Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Monday, September 27, 2010
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 30, 2010
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Friday, July 2, 2010
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Monday, June 21, 2010
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs
Why Mobile Innovation Is Blowing Away PCs: "
"
Editor’s note: Guest author Steve Cheney is an entrepreneur and formerly an engineer & programmer specializing in web and mobile technologies.
On the heels of the latest Android phone, the Sprint HTC EVO, and as we approach iPhone 4, it seems like mobile devices and platforms are innovating at about five times the pace of personal computers.
Rapid advancement in mobile is often attributed to the natural disruption by which emerging industries innovate quickly, while established markets like PCs follow a slower, more sustained trajectory.
But there are deeper fundamentals driving the breathtaking pace of smartphone advancement. Component vendors supplying to smartphone OEMs have evolved a much different DNA than those supplying to PC makers. Smartphones are an evolution of embedded systems, not PCs, and embedded markets have long favored vendors who don’t simply provide the most highly integrated chipsets, but who can also partner with OEMs to drive system-level integration and software at a rapid pace.
Hardware / Chipset Integration Differences in Smartphones vs PCs:
Intel’s monopoly in PC processors and peripheral chipsets has caused PC innovation to stagnate. “Chipsets” sit alongside a CPU and integrate auxiliary functions such as wireless and peripherals. By “bundling” chipsets with processors, Intel neutralizes competition on PC motherboards. Exceptions such as graphic chips exist, but Intel essentially “decides” 90% of what will (and won’t) be included on next generation PCs.
A great example of this is the notable lack of GPS chips in laptops. The fact that I have to type in my starting address on Google Maps on my $1,500 MacBook Air serves as a constant reminder that PC innovation has plateaued (even Mac hardware is controlled by Intel). It’s no surprise people reach for their iPhone when in front of a computer—the mobile experience is often better.
GPS is just one example of the ever-widening gap between PCs and smartphones. Sure, PC makers could add a separate GPS chip to the motherboard, but why hasn’t Intel pursued location as a core piece of IP in its chipsets to drive a better mobile experience for laptops?
It’s simple – they don’t need to. Intel loves high margins, and their market monopoly allows them to pursue margin at the expense of innovation.
In contrast, smartphone vendors have traditionally competed in a much more fragmented supply chain, integrating at a breakneck pace just to survive. Today’s 3G wireless chipsets integrate GPS, Bluetooth, and 802.11n on a single chip. And the competition between great companies like Qualcomm and Marvell not only spurs further innovation, but also drives vendors to differentiate in system integration and software.
System Level Integration and Support Differences in Smartphones vs PCs:
System integration is the term for how hardware and software combine to create a finished platform. In PCs, Intel dictates the pace of hardware releases– OEMs essentially wait for CPU updates, then differentiate through inventory control, channel / distribution and branding. Intel and Microsoft win no matter which PC makers excel – they literally don’t care if it’s Asus, Dell or HP.
In the smartphone world, it’s the opposite. Dozens of component vendors fight each other to the death to win designs at smartphone OEMs. This competitive dynamic forms an entirely different basis for how component vendors approach system integration and support.
Consider Infineon, which supplies the 3G wireless chipset in the iPhone. In order to stay in Apple’s graces, Infineon must do everything necessary to help the hardware and software play well together, including staffing permanent engineers in Cupertino or sending a team overnight from Germany. Do you think Intel does this for Dell?
This level of commitment helps smartphone OEMs to iterate platforms much more quickly than they could do so alone. If Infineon slacks off at Apple, other vendors are pushing to get inside the next iPhone. This competitive dynamic simply doesn’t exist in PCs, which is actually a fascinating side-story to why Intel and Microsoft have traditionally failed in most embedded (non-PC) markets.
Software Platform Differences in Smartphones vs PCs:
We all know Apple deserves credit for starting the first wave in smartphone OS innovation and for restructuring the wireless industry. And though we harp on Android for fragmentation issues, Google’s commitment to moving the OS forward is noble considering Microsoft has only released 3 Windows refreshes in the past 10 years, and is yet to release a smartphone OS, 30 months after buying Danger.
The competitive interplay between Apple and Google will continue to help smartphone software outpace PCs. But iOS and Android also benefit wildly from the structure of the smartphone industry. Apple and Google are pushed not just by each other, but by the symbiotic advancement in chipsets and the system integration work of component vendors that I detailed above. The entire smartphone innovation value-chain just works.
It’s this overall combination of component advancement, system integration, and software which will continue to drive unprecedented innovation in mobile. Meanwhile, the WinTel monopoly is taking PCs along a slow linear path, where features and user experience drag way behind available technology.
As we approach the next evolution in computing as ushered in by the iPad, Microsoft and Intel are under extraordinary pressure to recover in mobile. But not only do they lack the technology to succeed, they will also fall victim to the inbred structure they’ve created in the PC industry. It’s very likely that within five years, tablets, smartphones, and other “mobile devices” will have permanently left PC innovation behind. And I’d argue this is a good thing for both the progression of exciting new technologies, and for consumers.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Monday, May 24, 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Friday, May 14, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Friday, April 9, 2010
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Monday, April 5, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Monday, February 1, 2010
Apple iPad in Healthcare: Pros and Cons
Apple iPad in Healthcare: Pros and Cons: "
"
I’m not really an Apple fan, but I’m always open to innovations in healthcare. Last week was centered around iPad both in the news and the blogosphere as more and more bloggers started to describe its potential role in healthcare. It’s obvious now that healthcare will go through some major changes in the next few years due to EMRs (electronic medical records) and PHRs (personal health records). Though Boston has already gone through this.
Tablet solutions have a clear future (pdf) but as Apple tablet representatives were spotted at Los Angeles’ Cedars-Sinai Medical Center a few weeks ago, it seems iPad might have a shot in healthcare as well. Let’s see what can happen.
Possible cons from the healthcare aspect:
- No camera: it means it cannot be used in telemedicine
- No flash: several medical websites use Flash
- No mouse support: it’s not a disadvantage if there won’t be click-heavy applications
- Battery life: It is somewhere around 10 hours which is enough for a doctor working on the hospital but what happens when the iPad gets handed off to the next person? Dying battery can be swapped out for a fresh one in other tablet solutions. Here there won’t be enough time to re-charge iPads.
- It’s too big to fit into a doctor’s pocket.
- iPad is not ruggedized while other healthcare tablets are drop resistant from about a meter.
- No Multi-tasking: it makes it impossible to write a patient report while consulting with a collegue (there are hundreds of examples why multi-tasking is crucial)
- No barcode scanner: it’s used for checking and uploading drugs, among others.
- Such a device should be water-proof and easily disinfected. iPad wasn’t designed for this.
- The iPad has a capacitive touch screen on which gloves won’t work.
Possible pros:
- If there is a company that can get the best out of such a device, that is Apple.
- Probably there will be more and more medical applications designed exclusively for iPad just like there are so many medical apps for iPhone.
- It’s cheaper than other healthcare tablets.
- It was designed to be as user-friendly as possible (a nice advantage of Apple products) so elderly people will also be able to learn to use it easily.
- One scenario might be having an iPad in the hospital as the central database where doctors can upload the information from the iPhones.
If I miss anything, please let me know so I can improve the list.
I think iPad has the potential to become the No.1 healthcare tablet, but it has to go through plenty of changes and innovations in order to become a serious competitor in this race.
Resources:
- MobileHealthNews
- Kevin, MD one and two
- Read Write Web
- Lucien Engelen
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Pictures: The iPad Being Manhandled
Pictures: The iPad Being Manhandled: "
"
Okay, we’ve all seen the iPad now. We’ve read all about it. We’ve seen video of it in action. But how is it to actually hold? I took a bunch of pictures of people playing with it in the demo pit today after Apple’s event. The consensus amongst those I talked to? It’s actually quite comfortable.
I played with one myself for a bit and have to agree. While it’s nowhere near as light as a Kindle, it feels much more solid and because it’s significantly larger, is easier to hold with two hands. But it’s also light enough that holding it with one hand is not a burden. And it’s extremely thin. Plus, unlike the Kindle, you can easily swap between portrait and landscape positions.
As for finger smudges, that’s another story. The Apple reps were quick to wipe it off after each demo as it was quite greasy after each hands-on. But the screen is bright enough that you don’t really notice it except around the black edges.
Note the pictures below of it next to the Kindle, as well as it next to an iPhone and an old school iPod.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
