The Connected World

Google is the Most Exciting Company in the World

May 17 0

I read a great article breaking down the recent Google I/O developers conference and what it means to the larger computing world and to Google itself. The article contends, and I agree, that Google has hit another gear this year and is doing some of the most exciting things in technology.

Google+

It’s still the red headed stepchild of social networks, but I love what Google is doing with Google+. The new layout is fresh and exciting and the additional functionality behind it all is powerful and helpful. Google+ is a long play for Google and as they continue to wrap it around their other products, it will be hard for many people to avoid. Google’s new music service, for example, will gain social features powered by Google+. You also can’t write off the value your Google+ content will have in Google search. They’re not supposed to play favorites, but really, you want to take that risk?

Search

Google continues to be the king of search but they are not resting on their laurels either. The big announcement in search this year is what they are calling conversational search in which you use voice to literally talk to Google. This has been working on mobile phones for awhile, but now it is coming to the desktop as well. It’s very much like what Apple is doing with Siri, but far better. With Siri, Apple is tapping into a very limited data set, while with conversational search, Google is tapping into the largest, most sophisticated search engine in the world. Apple really had the lead here but squandered it by not continuing to innovate. Kudos to Google for taking the one market they have complete domination in and pushing forward.

Maps

Again, Google has a fairly dominant position in maps as well although not as complete as search. Despite this, Google is innovating on maps, taking most of the interface and moving it right on top of the map itself. This makes the whole thing much cleaner and intuitive. The new Google maps is incredible and also nicely incorporates Zagat ratings for businesses. The Zagat ratings, by the way, are tied to your Google+ profile. Watch as Google+ becomes the social layer that goes on top of as many Google products as possible. Apple famously created their own map application in the latest iOS and failed terribly. Since then, I haven’t seen a great deal of visible improvement and many people have gone back and installed Google Maps in their iOS devices.

It’s hard not to see how much Apple has stagnated since Steve Jobs died. It’s been a very long time since Apple did anything really exciting. I think the last thing, for me, was Siri. At the time, Siri was amazing and cool. There was nothing like it on the market and it seemed magical. But since it’s introduction, Siri has stagnated, not improving or doing much else of what it originally did. In the meantime, as we saw at Google I/O, Google voice search is already vastly superior to Siri.

For my money, at this moment in history, Google is the most exciting big tech company. Apple is loosing it’s shine and by the way, what the hell happened to Microsoft?

photo by: infomatique

The Current State of Social Networks

By David JacobsLeave a Comment

May 17 0

A few things have gotten me thinking about the current state of all the social networks I am a member of. Let’s take them one at a time.

Twitter

I have a love/hate relationship with Twitter. Sometimes I think it’s great and other times I can’t stand it. I am not sure I enjoy Twitter much on a daily basis, but during a hot news moment, it is the network that really shines. There is nothing that can match Twitter’s realtime messaging in a crisis. On a more regular basis, I find Twitter to be a bit vapid and empty. Since it has the worst features for conversation, there is more talking and less listening and responding. I get the least interaction from others on Twitter and I think a good deal of Tweets are computer programmed.

Facebook

Facebook seems to be the network people love to hate, or at least geeks do. It’s true, Facebook makes some radical changes and has not had the best privacy track record. All that being said, Facebook is still, by far, the largest network. It’s also true that Facebook is the network where you find more friends and family but this can be a refreshing change. I like the variety of topics in my stream and Facebook is the network where I get the most response. People on Facebook are interested in interacting and not just spouting off which, for me, makes Facebook more satisfying than Twitter.

Google+

Poor Google+, the red headed stepchild of social networks. Google+ can’t get any respect or any traction it seems. Technologically, Google+ is as good or better than any of the other networks, but Google traditionally has not be strong with their marketing. I have to say, though, the recent upgrade to Google+ with a brand new design is fantastic. It’s a little like Pinterest but also incorporating Google’s new “card” interface. I love the new look of Google+. As for interaction, I find Google+ to be not as good as Facebook, but better than Twitter. Google+ is still swimming up stream but Google is being persistent and certainly has the money to keep at it for a good long time. As Google ties more of it’s other services to Google+, people will be drawn to the network wether they like it or not.

I hesitate to put LinkedIn on the list as it’s not a general purpose network like the others, but LinkedIn deserves special credit for creating the first niche social network and dominating it. There are some competitors, but for business networking on the Internet, nobody comes close. LinkedIn also underwent a recent redesign and I like the new direction. LinkedIn as consistently done a great job and there is no other place to be for a professional social network.

Pinterest, like LinkedIn, is also a specialty social network but deserves big credit for revolutionizing social networks. The design of Pinterest was completely unique and has been widely copied recently. As I noted, even the new Google+ feels more Pinterest-like. Pinterest also is a fascinating network because of its demographics, consisting of more women than any other social network. The focus on more personal things like arts, crafts and home decor also make Pinterest completely original.

In general, I think the big three (Twitter, Facebook, Google+) have most of the critical mass and aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. The growth in social networks will be in the niche networks like Pinterest and LinkedIn. I think there is plenty of opportunity in this space and because these networks are more specialized, they provide a great opportunity for targeted marketing.

Amazon and the Decline of the E-Reader

By David JacobsLeave a Comment

May 14 0

It’s no surprise traditional black and white eReaders like the Amazon Kindle are starting to take a serious hit as the popularity of full function tablets rise. Amazon’s Kindle application runs on all these tables and the price gap between a full tablet and eReader is now minimal. Even Amazon themselves have realized this shift and have been producing the Kindle Fire which is closer to a full function tablet, although itself still slightly more limited than say a Nexus 7 from Google. The Fire gets better with each revision, but Amazon will still survive the eventual death of their original Kindle mostly because of their dominating position in content.

Amazon is by far the leader in sales of electronic books and they have a strong positon in other digital content like TV shows and movies. Amazon makes their own hardware now because they want to create a customized, controlled Amazon experience. The Kindle Fire is designed to be the ultimate Amazon digital consumption machine. I get it, but Amazon is not going to be able to make a better tablet than Apple, Google or Samsung. I think Amazon would be better served creating a better experience on these other tablet leaders and focusing on content. Of course Apple and Google have their own digital stores, so again, I understand the conflicts, but Amazon has been at the digital goods business longer than anyone and they have a very dedicated customers base.

The latest rumor is of Amazon producing a cell phone which I think is insane. Why in the world would anyone be motivated to buy a phone from Amazon? It’s as crazy as the talk of a Facebook phone. For both Amazon and Facebook, the strength is in running their software on multiple platforms, not creating hardware which neither is truly equipped to do. Facebook finally realized this and created Facebook Home, a software layer on top of the Android OS instead of an actual phone. The reason the Kindle worked in the first place was because there was no such device and Amazon wanted to push the eBook concept which they did brilliantly. They then smartly moved quickly to put the Kindle reader on every platform they could find which gave Kindle books the highest utility. The leverage and power for Amazon is in the store and the Kindle application. The hardware is fairly meaningless at this point.

Managing Expectations for Google Glass

By David JacobsLeave a Comment

Apr 18

scoble Google Glass, Google’s grand experiment in wearable computing is starting to hit developers and early adopters. Reactions will be coming in the next few weeks, but I listened with interest to Robert Scoble’s initial reactions. Scoble is renowned for being keyed into the hot thing of the moment and he is often irrationally exuberant about certain products or services. So I was surprised to hear his muted reaction to Google Glass. He did note features he though were revolutionary and exciting but also listed many things Glass cannot do.

I think this is going to be common among the first reviews. It’s not going to be a this is the greatest thing to ever be invented kind of reaction so typical for Apple products. Which is not to say Google Glass doesn’t have huge potential and one day could be a major revolution in technology, but it’s going to take time. I think it’s going to take around 2 years before Glass truly reaches it’s potential. In that time, the challenge for Google will be to manage expectations, less they may fail before they get very far out of the starting blocks. It’s going to be very easy for people to write Google Glass off before it has a chance to mature. This is the risk of bringing out a product early. You’ll notice Apple never does this. Apple brings out their products only when they are fully baked and ready. Google, on the other hand, has a history of bringing products out as fast as possible. It’s a different philosophy but Google’s is far riskier.

So far, the marketing for Glass shows mostly people taking pictures and videos. That’s cool, but a $1,500 camera is not going to cut it. You see what I mean about writing Glass off early? The Marketing on Glass is going to have to be much better, pointing out how early we are in development and what the full picture looks like in the future. Let the early adopters have their fun, but as a general consumer, I need to know there’s something more here. Unless Google makes gadgets for geeks, than Apple will make the wearable device the masses fall in love with. I honestly don’t know where Google thinks it is on this spectrum. And that’s the big difference between Apple and Google. Apple has such a firm grasp on who it is and what it does and so does everybody else. Apple makes the most beautiful and elegant technology products in the world. I can’t sum Google up in a sentence. I guess if you asked a typical consumer they would say Google is the place they find things on the Internet. Fair enough, but what’s that got to do with Google Glass? This is the question Google has to answer.

I think wearable computing is certainly the next big thing, but I am not as clear if we will be wearing technology on our faces, wrists, or in our very clothes. I imagine we will look back at this first version of Google Glass in 5 years and laugh. What an awkward, strange thing it was back then. Eventually, Glass will be itself a miniature monitor in the very piece of glass, perhaps digitally transmitting HD images to a surgically implanted receiver in our retinas. Ray Kurzweil said the singularity is near, and it very well may be.

YouTube Set to Introduce Paid Subscriptions

By David JacobsLeave a Comment

Feb 12

When Google bought YouTube for a billion and a half dollars back in 2006, some thought it was foolhardy. Surely the major content players would come crashing down on YouTube for copyright violations and how in the world are you going to monazite Keyboard Cat?

For the most part, Google has made nice with the major content players, regularly taking down videos that infringe on copyright. Plugging in the powerful Google advertising engine was the next logical step and has worked very well. In the six years since Google bought it, YouTube has only grown larger and more powerful. My daughter spends as much time or more watching YouTube as she does traditional TV and I think that’s pretty typical for the average teen these days.

Now Google is taking the next step and it’s a bold one. YouTube will start offering subscriptions for channels this spring. There will be a select few channels in the experiment and it is thought pricing will be anywhere between $1-$5/mo for a channel. Google has always been an advertising company so this is an interesting move but to the extent they get people used to paying a la carte for video, it could explode the current television business model. Today, customers have to pay for a package of TV channels for a set price wether they want those channels or not. Similarly, cable operators are often forced to license channels in a package as well. Both cable operators and end customers have become frustrated with this model and would rather pay for channels a la carte or at least be able to choose which channels make up their package. YouTube is clearly the most powerful video platform on the web and if anyone can challenge the current business model it’s them. Of course there is no guarantee paid subscription channels will even work on YouTube where people are used to getting their content for free.

Oreo, The Super Bowl and Real-Time Twitter Marketing

By David JacobsLeave a Comment

Feb 5

Sunday was the Super Bowl and the marketing spectacle that goes along with it. But the most exciting thing to happen in marketing on Sunday did not happen on the television screen. Despite the millions spent producing, placing and promoting 30 second spots, the Super Bowl marketing winner was a very simple and inexpensive image posted on Twitter.

Twitter has always been the foremost real-time social news stream. When it comes to breaking news, even the traditional news stations rely on it for the latest information. Because of its tens of millions of users and the crowd-sourced nature of its workings there is almost always someone around at a news event with a Twitter account.

What I learned Sunday, however, is that Twitter is also a powerful real-time marketing engine. When the lights went out in the Super Dome in the third quarter of the game it was a startling development. Immediately Twitter came alive with tweets about the lights. Within minuets a “superdomelights” account was created and started tweeting. This is classic Twitter, responding in real-time to a hot news event.

Than a tweet from @oreo

Power out? No problem. twitter.com/Oreo/status/29…

— Oreo Cookie (@Oreo) February 4, 2013

This very simple and clever image, created in just a few minuets, perfectly captured the situation and provided a humorous break in the monotony of waiting for the lights to come back on. This tweet was retweeted over ten thousand times in the first hour. Its also being blogged about relentlessly today. What’s better it cost Oreo virtually zero to produce and distribute. Hows that ROI vs a 4 million dollar 30 second ad?

I think we will see more “strike teams” put in place during known big events to take advantage of these real-time marketing opportunities. The key, though, is to be relevant but not look like you’re trying too hard. Oreo hit that perfect balance which is why it worked so well.