Earlier today, I watched a trailer for the upcoming Steve Jobs biopic, jOBS. The film, which stars Ashton Kutcher, claims to be the definitive movie source for the life and times of one of the most iconic figures in all of the technology industry. Based on the trailer, it appears jOBS will start out the […]
The first Moto X reviews are in, and the verdict seems good: Motorola’s new flagship takes a little time to demonstrate its worth, with features like always-listening Google Now and “breathing” notifications, but testers seem taken with the Android smartphone. Yet, if there’s one well-repeated criticism, it’s of Motorola’s pricing for the Moto X; even […]
Apple is the company that every other firm in the industry wants to be. And why not? For years, Apple has been generating billions of dollars in profits, and the company’s products are considered the very best in the world by a countless number of customers. Apple is simply the most important technology firm in […]
The Moto X is too expensive. It’s underpowered. It’s ugly. Consumers don’t want color options. They don’t want to talk to their phone, just on it. If it’s not metal, it’s not premium. Man, the Moto X is a disappointment. Some of the instant – and vocal – criticisms of Motorola’s new phone have bordered […]
Can we all finally admit that the Wii U is in huge trouble? I mean, for months I’ve been saying it here on SlashGear, and yet, the company’s most ardent supporters have continued to say that the console will be just fine. But again, that argument flies in the face of the facts. Nintendo earlier […]
I know what I’m about to say will annoy millions of Nintendo fans around the globe and maybe even make some of the executives at the company scoff, but the way I see it, there’s no other way out for Nintendo than to end its love affair with consoles and go multiplatform with its hit titles.
I understand that, for years, Nintendo has rebuffed all suggestions that it should bring its titles to other multiple platforms. The company believes that it’s still going to benefit most from offering hardware and software on a single product and can’t fathom the thought of putting Mario or Zelda on an Xbox or PlayStation. First-party titles are the secret to its success, after all.
But I think it’s time that we and Nintendo start acknowledging that all of that “success” has been fleeting over the last decade. I’ll freely admit that the Wii was, surprisingly, a hit. And chances are, neither the Xbox 360 nor the PlayStation 3 will match it in total sales when everything is said and done. But should we discount the fact that in its latter years, the Wii was losing steam? And perhaps most importantly, should we discount the fact that the Wii U has gotten off to an abysmal start?
Although Nintendo has not officially released console sales data for the U.S., each month when NPD releases its console sales figures, one thing becomes immediately apparent: things are not going well. In fact, it’s believed that Nintendo has sold less than 100,000 Wii U units nearly every month this year. For a console that’s not even a year old, that’s a huge problem.
So, what happened to the Wii U? Blame it on mobile games, blame it on its core customer base getting older, and perhaps blame it on Nintendo’s own inability to see the changing times. As EA COO Peter Moore said recently, the Wii U is a decidedly “offline” box despite claiming to feature online components that gamers would want. In reality, it’s a vestige of what gaming used to be like – and isn’t anymore.
“Nintendo had every opportunity to do something special with the Wii U”
Nintendo had every opportunity to do something special with the Wii U. The console could have picked up casual gamers and appeal to the hardcore segment by delivering better online features. Instead, Nintendo stuck to the same, tired strategy. And now it’s in deep trouble because of it.
In fact, EA and Activision have both said that they have no games – that’s right, no games – in the pipeline for the Wii U. Even Ubisoft said that it needs to see what happens before it continues to invest in the console.
The way I see it, unless something miraculous happens, the Wii U might soon die a slow and agonizing death. And at that point, if Nintendo wants to continue on, it’ll need to go multiplatform and bring its popular titles to other consoles. In fact, the smart move might be to do that now and generate boatloads of cash by bringing titles to other devices. If Rovio and countless other mobile game companies can succeed and generate all kinds of cash, why can’t Nintendo?
At some point, Iwata and Miyamoto need to put aside their pride and accept failure. More importantly, they need to acknowledge that the market is changing and there’s an opportunity for Nintendo to transition its business and stay alive to continue to make games.
It’ll be OK, guys. Really, it will.
Why Nintendo Has No Choice But to Go Multiplatform is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2013, SlashGear. All right reserved.
When I was a kid, I was obsessed with technology. Any product I could get my hands on, I would use. And when I had a chance to pick up a game console, you can bet I was rushing to the stores to get one. Technology ruled much of my childhood.
Still, I was able to handle the real world. I could converse with both kids and adults, and I was engaged enough in school to know that there was a time and place for my technology. I also understood that getting too obsessed with tech could make me socially awkward, which prompted me to question how much time I should be spending around it.
In other words, as tech-obsessed as I might have been, I think I had a healthy relationship with gadgets.
At a July 4 party, however, I came to realize that kids today have a much different experience with technology. When I was a kid, having a cell phone in high school was unheard of. At this recent party, which was attended by kids of all ages, even the 4-year-old was holding an iPod touch and texting her sister.
Every kid at the party was holding a smartphone or iPod rouch, and they were either playing games on it or texting their friends. At no point did they look up to see what was happening at the party, and when asked a question, they would wait to finish their text message before answering it. The adults in the room were understandably displeased by the behavior, but as the parents put it – “it’s their generation.”
If that’s the case, I’m worried about that generation. During dinner, we were all sitting at the table, having a nice discussion. I look over and see two of the older kids laughing with their phones in their hand. I asked what was up, and they promptly told me that they were texting each other from across the table. Rather than have a real conversation, they opted to type it from five feet apart.
“In the old days, if a kid was bullied, it wasn’t recorded”
Of course, it’s not just the kids who were at that party. A quick search on YouTube reveals countless videos of kids taking videos in school. An overwhelming number of those videos shows kids being ridiculed or bullied in some way. In the old days, if a kid was bullied, it wasn’t recorded. Now, the whole school sees what’s happening.
And since most devices today contain cameras and the ability to capture video, students are finding themselves in compromising positions when they send photos of themselves to others that are quickly sent around the school to fellow students.
Unfortunately, I think we’ve taken a hands-off approach to this growing, dangerous relationship between technology and kids. Most device makers realize that children are a key revenue generator, and parents are content today to placate their kids, rather than explain to them that having real conversations and acting like a human being is actually a better thing.
When I was a kid, the only time you saw a child with that zoned-out look on his or her face, they were playing a video game. And in many cases, parents were alarmed by it and told them it was time to go outside and play.
Nowadays, I see it wherever I go. And parents, shockingly enough, have the same look on their faces.
After all, if you want to talk to your kids nowadays, the best way is to text them, right?
IMAGE Summer Skyes 11
Kids and Tech: Is It Going Too Far? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2013, SlashGear. All right reserved.
The “cheap” iPhone isn’t actually about being cheap at all: it’s about retiring the 3.5-inch screen. Apple has a long-running love of standardization, and with good reason. The company built the iPad mini around a display size, aspect, and most importantly resolution that allowed the greatest parity – and the fewest developer headaches – with the existing, full-sized iPad, after all. It’s not just in the name of control-freak tyranny, either: the iPad mini came out the gate with a full catalog of compatible apps, which is more than the Nexus 7 could claim.
Soon, Apple will announce a new iPhone, and the range of phones it has on sale will shift again. All signs point to it being the “iPhone 5S“, though no matter the name, we’re expecting the current iPhone 5 to slip down a tier and become the mid-range option. That would, if Apple was true to previous form, leave the iPhone 4S to take up the iPhone 4′s position as the “entry-level” handset, free-with-agreement.
Thing is, the iPhone 4S has a 3.5-inch screen – a leftover of the old design – while the iPhone 5 and 5S are going to use the newer 4-inch Retina. The 4S is also not the cheapest to make, and there’s a good reason Apple switched from the precarious glass casing of that generation to the sturdier metal of the iPhone 5.
“Full specifications are yet to leak, but a 4-inch display is a safe assumption”
Is there a better reason to ditch the iPhone 4S altogether, and introduce a new design completely: one which can cherry-pick the key elements of the iPhone 5 but wrap them up in a chassis that’s cheaper to make and thus cheaper to sell? Full specifications of the “low cost” iPhone are still yet to leak, but a 4-inch display is a safe assumption, meaning developers will be able to focus their efforts on a single, current resolution of 1136 x 640.
Price is important, of course. Apple figured that out back when it opted to keep the older iPhone around to create an instant tiered range, though not in the same way that Samsung or others might, by constantly developing multiple slightly differentiated models. Cheaper variations are also a mainstay of the iPod line-up: see, for instance, the cheaper iPod touch, which drops the camera and other elements to meet a price target.
It’s even more essential when you consider the next big battleground in smartphones: the so-called developing markets. Countries like China are the target for most of the big names in mobile – Samsung wants a piece of the pie, Nokia is counting on them to buoy up Windows Phone, and ZTE and Huawei are already staking their claim with budget Android phones – and the requirement for something affordable means keeping costs to a minimum is essential.
It’s a precarious line to walk. Apple has to deliver enough to make the new, affordable iPhone competitive with rivals, but also not so good as to eclipse any reason for users to upgrade to its more expensive versions. Still, the iPad mini has “cannibalized” full-sized iPad sales, but Apple is still sitting pretty in financial terms, and the entry-level iPhone is arguably more of a gateway drug for the premium models than the two tablets, which are relatively different propositions given their screen sizes.
Apple’s strategy involves more than just making the cheapest phone possible. If the new, “cheap” iPhone plays just as nicely with the App Store (which remains a key differentiator for the brand) as its more expensive siblings; if it’s as appealing to budget buyers in established markets as the iPhone 4 has been in this past generation, then it serves two purposes. Ticks the box for taking on developing markets as well as offering something different and – thanks to those candy colored shells we’re expecting – eye-catching for more saturated markets.
IMAGE Techdy
Apple’s “budget” iPhone is about screen control, not cash is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2013, SlashGear. All right reserved.
I’m in a perpetual argument with more than one person over the appropriate length of a resume. I’ve always believed in the 1-page resume. Most on the other side see 3-pages as a logical limit. They are wrong, of course. The 1-page resume is the perfect size. You never need more than one page explaining who you are. If you think you do, you are overthinking yourself. The resume is not supposed to be a novel about your life, it’s supposed to be a book report about the novel about your life. It gets the reader interested in the story, but it doesn’t tell you everything or give away the ending.
My favorite example is Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs has an amazing resume, and it’s only one page with plenty of white space. I won’t reprint it, but here’s the gist: I was a founder at Apple where I helped invent the Macintosh which revolutionized the computer industry. Then I worked at NeXT, where my ideas made programmers lives easier by (insert NeXT stuff here) . . . Then I worked at Apple where I invented the iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, etc. Also, Pixar, where I gave the thumbs-up to Toy Story and those other movies you and your kid can actually agree on.
There are books written about Steve Jobs and his life and everything he did. Multiple books with competing movie adaptations and big name Twitter celebrities attached. Jobs’ resume is not a book. It gives you a few brief facts. It lays out key accomplishments. Most importantly, though, it makes you want to learn more.
That’s the key to a resume. A resume has only one purpose, to get you in the door. You need to sell yourself in an interview, where you will truly land the job. A resume will not land you a job. It can only hurt you when executed poorly.
When I was a hiring manager at a former company, I looked for 2 key elements in an applicant. I wanted a cover letter that was clearly unique, written by someone who had read my job posting clearly and was answering me directly. The worst thing you can do while looking for a job is to cut and paste your cover letter. Hiring managers can tell when you’ve done that, and this is the quickest way to lose their attention.
I also looked for a 1-page resume. This wasn’t a sudden death decision. I interviewed and perhaps hired applicants with a multi-page resume, but multi-page resumes simply don’t make sense.
“Did Leonardo need 3 sheets of canvas for the Mona Lisa?”
A resume is both a piece of artwork and a sales pitch for your talents. You can certainly insert creativity into your resume, in which case the single page format becomes even more important. No matter how funky and outside-the-box you choose to think, the single sheet of 8.5 by 11 inch paper is the medium of choice. Did Leonardo need 3 sheets of canvas for the Mona Lisa? Of course not. Art fits onto a single page without breaks. This is why art museums are full of single canvases and not silly triptychs.
There is something daring and defiant about the single page resume. It says at once “Here I am in my entirety” and also “A single sheet of paper cannot contain me!” A three-page resume is always too thorough. Every aspect of your job described in detail. Loose undergraduate associations and strange summers of volunteering meander through a page that should be high peaks of accomplishment and wide valleys that draw the reader.
That’s how I feel about resumes, but I’m realizing that my thinking is outdated, or at least it will be very soon. After all, what is a single-page resume in the digital age? What is a three-pager? That’s an anachronism of paper. Certainly resumes are among the few documents left that most users feel compelled to print. That is mostly because there is not yet a better alternative, and that’s a shame and an opportunity.
LinkedIn is my resume at this point. It shows what I did; who I know; what came before. All the resume essentials. It leaves out a lot of the stupidity that seems vital on a traditional resume. References. Software knowledge, especially Microsoft Office. That insipid objective statement.
Would you rather call the references I suggest, or would you rather do a little social networking? When you find out I know Sarah, your Director of Marketing, from when we both worked together in Milwaukee, wouldn’t you rather ask her what she thinks? Even seeing the connections without reaching out paints a better picture than you’ll get from a coached reference call.
LinkedIn also eliminates the unnecessary junk, while leaving limitless space for what’s important. What’s important? Jobs. What’s not important? Things nobody paid you to do. First, everyone knows Microsoft Office, and if you don’t, you should really start lying about that. My knowledge of Excel is literally the only lie on my resume. Why indicate you know Illustrator? Doesn’t your prior job experience indicate a necessity to know the tools of the trade?
Most of all, it’s time to end the objective statement. Hi, I’m Philip, I work really hard, I like what I do, and you’ll be happy you hired me. That’s every objective statement in a nutshell. Anything else is gymnastics of verbiage and diction.
Social networks undoubtedly play a major role in the job hunt, and it’s time to embrace that and bring your social connections to the forefront, at the expense of archaic means. The last time I interviewed a job applicant, the applicant had his twitter handle on his resume. I started following him. He started following me. By the time we sat down at our interview, he had read a column or two, and I had skimmed his feed for references to drug use and Nazi memorabilia. It wasn’t even a secret, we both admitted to this sort of research.
Why not? I would much rather an employer see the collection of information publicly available about me than a single sheet of paper with a summary of my best days. Let me talk about the best days in an interview, as part of the story of my success. Instead of worrying or arguing over the single-page or multi-page resume, it’s time to find a better method altogether. The information is all readily available, we just need a concise way to package the story and get your foot in the door.
IMAGE Joi Ito
The Zero Page Resume is written by Philip Berne & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2013, SlashGear. All right reserved.
If Google TV taught us anything, it’s that the search giant has some interest in competing in the living room. The company’s platform, which runs on set-top boxes and televisions, is designed to run atop the user’s television service and deliver full interactivity with both that programming and all of the entertainment options available on the Web.
When Google TV was announced years ago, everyone knew that it was an ambitious project. But Google seemed focused on breaking into the living room and succeeding.
Now that Google TV has become a loser, rumors are swirling that the search giant is considering jumping into the console market. The device, according to the rumor mill, would possibly run on Android and come with complete access to the games currently available in the Google Play marketplace. And since it’s Google, the rumor mill argues, it might just have a chance at becoming a hot commodity in the gaming market.
But I think it could go much further than that. The way I see it, Google might just become the console market’s most dominant force if it launches a console. It won’t happen overnight, but it will happen.
Looking at the console market, things are tough. The current generation of devices are losing steam and the Wii U, which should be selling quite well right now, is proving to be a loser.
That’s the first good thing for Google. Chances are, an Android-based console would initially appeal to the more casual gamers. And since Nintendo isn’t able to do that any longer, there’s a massive void left for Google and its own console to capitalize.
“Google, unlike Microsoft, has been able to look like the good guy”
Then there’s the issue of Microsoft. Although the software giant has become less of a threat to the average company, it’s still viewed unfavorably by millions of people around the globe. And Google, unlike Microsoft, has been able to look like the good guy against the evil software company.
That’s especially true in certain parts of Asia, where the Xbox 360 has been selling quite poorly over the years. Sales are abysmal in Japan, which is why Microsoft pushed back the country to “tier 2.” And Japan is really the crown jewel in the Asian gaming market.
A Google console could pick up the gamers in countries around the world that don’t want to invest in an Xbox for one reason or another. In some cases, it’ll be because of Android. In others, it’ll be all about Microsoft hatred. In still others, it would be the cheaper price on an Android console. Regardless, there’s a good chance Google could win over the gamers that Microsoft cannot.
Lastly, I think we need to fully understand the impact Android can have on the console market. It’s an operating system that’s already in use by millions around the globe. And porting games from that platform to a console wouldn’t be all that difficult. Best of all, the platform would launch with thousands of games in its library – a first for the console market.
If Google knows what it’s doing, the company will make it easier for gamers to play a title on their Galaxy S4 and then pick it up on their console at home. The company would also provide enough firepower in the console to handle both mobile games and more sophisticated titles that larger developers might want to deliver. And since the console is running on Android, there’s a good chance it’ll be cheaper than its competitors.
Sorry, but I don’t see anyway that an Android console wouldn’t succeed. And if it comes from Google, there’s a solid chance that it’ll have an even better chance of dominating the console market.
Like it or not, gamer preferences are changing. And now is the time for Google and its Android platform to capitalize.
Why Google Could Win the Console Wars is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2013, SlashGear. All right reserved.
This is site is run by Sascha Endlicher, M.A., during ungodly late night hours. Wanna know more about him? Connect via Social Media by jumping to about.me/sascha.endlicher.
