An evolving device
To all of you who don’t own an iPhone: when was the last time you were waiting for a new release to update the firmware on your phone? I have never updated my phone ever before, nor was I looking forward to doing it. But ever since I have an iPhone I can’t wait for the next release. The iPhone is a phone that evolves over time, and that improves over time…every time again.
Last week Apple has released the Developers Kit that allows any third party to develop applications for the iPhone. Most interestingly the investment company Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers has launched the iFund along side. They will fund $100 million dollars in market-changing ideas and products that extend the iPhone platform. It is open to anyone who thinks they’ve got the next revolutionary step for the device. Something like that has never been done in such a public way. So, if the device is not a revolution yet, it will become so in the near future.
Besides this Developers Kit it is already possible to create webapps for the iPhone. It is possible to put shortcuts to these webapps in the form of icons on the homescreen of the iPhone. You can rearrange them accordingly. Which phone allows you to change the homescreen in the first place? I never had one. So my phone appears to have new functionality such as a dictionary, a remote control, and MSN already. Even though these webapps are not native to the device. In the future such things will become native to it and will allow you to have use your phone as a mobile MSN device for instance.
Usage
I use my iPhone a lot. I hardly ever still read e-mail on my laptop, instead I use my iPhone all the time. Whereas I used to have the standard signature that put ‘Sent from my iPhone’ underneath every e-mail I sent from the phone, I have now deleted that as it became a little absurd having that there. So now the receiving parts of my e-mails don’t see the difference anymore.
Previously I never used my mobile phone to access the web or read e-mail. It just was to much hassle. With the iPhone I now receive e-mails that ‘pop-up’ as they are being sent. That has altered my life. I caught myself recently while sitting in a bar with friends responding to a couple of e-mails. Although that might be perceived as yet another intrusive activity and crushing my span of attention, I do believe that it is exactly that kind of usage that will change the market. More and more people will start doing that, whether you like it or not.
Many of you might not realize that I use the iPhone a lot for commenting on these blogs as well. Over time my use of the keyboard has gotten better. And especially when I write in English I can almost type as fast as on a normal keyboard. The only annoyance in that respect still is, that there has not yet been released a Dutch keyboard. Which means that every word I try to type in will very often be corrected to English. But with the release of the Developers Kit I expect not to have to wait for much longer.
The other shortcomings are the absence of 3G on the phone. That makes accessing the web ridiculously slow when you are not in reach of WiFi. Now, that doesn’t bother me to much as I ‘live’ within a WiFi hotzone, that allows me to access the net via a hotspot almost everywhere. Besides that, the camera is not that good (only 2 megapixel) and it doesn’t support video yet (will be released not for long I suspect, again possible via a firmware update).
A revolutionary device
I truly believe that for most people this phone will be the groundbreaking device they’ve been waiting for. However the price is still very high, so that might make adoption lag behind a bit. But the use of the device is so intuitive that most people will know how to use it within a couple of hours, even the Digital Immigrant. And that is the main reason for me, to think that this device will become very revolutionary.
We believe that the biggest changes in society occur because the way people spend their time, money and energy. I think consumers will spend more and more of their disposable income on the iPhone. I’m already being asked by my girlfriend, other friends, but also my parents when they can get one. I’ve never experienced such a thing with any other ‘unreleased’ device before.
The same point was made by Olly Wright a while back http://ollywright.org/2007/08/revolution-will-be-sychronized.html
He included some numbers to proof the point.
That is indeed a great article! Wright makes some very good points. I especially like his last paragraph where he makes a comparison with the internet industry a decade ago.
As a matter of fact, David Moschella has written a book, in which he describes four waves of power: systems-centric, PC-centric, network-centric, content-centric. In his view we are now at the beginning of the content centric wave of power in which the power in the IT-industry will be with the companies that dominate the content space. In his definition content must be viewed in the broadest sense and he mentions Google as one of the examples in this era. Following Wright’s reasoning and mine, that Apple is in fact building direct relationships with the end-user, bypassing the operators, every application on the iPhone is content. ‘Controlling’ the network will not be as important in the era ahead of us. Apple seems to realize that, and is already getting active in this space.
Thanks for the link, Almar!
every application on the iphone is about content because they can’t touch the network. the network is off-limits to iphone and its applications, as detailed in an article. it is impossible to misuse the gsm protocol to auto-twitter your location/activities, i suspect. and your iphone is not going to call you if your google alert has found something of high interest relating to the openmoko. it is just not open enough (yet!)
i think they have to protect the existing revenue streams of themselves AND the network operator. by not allowing applications to continue to run (something that is not technically unfeasible) voip is difficult to implement. and by controlling the applications released (probably under the guise of ’security’ and ’stability’) they will not allow other music services apart from itunes to be offered soon.
Why do you think the network has to be touched for a revolution to occur? Can’t Apple ‘bypass’ that network problem in the end, by bypassing the operator in a direct relationship with the end user? As Wright is suggesting: it’s just like the ISP’s: do you care who delivers your bandwidth? Isn’t it much more about the Google’s, YouTube’s etc. in that respect? Or, is the openness of that infrastructure exactly what you think is lacking here?
Why would additional music services be needed for a revolution to occur? Or in other words: why is ‘being open’ to anything the key here? Where’s the value in that?
i could have expected this question, of course. let me try to answer by showing 2 consequences of not being ‘open’ (open on the device by allowing any application to ‘run’ and open on the network by allowing the communication protocol to be repurposed.)
if the iphone is not opened it means the iphone will become an island of its own. apple will decide how that island looks. fine, from apple’s standpoint. itunes is also an island, and very successful. but for a user it means that you are limited. there will be things you can only do with other iphone users. this is exactly what the operators have always used and protected. and this is exactly what apple promises to solve. i think they will not solve this very quickly. it is not in their interest. and they have shown with itunes that interoperability is not important.
if the network is not opened the innovation is limited to the individual. it is innovation in the personal sphere. and from what i see and what you describe it is all about efficiency, about optimization. more mail, more google, more itunes, more etc. if the network is opened, if we can use the (gsm) protocol for something else, the innovation might happen on communication level. the cellphone is now a point-to-point device. you call/sms someone. it is one2one communication. the next step would be to make it a many2many device. how? perhaps like this or like this. but certainly not like the iphone.
but it doesn’t mean the iphone is not a great device for ME! (i am waiting for the openmoko, now i am still jealous of you:))
Exploring what I mean to say here….:
I’m not sure if it is an innovation on an individual level. Yes you are right, it is primarily an optimization of my current lifestyle. All the stuff I do, becomes much more fluid by using the iPhone. But that might cause some disruptions in the social realm.
As for your examples, Facebook has already customized its website for iPhone use, and I do think they will be developing applications for the iPhone, which brings the social networking principle you describe a reality (mind you: by many the current iPhone version of Facebook is already perceived as an application by its users).
I do wonder though, how the Openmoko is going to disrupt the network (if that is your claim at all by referring to it) in a way that you are describing, since it is still the operators that control the access to the network. And as far as I can see it is ‘just’ the phone that is open. Or am I wrong here?
Note: stuff like Skype is running on an iPhone, so is MSN…but that is all over the internet and not via the network of the telco. And just to show you that it will also become a gaming console two more examples. So maybe I will start using my iPhone for stuff I am not doing at the moment, might that change of lifestyle be considered a disruptive change (on the social level)?
i would really like to see that facebook application. it might be able to do things i only expected from native applications.
i don’t know if openmoko is going to change the network, but openmoko has one thing in its favor, and that is that its open. on an open system you can misuse the network protocol to invent new uses. you need an open phone to get to the proper level of the system, deep enough in a awy. and once there are examples, as soon as something new is invented, apple will start renegotiating and other handset manufacturers will follow.
the key is in misusing (repurposing) the existing protocols to invent new sort of communications.
the example i imagined in my post is that adding a user in your phone is like adding a user to a social network or something like msn or skype. it is more like restricting access to you, or managing access to you. and all the features people envision (location of where you are in your nickname) could be integrated. this is an application not possible on an iphone, but perfectly possible to implement on an openmoko.
Clicking the link will show you a video of Facebook on iPhone. But I’d be more than happy to show you
Can you give an example of the repurposing of a protocol that happened before and caused a disruption?
the most notable example of sms. killer application would be an understatement in this case
a less notable but equally applicable is voip. tcp/ip is not natively suitable for things like live datatransfer. another examples are things like flash, but little different.
but the best example is perhaps the use of tcp/ip. this protocol is what we could call ‘the internet’. on top of this protocol we have things like mail (imap/pop/smtp,) web (http,) news (nntp,) etc.
another example is xml. in itself difficult but together with the interprotocols we now have rss and mashups are possible.
SMS? But that is not an open protocol at all is it? I wouldn’t say that is the repurposing of a protocol, but instead the application of such a protocol by the consumer. Developed by the manufacturer of the phone or operator, but used in a completely different way by the user.
Which is exactly my point about the usage of the iPhone: it is the consumer that will drive that disruption. The protocol doesn’t necessarily have to be open for that…
yes, in a way. but the intended use (application) has been repurposed for enduser.
it is a bit of both. they could have ‘closed’ the protocol for others than the field engineers it was intended for. because it was open the handset manufacturers could use it. that it was part of the consumer handset was not intended at all. (i think.)