In a post-PC era, HTML5 wins even on the PC

In a post late last night on Ars Technica, which focuses primarily on the impact on Windows developer, there’s a critical kernel:

Microsoft Vice President Julie Larson-Green, in charge of the Windows Experience, briefly describes a new immersive application—a weather application—and says, specifically, that the application uses “our new developer platform, which is …. based on HTML5 and JavaScript.” [emphasis added] 

The quote is at 3:45 in this video:

So, as we enter a post-PC era, beautifully illustrated by this post from Horace Dediu of Asymco, HTML5 dominates even on the PC:

Love the data, hate the graphic

One of the key themes we're focused on at the moment is the multilateral asymmetric contest amongst major platform players (Apple, Google, Microsoft and Nokia in particular), device vendors (Apple, RIM, Nokia, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG, Motorola, HTC in particular), service providers (Google, Apple, Amazon in particular) and network operators (Verizon, Vodafone, FT Orange and so on). There's some interesting data from Silicon Alley Insider illustrating the size of the stakes...

The cash resources of some of the major players

While the numbers are interesting, I have to confess I hate the graphic... It looks like an area chart, but it's actually a line chart. Tufte's head would explode...

And I'd love to see the analysis extended to include Nokia, RIM, Samsung and so on. And in this context, who cares about Intel, other than ARM and Qualcomm?

Android(s) are coming...

There's a great (albeit lengthy) post on Gizmodo about Android, although the title may be a little overstated:

[Android] 2.0 is more than that: it's proof that Android is finally going to take over the world

As a digression, it's fascinating to see how a technological innovation can re-shape language: the former meaning of android is now relegated off the first page of search results on Google, which led me to try 'androids' as an alternative:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biBHJvGx3s8&hl=en&fs=1&]

The article from Scientific American about this date with a robot can be downloaded here; I find it intriguing partly because I began my career as a roboticist and cyberneticist.

Although it may overstate the case, because we are just in the earliest stages of a fierce contest amongst at least five credible competing app phone platforms, the post from Gizmodo does summarize well much of what provides the impetus for Android and why Android 2.0 is so important:

it's "the first truly open and comprehensive platform for mobile devices."

Android 2.0 means the handsets aren't just interesting anymore; they're truly buyable

In addition to everything else Android has going on, timing is on its side. Windows Mobile is limping along with two broken legs...

...as far as most consumers are concerned, anything Windows Mobile can do, Android can do better

The Palm Pre, polished and beautiful as it is, can't keep up with Android's exploding app inventory, multiplying hardware partners and rock-star ability to draw talent

Android 2.0, along with Palm's WebOS and Apple's iPhone OS, are the main reasons the BlackBerry OS feels so clunky and old

Let's take a quick look at each of the other major contenders:

• the iPhone is the current leader, and critically works well across not just app phones, but through iTunes across other platforms such as personal computers and TV


• although RIM's BlackBerry has been the long-time leader in the enterprise, it is not doing as well in the consumer marketplace, particularly outside North America, and its software platform (RTE, APIs and SDK) looks increasingly clunky in comparison to iPhone and Android


• Nokia is investing heavily in the transition to Qt and Maemo - the big question is really can it get there fast enough


• Microsoft's most recent release of 6.5 was late and lacked usability, and despite some good things being said about it 7 is still some way off, eroding support for it


• while WebOS is technically elegant, the Pre's implementation is slow, Palm lacks distribution and was really late with its SDK - it will be extraordinarily difficult for Palm to overcome these handicaps and establish itself as a credible competitor in the face of the likes of Apple, Google, Nokia, Microsoft and RIM

Android's a strong contender, but it's by no means yet certain that it will rule the world. In fact, one of the real possibilities is that rather than reaching a tipping point, a few of these will co-exist over the medium- or even long-term.

Why offer an extreme version - because of extreme aversion

There's an item on CNET today asking why on earth Microsoft plans to offer Windows 7 Ultimate?

Now, not having been involved directly in this decision, it may be because Microsoft genuinely believes that its the right product for a small target group of customers:

"There is a small set of customers who want everything Windows 7 has to offer," Ybarra said. "So, we will continue to have Windows 7 Ultimate edition to meet that specialized need.

"Windows 7 Ultimate edition is designed for PC enthusiasts who 'want it all' and customers who want the security features such as BitLocker found in Windows 7 Enterprise edition."

There's a better reason for an extreme version - extreme aversion. What? This extreme version will not just make a few über-geeks feel good, if they don't think they're being ripped off, but more importantly it will make those of us who don't buy it feel better.

The reality is that customers making choices do not behave in line with rational expectations. One of the important cognitive biases that we have when it comes to making choices about which products to buy is that we tend to avoid extremes, and prefer intermediate choices.

Although other factors may play a part, it seems that the most powerful motivation for this is so-called loss aversion. We value things we have to give up more highly than things we might obtain, typically by a factor of between 2x and 4x. An extreme choice involves a large loss relative to the other extreme; an intermediate choice involves less loss than either extreme. That's why there's sometimes also a barebones version that very few people buy, to provide an extreme at the other end of the range.

So, Windows 7 Ultimate will make all of us who don't buy it feel better.

The way in which customers really make choices amongst competing products has profound implications for product portfolio and pipeline management; these are explored more fully in a recent working paper: 'Less is More'.

More Palmistry?

We've already noted that despite the excellence of WebOS, Palm needs strong support to become a credible platform player, competing with the likes of Apple, RIM, Android, Nokia/Symbian/Ovi and even (because it might do something radical) Microsoft with WinMo.

The point is now not lost on even the analyst community (Kaufman Sets Hold Rating; Many Possible Suitors), who've identified several options:

"...potential suitors include Nokia, Samsung, LG, Motorola, Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, Microsoft and Dell."

Let's leave aside the question of why buy now, when in December Palm was trading at less than one-tenth of its current value with a market cap below $200 million, the value of Palm is in WebOS and its US presence, not the Pre, so let's take a look:

Nokia - already bought and paid for Trolltech, and has Maemo - not likely, unless its struggles in the US make Palm worthwhile for that alone

Samsung or LG - {neutral | non-aligned | independent} device players - very hardware-focused - do they want to transform their business model become a platform player with WebOS, competing against Android and Microsoft rather than collaborating with them, or trying to co-exist?

Motorola - too many of its own issues, also already stronger in US than elsewhere

HP or Dell - clearly want to build positions in smartphones from their personal computer position, could they re-focus WebOS development in the right direction?

Microsoft - not unless or until it admits (to itself, most of all) that WinMo's not going to get it there...

Cisco - the wildcard, perhaps as the basis for entry into smartphones as they become a key element of the the interwebs