Stephen Hackett:
It really seems like this bigger iPhone story is picking up steam, and that’s fine, I suppose. I’m just at the point where I don’t give a shit about this kind of thing…Even after it’s announced, I don’t think I’ll care about it being 3.99 or 4 inches across. Seriously, the numbers — and this story — aren’t important.
Bingo.
Dropbox has unveiled a new competition for this year:
Dropquest is a multi-step scavenger hunt that has you solve a series of puzzles (inspired by the likes of MIT’s mystery hunt or notpron [though not nearly as time/effort-consuming]). Everyone who completes Dropquest will get at least 1 GB of space (even if you participated last year). Also, everyone starts at the same time, but the questers who finish the soonest get amazing prizes!
Cool. Late at night after work I might tinker with the objectives here. Get cracking if you’re interested as the deadline to finish is June 2nd.
TUAW’s Steven Sande wrote an article early this month on how the Brooklyn Tap House has adopted iPads for its point-of-sale system:
The main attraction for the POSLavu system, according to restauranteur and co-owner Hugo Salazar, was the price. Many restaurants use systems from Micros or Aloha that can sport price tags of US$20,000 or more; the bottom line for the devices and software at the Brooklyn Tap House was about $7,000.
Slick buying guide from The Verge. Especially nice work on the info graphics measuring set top box versatility.
Developers have clamored for a paid upgrade system since the App Store’s inception, but I’m worried Apple won’t offer this feature anytime soon. I’m far from alone – Instapaper developer Marco Arment also predicted Apple’s non-action on his latest podcast. Yet Marco and many others don’t think this is a problem, that the current à la carte system is “the future” of software publishing. They’re completely wrong.
Apple drags its feet on paid upgrades because Apple wants simplicity for their customers. A choice between a full product and paid upgrade muddles this philosophy. For now, all users get all app upgrades automatically. If you introduce optional, paid upgrades, certain updates only apply to select customers. This adds complexity for consumers and developers having to juggle and maintain multiple app versions on the store.
In addition, the lack of paid upgrades keep app purchase prices lower. This is simple economics: on the App Store, developers have to force a repurchase between major versions in the form of a new app. App prices will be driven lower to offset the much larger sticker shock between versions and to account for boosts in upgrade revenue (100% of the product cost instead of some smaller fraction.)
I don’t think this is a good economic model, especially for more expensive, professional level software, such as Omnifocus and Photoshop. But remember, Apple is not, at its core, a software company; they make money from selling iPhone and iPads. The cheaper the software, the greater the incentive we have to keep on buying Apple’s hardware.
Also it’s professionals and power users – both niche Apple consumers – that demand paid upgrades, not the core audience. Given how rarely Apple updates its pro products (e.g. Mac Pros, Aperture, Final Cut) in the last few years, we’re in for a serious wait before Apple takes any action here.
Marco defended Apple’s inaction on this week’s Build and Analyze podcast; I disagree with him. A lack of paid upgrades causes two main problems:
The absence of an incremental purchase kills a huge source of revenue for developers and publishers. Without both new software and upgrade streams, many publishers, from high end publishers like Adobe to independent studios like Delicious Monster and Panic have a hard time staying afloat. In economic terms, a lack of price discrimination between more receptive, existing customers and newcomers is a major problem.
Customers get angry and frustrated when they can’t upgrade. Naturally for apps under a few dollars, this issue doesn’t apply, given the small investment. Yet if you’re considering $40, $80, or hundreds more for a purchase, an upgrade by way of repurchasing the software is costly. It’s especially aggravating if the next big upgrade is launched soon after you buy the old version. This keeps potential buyers on the sidelines between major releases, exactly the time when many developers need revenue to keep going.
Apple needs a change in course here. A lack of paid upgrades is killing both developer revenue and consumer interest in a lot of great apps. It’s also watering down app quality, especially in the iPhone and iPad markets where there’s no App Store alternative.
Co-founder of Hunch and startup investor Chris Dixon:
The key question when trying to value Facebook’s stock is: can they find another business model that generates significantly more revenue per user without hurting the user experience? (And can they do that in an increasingly mobile world where display ads have been even less effective.) Perhaps that business model is sponsored feed entries, as Facebook seems to be hoping (along with Twitter and perhaps Tumblr). The jury is still out on that model. Personally, I have trouble seeing how insertions into the feeds aren’t just more prominent display ads. You still have to stoke demand and convert people from non-purchasing to purchasing intents.
Chris nails it here. In other advertising models, users have purchasing intent, while that’s generally not the case on Facebook. Less intent translates into ineffective ads.
Shawn Blanc:
The idea of a Retina display on a Macintosh sounds fantastic. The words I’m typing at this moment are onto my iPad with its high resolution screen, and the text looks stellar. Retina displays rock. Sure, there are downsides and ugly bits that a Retina display Mac would bring with it — such as non-retina applications and websites — and Marco Arment does a good job of articulating those.
I have the good fortune of using applications on my Mac that are developed by bleeding edge developers. In addition to the native OS X apps I use (Mail and Safari), the 3rd-party apps like OmniFocus, Yojimbo, Coda, Transmit, MarsEdit, Byword, iA Writer, and others which are all run by developers which I have no doubt will be quick to update their Mac applications to support Apple’s new high resolution displays.
I need to link to Shawn more often. He’s a great tech writer and pretty level headed, as exemplified in this article. Yet I am more worried about websites with Retina displays than Shawn is; it’s a big development on the web development side and it’s going to take a while for the community to adapt.
Mat Honan wrote a pretty incredible article yesterday on Yahoo’s floundering with Flickr over at Gizmodo:
“By the time we were looking at Flickr, Yahoo was getting the shit kicked out of it by Google. The race was on to find other areas of search where we could build a commanding lead,” says one high ranking Yahoo executive familiar with the deal.
Flickr offered a way to do that. Because Flickr photos were tagged and labeled and categorized so efficiently by users, they were highly searchable.
“That is the reason we bought Flickr—not the community. We didn’t give a shit about that. The theory behind buying Flickr was not to increase social connections, it was to monetize the image index. It was totally not about social communities or social networking. It was certainly nothing to do with the users.”
And that was the problem. At the time, the Web was rapidly becoming more social, and Flickr was at the forefront of that movement. It was all about groups and comments and identifying people as contacts, friends or family. To Yahoo, it was just a fucking database.
I rarely associate Nick Denton’s Gizmodo these days with in-depth sound, writing and reporting. But wow, they really rose the bar on this one. Perhaps I should give them another chance.
Wired interviews Eventbrite CEO Kevin Hartz:
“We don’t know where we are in this cycle,” Hartz says from Eventbrite’s San Francisco headquarters. “We can’t know how much longer this abundance of capital will last, but I don’t want to be a part of it. When I see a massive number of new investors and carpetbaggers coming in, it’s time to get out.”
Hartz doesn’t use the word bubble; it’s more complicated than that for him as a guy who sits on both sides of the money equation as an investor and an entrepreneur. It’s more a winter is coming view of the startup world, especially for the consumer internet on which Hartz focuses. His advice: Get prepared for a chill to set in.
I read this article and found myself nodding along to much of what Nick Thompson had to say. It was a genuine surprise, given that the Condé Nast iPad and web apps are so poor. Then I read this:
The Verge: Magazine apps are often slammed for being slow, large, and kind of kludgy. Why is it so difficult to do properly? Who’s doing the best job?
Nick Thompson: New York has an excellent app, as does Wired. I’ve also been very impressed with Esquire and Vanity Fair.
TV: Why do you think The New Yorker has been so successful on the iPad, relative to other magazines?
NT: The main reason is that people genuinely like the magazine, and they like to read it. Also, we’ve, very deliberately, kept our iPad app very clean. There isn’t much clutter; it’s really just the stories, with some added slideshows, videos, and infographics.
Naturally, the guy singles out other Condé brands. Ironically, with potentially the exception of Wired, where the extra media content fits well, it’s a disaster everywhere else he mentions, especially Vanity Fair. Slow load times, gigantic downloads and extraneous videos that slow the experience.
And I’m sorry Nick, but when there’s a 200 plus MB download for each “clean” iPad New Yorker, I’m looking elsewhere. Love the content, and I read it every week…on my Kindle, which downloads in about 20 seconds.