REPRINT: Blackberry – The Problem (7/19/12)

Here is a reprint of my 2012 post on why RIMM (Blackberry) failed.


What Happened – A Lesson in Psychology

The simple answer is that they have totally flubbed the move from feature phones to the modern smartphone and tablets. The Blackberry Storm did not go over well, largely due to quality of interface issues, and the PlayBook tablet was a total flop.

But for the investor this information is not enough. This is 20/20 hindsight. By the time RIM dropped to a four year low on June 17, 2011, it was too late. We want to know: How did such a smart company make such a huge mistake? What where the early warning signs?


Full post here

 

If you appreciate this work

Then please check out my short fiction anthologies.

(Both available in both Amazon and iBooks stores.)

50CentFlash.com



50 Cent Flash v1

50 Cent Flash v1
View on Amazon

50 Cent Flash v2 Buy iBook

50 Cent Flash v2
View iBooks Store

Screen Shot 2015-04-24 at 8.46.33 AM copy

Perceived Value

Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder – De gustibus non est disputandum [1].

In the field of smartphones this is played out very well in the iPhone vs. Android wars where one side will stick, sometimes fanatically, to the superiority of its platform over the other. (Note: the overwhelming majority of people Continue reading

Interesting iPhone Ad in China

A friend pasted on Facebook this very interesting/cute video of kids in a “China has talent” type of show. (Anyone out there who can correct me on the details, please do.)

Screen Shot 2015-04-08 at 9.06.48 PM

All is fine with the little dribblers, until we get to the 39 second mark, when one of the judges pulls out…

Screen Shot 2015-04-08 at 8.29.27 PM

I guess iPhone IS really big in China. Looks like he has the gold model. I can’t believe that this went unnoticed.

By the way – the kids are awesome!


Take privacy poll


Elegant, Handcrafted, Genuine Leather

SmartPhone Holster

Soon for iPhone 6 Plus!

delQuindio_productpic_estuches-15363b

Thank you!


————————————————————————————————————–

Free Short Story!

The Room
“Jenni Plochka?” the worn woman in a pink bathrobe read the card in a harsh, tobacco and booze voice. The blue “Vacancy” flashed through her cigarette smoke. She frowned suspiciously. “Don’t get many BMWs here.” “Just wanna crash. Gotta bed?” “OK. But we paintin’ and wirin’, so th’only room is an old one at the end.” [READ MORE…]
YA EN ESPAÑOL: LA HABITACION
MOST MAGYARUL: A SZOBA

Histoire Libre:  La Chambre d’Hôtel

New York Times on Apple Job Growth

The New York Times has published a rather silly article in which they claim that Apple has never contributed any jobs to the economy.

Well – they do not put it exactly that way – but their article practically says it outright.

I will agree with the quote:

… said Gary P. Pisano, a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School. “It’s hard to say the exact size.”

I agree as well that the methods used by the company they hired could be the subject of legitimate debate (as long as that statement is NOT interpreted as an innuendo that someone was dishonest.)

However, the following quote is a bit odd:

David Autor, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said via e-mail that the “entire business of claiming ‘direct and indirect’ job creation is disreputable” because most of the workers Apple is taking credit for would have been employed elsewhere in the company’s absence.

They go on to note:

Mr. Cappelli said. “If you say, ‘If there had been no Apple, those people would not have jobs,’ that’s not true.”

Of course it is not true that every single one of those individuals would be jobless, but if there were no Apple and engineer X took a job at HP then there would be some other engineer who would not have a job.

According to the logic provided, then no business anywhere creates any jobs at all. Everybody else would have been working somewhere else. This is – of course – utter foolishness.

I will admit that they do conclude with the statement:

Apple is, however, an innovative company that created a market for tablets and radically increased demand for smartphones.

In reality – the smartphones existing before the iPhone are not today considered smartphone. Additionally, the app business was relatively nonexistent prior to the iPhone, so perhaps they should be credited with ALL the apps developers (snicker).

As for people buying alternative products if Apple did not exist… sure they would be buying Asus and Lenovo computer that are totally designed, engineered, and built in China in factories with absolutely NO oversight at all. And…

They would be running DOS 12.1. (What a pleasant thought.)

——-

AnandTech iPhone 4s Tests – What do they mean?

AnandTech (www.anandtech.com) is truly a professional blog with some of the best technical analysis you will find. They have just published a set of tests results on the iPhone 4s, titled:

iPhone 4S Preliminary Benchmarks: ~800MHz A5, Slightly Slower GPU than iPad 2, Still Very Fast 

I thought I would explain some of this to those with less technical backgrounds.

First, a few points:

  1. Apparently, these tests were not made by Anand Tech themselves, but gathered from other bloggers who seemed to have had early access to 4s units. Hence the “Preliminary” in the title. AnandTech will be running their own tests as soon as they get their own units.

Some Tech Basics

  1. CPU = Central Processing Unit: This is the “Brains” of a computer that reads instructions from programs, and makes everything happen in the computer. (Smartphones are miniature computers with phones incorporated.)
  2. GPU = Graphics Processing Unit: This is a special kind of processor, similar to a CPU, but designed to process image data. They are designed to perform certain mathematical operations repeatedly on millions of graphical data points. (They can also be used to process certain types of mathematical problems and are seeing new uses in this area.)

Click here for more Computer Basics Terms

One thing that is important to note is that the overall performance (speed) of a system is dependent on many things, and not simply the speed of the processor and/or the number of cores, nor on any other single factor. Additionally, the overall design of the system and subsystems may enhance certain aspects of performance will neglect other aspects. So one system may load and render multiple web pages very quickly, but be slower at certain types of graphics operations.

Finally – System performance is dependent on software as well as hardware. This applies both to the Operating System (OS) and to the particular application being run.


There are basically two types of tests. (Well I am sure you can come up with other classifications, but for our purpose this will do.) These are “real-life” tests which use real software programs, and benchmark tests which are programs designed specifically to test system performance. While the latter are more likely to test compare real limitations of a system (or some part thereof), they sometimes are not indicative of real user experience of said system. A mix of both types of tests is important to get a useful view of a system. I think one could say that benchmark tests test the hardware to the limits, while software tests give better overall system analysis. The problem with software tests is that you cannot test every aspect of even one piece of software, let alone of all software in its class.

Test Results:

Browser Tests

There were two browser benchmark tests with slightly different results. In both cases, the 4s handily beat all Android phones, pretty much tying the Galaxy Tab, which, of course, is a tablet not a phone. It should be noted here that the iPhone 4 (no ‘S’) was roughly comparable with the best Android phones when upgraded to iOS 5. So people who keep these phones should see a very significant browser improvement when they upgrade.

Graphics Tests

In the graphics tests listed, again, the 4s handily beat all Android phones, and  the Galaxy Tab as well.

A5 Clock Speed

It appears that the A5 chip in the iPhone 4s is clocked at 800MHz instead of 1GHz (1000MHz) as in the iPad. Now why would Apple want to “cripple” its CPU? Simple. Two reasons.

  1. In the fabrication of Integrated Circuit chips, each chip is tested after production. A percentage pass and a percentage fail. But some of the failures can still be used at reduced speed. Thus, lower speed means you get higher production from the fabs.
  2. More importantly, I am sure, is the reduction in electrical current consumption. As the report state:
    • Dropping a CPU’s core voltage, yields a greater-than-linear decrease in power consumption, making the marginal loss in clock speed a good choice.
What are the implications of this? Again as AT continues:
    • Apple does have to exploit its strengths in software to avoid any tangible performance penalties. Apple has traditionally done this very well in the past…

I would like to add, that this is not only software, but the A5 also has superiority over the competing Tegra 2 chip frequently used in Android phones, particularly in the GPU. Without getting too technical here, both system are based on the same design by the ARM group. The specifications for the dual-core ARM Cortex-A9  architecture allows for different GPUs, and Apple elected to implement a much faster GPU than is found in the Tegra 2. The results of tests bear this out.


— I appreciate your comments and ranking —