. More objectively, there appears to be clear and careful thought to identifying how current models fall short in today’s smartphone landscape (admittedly obvious), assessing weaknesses in Android/iOS experiences, and targeting an imaginative feature set to both loyal and disenfranchised users.

It starts with a newly holistic approach to the mobile work-life balance. And there is that amazing camera thing.

Continue reading Editorial: Betting on BlackBerry (or hoping)

Filed under: ,

Editorial: Betting on BlackBerry (or hoping) originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:00:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments

When Does A TV Get Too Big?

I love my televisions. One of them, a 55-inch set, sits in my living room, ready and willing to deliver all kinds of entertainment. Another set, a 42-inch model, is running in my bedroom for those times when I want to relax and catch up on some shows on my TiVo.

Recently, when I was watching a movie on the aforementioned 55-inch set in my living room, I got to thinking about screen size. On numerous occasions, people have come into my house, looked at the screen, and made some sort of laudatory statement about how “big” my television was. To them, the size, and not the fact that the set is extremely thin and delivers outstanding picture quality, was most impressive.

Realizing that, I decided to head down to Best Buy to examine people’s actions in the store. Much to my surprise, the vast majority of folks centered their attention on a precious few televisions that lacked overall quality, but were much larger than their upper-end counterparts. I was also surprised to see that the aisle with smaller televisions was largely ignored by customers.

All of that has made me wonder whether screen size matters too much to us. According to NPD DisplaySearch, the average screen size of today’s televisions is 36.8 inches. That’s up two inches in just the last year alone.

In a discussion on the topic recently, NPD DisplaySearch senior vice president Paul Semenza said that for today’s customers, “its about, how big of a set can I get into my room?” That mentality has come to the detriment of overall quality.

“People are buying the biggest TV they can fit through the door”

So, why does size matter so much? I know I own above-average televisions in terms of screen size, but I have the rooms to accommodate them. According to Semenza, people are simply buying the biggest television they can fit through the door. Sometimes, those big sets fit into a space. In other cases, they just don’t.

Those who buy televisions and research them typically come across tips from sites like this that tell them how big a screen should be for a certain room. Typically, the golden rule is to get a screen size based on where the viewers will be sitting, not how big a room is. The closer you sit to the set, the smaller the screen should be.

But how many of us actually listen to such advice? Judging by the data, and my own admittedly non-scientific research, it appears we throw logic out the window when buying a television. To us, the bigger the screen, the better.

Of course, TV makers love that about us. Televisions with larger screens are more expensive. So, the more people ignore smaller sets for larger ones, the more those companies will make. It’s a great deal.

Perhaps, though, it’s time for us to change. Screen size, while important, is not nearly as integral to the viewing experience as the device’s internal components. Without high-quality visuals, who really cares how big a television screen is, anyway?

Say what you will about television screen size, but I’m going to start advocating smaller sets. Such a move might just benefit us all.


When Does A TV Get Too Big? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


A Samsung Nexus 10 won’t solve Google’s tablet problem

Google, if the rumors are true, has turned to long-time Android supporter (and arguably the only OEM really making a success out of Android) Samsung for the next Nexus tablet, and unlike the budget Nexus 7 it’s a direct challenge to the iPad. Blasting past Apple’s “Retina” boasts with a 10.1-inch, 2,560 x 1,600 display, there’s no doubting that such a slate would be a joy to the eyes, but it’ll take more than ribald resolution to address Google’s lingering Android tablet problem, and no amount of fancy Samsung hardware can do that.

Android has never had a device problem. Some of the most innovative and boundary-pushing hardware we’ve seen of late is running Google’s OS: fast chips, impressive screens, superlative connectivity; capable cameras; a smorgasbord of options to suit your hand, and pocket, and wallet. That’s not to say there isn’t innovation going on elsewhere – Apple keeps churning out compelling devices, and I’ve had a soft-spot for a while for Nokia’s PureView tech – but suffice to say you could never accuse Android of lacking in pure gadget appeal.

The Nexus 7 was compelling, then, not because of its hardware, but because of the balance it represented between specs and price and capabilities. A sub-$200 tablet with a highly usable screen, sure it lacked some of the bells & whistles – like a rear camera – but ASUS and Google had good excuses for their absence, and the promise that when Jelly Bean gets replaced, Nexus 7 owners will be quickly treated to the next version.

At its launch, I speculated that Google’s goal with the Nexus 7 was to encourage consumers to begin paying for apps rather than relying on free, or ad-supported software. Google’s $25 of free Play store credit was contingent on registering a credit card or other payment option, for instance, and the Nexus 7 was delivered already linked to the buyer’s Play account. Android users have long been known as favoring free apps to a greater extent than iOS users, and Apple hasn’t stinted from rolling out those “average spend” stats whenever it can.

The Nexus 7 had another purpose: encouraging Android developers themselves to create more applications for the platform. Not just any apps, though: software for tablets.

“Giving out a free tablet and hoping apps follow isn’t a new strategy”

Giving out a free tablet device and hoping apps follow isn’t a new strategy; in fact, Google tried it itself at I/O in 2011, a year before. It was Samsung doing the honors with hardware too, funnily enough, in the shape of the original Galaxy Tab 10.1 (complete with a fetching limited edition Android-themed back panel). “Go, take our slender Honeycomb tablet” was Google’s message, “and reward us with applications so plentiful they knock the iPad into a cocked hat!”

Unfortunately, things didn’t quite go to plan. Honeycomb proved underwhelming, just like sales of the Android tablets running it, and then the Ice Cream Sandwich update was slow to appear, and finally – by the time Jelly Bean appeared on the horizon, looking smooth and compelling – Samsung decided it wasn’t going to bother updating the Galaxy Tab 10.1 any more anyway. All of those developers carefully prepared with hardware, only to discover that they couldn’t test their apps on the latest version of Android unless they installed it via unofficial routes.

The end result is, well, little change from the state of Android tablet app play 18-24 months ago. At a time when the App Store is flourishing with apps for the iPad, the Play market is still all too often smartphone-centric in its wares. It’s still hard to put together a convincing list of tablet apps that show off the best of Android hardware.

In the meantime, we’ve had no shortage of clever, unusual Android tablets to choose from. We’ve seen removable keyboards and digital pens; accessories and add-ons Apple has never bothered with. And, with third-party developers apparently so reluctant, manufacturers like Samsung and others have stepped up with apps to take advantage of those features themselves, and in the process increased the likelihood that the tablet will be delayed in getting the next version of Android fresh from the Google spout.

Any Samsung launched under the Nexus brand will have pure Android as Google intends it, but that also means none of Samsung’s own app handiwork to fill in the gaps. All buyers will have to play with is what’s in the Play store today, and the bulk of that is software intended for phones. The Nexus 7 could get away with it because, at a pinch, an embiggened Android smartphone app looked okay on its 7-inch screen. On a Retina-slaying Samsung super-slate, with 10.1-inches to play with, that’s simply not going to fly. Google needs to figure out how to wake more developers up to Android tablet apps, or the Samsung Nexus 10 is only going to emphasize how poorly prepared the platform is.


A Samsung Nexus 10 won’t solve Google’s tablet problem is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Editorial: Bring on the digital overthrow of publishing

Editorial Bring on the digital overthrow of publishing

Last week’s release of the Amazon Kindle Paperwhite offered an opportunity to look back on the rapid growth of e-reading, and look forward to what the digitization of publishing will mean to four major market forces: publishers, bookstores, authors and readers. As during any technological disruption, winners and losers trade fates until the upheaval settles and a new cycle of status quo begins.

Amazon is not the only bookstore represented in the scramble for new-era survival, but its major role has multiple dimensions: seller, publisher, enabler, inventor and primary instigator of disruption. Amazon is banking on being a winner, and was recently handed an advantage by the U.S. government in its uneasy relationship with publishers.

While industrial forces work their way through the dislocation of new paradigms, individuals — both book consumers and book authors — stand to be the biggest winners, and that is a good thing.

Continue reading Editorial: Bring on the digital overthrow of publishing

Filed under: , , ,

Editorial: Bring on the digital overthrow of publishing originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:00:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments

Could Google+ Eat Evernote?

Information is pointless if you can’t find it when you need it. That’s the ethos that has driven search engines like Google just as it has “digital notebook” services like Evernote, and it’s also the reason why Google+ could eat Evernote’s lunch if it put its mind to it. With the news of Facebook’s one billion active users, questions as to how Google+ will compete with Zuckerberg’s empire have inevitably surfaced; of course, the best way to stay relevant is to offer something completely different altogether.

While both Facebook and Google+ are social networks, they take very different approaches. Facebook is about friendly sharing: inviting people into your digital life, and dipping into theirs. Google+, in contrast, sits at the hub of all of Google’s services, each of which is focused on a different type of data: email, documents, music and videos, photos, and more.

I’ve been an Evernote user for years now, and a Google+ user since the service opened its virtual doors in mid-2011. Like many, I’ve been relying on Evernote as a digital aide-memoir, a place to gather up thoughts, lists, books I might want to buy, music I might want to listen to. I’ve drafted articles and reviews in Evernote on my phone while sitting on buses and trains, then picked up where I left off in the desktop version. I’ve even relied on its clever OCR – which can pick out text in photos and make it searchable – to store business cards, snapping them with my phone’s camera for easier recollection than digging through a physical stack later.

“I just want to be able to find my data quickly”

It’s proved its worth both because it’s convenient and because I’m lazy: I don’t want to have to remember which device my information is stored on, I don’t want to have to remember to synchronize when I get back home, I just want to be able to find data quickly later. In recent weeks, though, I’ve found myself bypassing Evernote and using Google+ for many of those tasks instead.

For those who haven’t used it (or who have turned the feature off), the Google+ app for Android and iOS automatically uploads photos and video you capture with your phone and tablet to a private album. From there you can share it easily, either publicly or to specific circles you’ve set up; or, as I’ve been doing, you can keep it private but use it as a simple way to keep track of information.

In bookstores, I’ll snap a shot of the cover of a book that I might want to check online reviews of later, or I might grab a photo of a particular wine bottle, or a DVD, or an advert; anything I might think I’ll be interested in at some point in the future, but know will slip from my memory before I’m home again. I know Google+ will automatically upload it and it’ll be waiting for me, not only in the browser on my computer, but pushed into the Google+ album in the gallery on all my Android devices.

I could snap a photo with Evernote, but I’d feel obliged to tag it, or sort it into a notebook, and that’s more than I want to do when I’m out and about. Still, Evernote’s organizational systems are far more advanced than those of Google+, since it’s set up to handle sorting and recalling huge amounts of information.

That needn’t always be the case, however. Google has all of the constituent parts to make an impressive alternative to Evernote, building on different aspects of services already on offer. Text and handwriting recognition are already used by search, able to find results in PDFs and translate the scrawl of a finger on your smartphone display: they could just as easily pick out text in snapshots of book jackets and billboards. Evernote’s notebooks could find their equivalent in private Google+ circles: individual ways to gather together content that could – but not necessarily – be kept private rather than shared.

Where Google+ has the potential advantage over Evernote is how integrated it is into our daily lives and the services we rely on, not to mention the social aspect. My photos of business cards currently wait in an Evernote notebook for me to search and find them; Google, meanwhile, could pull out the text and automatically slot it into my Gmail contacts, then sync that with my phone. It could also fill in the gaps based on what it knows about the person: things that won’t fit on a 3.5 x 2 inch card, like a Google+ bio, or a list of sites that person contributes to and samples of the recent content they’ve produced.

Those books I’m curious about, or adverts I’ve spotted, could be recognized with the same technology that powers Google Goggles: then I can automatically see reviews, and the cheapest place to buy them. Maybe there’s a QR code on the advert, something I probably won’t scan at the time – it always seems to be the way that the billboards with QR codes I see are when I’m underground on the Tube, with no signal to look them up – but which Google+ can quietly look up for me itself, and use that information to flesh out what I see when I come back to review my gallery of gathered images. After all, it already knows that I must be interested in that topic, since I’ve been curious enough to take a photo of it.

“I needn’t solely rely on Google’s opinions, I can crowdsource”

Of course, Google+ is a social place, and so I needn’t solely rely on Google’s opinions before I make a decision: I can crowdsource it. I’m probably not the first person to ask, either, so if the ensuing discussion is done publicly, Google+ could easily bring together those multiple conversations so that everybody gets the benefit. Google knows masses about me and the sort of people whose opinions I particularly trust – it reads my email, after all, and it sees who I interact with most and what I click on regularly – so it could make sure the most useful tidbits simmer up to the top where I’ll see them first.

I, like a lot of people, am lazy with how I collect my data – heck, sometimes I just email myself something I need to remember, and hope it’ll be somewhere near the top of my inbox when I next open it up – but I expect great things in how I then consume it. Evernote is a brilliant digital alternative to the notebook, but my life has moved on from collating snippets of information through which I’ll browse later on.

If Facebook is about sharing the minutiae of our lives and hoping our friends comment on it, then Google+ has an opportunity to do something new, to bridge our interests and our expansive digital memories and help us process them in meaningful ways. Evernote may get caught in the crossfire, but I doubt I’m the only one who’ll follow the path to the service that helps me get most done with the least effort.


Could Google+ Eat Evernote? is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Can there ever be another Apple?

I often look at Apple and what it has been able to accomplish over the last decade with amazement. Who would have thought that a technology company – especially one that was extremely close to failure – could become the world’s most valuable firm? But Apple has. And with over $100 billion in cash on hand, the chances of it going back to the old days of failure and despair seem unlikely.

[Original image: Photon_de]

Still, Apple’s meteoric rise from obscurity to household name is by no means unique. Several companies over the years have been able to land themselves at the top of the corporate world with a proper combination of innovation and outstanding leadership.

Realizing that, I can’t help but wonder if there will ever be another Apple. I’m not saying that the next Apple will be another company that builds smartphones and tablets, but one that can see the future and deliver it now.

Of course, many Apple fans would say that there isn’t any room for another Apple. After all, the company has the innovative insight to deliver the latest and greatest products already. And with enough cash on hand to buy up, well, just about anybody, Apple can insulate itself from losing ground to another firm.

“Apple might be big and popular, but it’s not invincible”

But holding such beliefs on the ultimate power of corporations is a dangerous game. Major companies can be huge and powerful, but a few wrong moves, and they will fail.

Make no mistake – Apple might be big and popular, but it’s not invincible.

So, that’s precisely why I think there can be another Apple. In fact, I’m a firm believer that there eventually will be another Apple. The company will find a way to innovate beyond what others in the industry have. And with a loyal following, it might just be able to surpass what Apple has achieved so far.

That said, I have no clue what company will be able to be the next Apple. And as much as I’d like to see a startup climb its way to the top of the technology world, I’m starting to think more and more that the next Apple will be a company that has already solidified its position as a trustworthy vendor in the marketplace. The way the industry works at this point, there’s really no easy way to reach the top without an already trusted brand behind it.

Still, it’s possible. Apple might own the mobile space for the next several years, but what’s to say some other company might not do something similarly special in the living room? Or perhaps a firm will come along that transforms how we use computers. It’s easy to say that no more innovation is possible beyond what Apple can deliver, but such claims are nonsense. This is the technology industry. With the right mind and enough cash, anything is possible. And to not believe so is to not acknowledge how far we’ve come over the last few decades.

Apple is special. Apple is impressive. But it’s not the end. And we must all remember that.


Can there ever be another Apple? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.