The Apple Tablet ...Which Is Made In Sweden. Or Is It Kindle? (Video)
One can't have missed the buzz (to the extent its ridiculous) of Apple's rumored tablet that is rumored to be unveiled in San Francisco on Tuesday, January 26.
In addition to the Jesus tablet (yes, that's what some people call it) there are rumors about a similar-ish device from Microsoft, a color tablet device called Courier and of course HTC is cooking one with Google, maybe. At least that's the word on the street.
What do you do with the too big iPhone? Just as the vision of the infamous CrunchPad, it would be a great device to browse the web laying on the couch. After all taking a MacBook Pro to bed or browsing it while laying on the couch is not only clunky and difficult, it is also likely to burn you. But there is only so much Internet you can browse while laying on your back or when curled up on a couch. So what would be even better usage for a browser that does not fit in your pocket?
It could, in theory(!), help media industry to strengthen their problematic (or rather non-existent) business model by getting people do subscribe content and read it from this rumored tablet. NYT knows that publishers are already hard at work:
"And it’s worth pointing out that many publishers are building content in the belief that when it comes to the tablet, it’s not if, it’s when."
Not everybody know's that the Swedish media juggernaut is going a step beyond customizing content to 10.1-inch multitouch screen: Bonnier and the infamous Bonnier R&D, and their design partner BERG, is cooking their own tablet-ish e-reader. Or at least a concept of a such device.
Will it work (assuming one of these companies will some day unveil one)? Well, yes and no. There's a good change that it will be a partial solution. Changing behavior takes time and is hard, but I have seen a glimpse of the future and its the GQ's iphone app which sets you back exactly €2.39. Yes, that's real money that I'm talking about and not some shady advertising exposure metrics of uninformative CPMs. That's not all, I was also quite happy to pay it for this fine piece of media that is a mix of text, photos, sound and video.
Guardian is another media publication that has a nifty iPhone App but there's a significant difference. Unlike the Guardian, where a one-off fee is paid for unlimited access to content, in the UK GQ is charging £1.79 for each edition. This could work nicely with any of the super sized iPhones, tablets or next gen Kindles. Well, until some genius starts to give such content free and try's to make it up with advertising. Giving content free is like wages, they are sticky only to one direction.
Photo by Gizmodo.
7 Comments
Add your comment
Ville,apple tablet will have a lot of impact especially on print media outlets.the main advantage although its unconfirmed is that it can run through out the day without recharge.Am sure it will do well in remote areas and upcountry regions where power is a nightmare.however the cost maybe a hindrance for majority at the beginning but with time am betting it will do well.
In home environment it would be enough to have a wireless display with integrated mouse/touchpad and external keyboard. Touchscreen version (with qwerty) would be the "pro"-version.
These kind of devices won't be loved neither by processor-manufacturers or OS-"producers" (MS, Apple, Nokia). That's why Google (or some startup!) should show the way.
Of course it would be nice to "connect" this wireless display to the mobile phone, too.
Ville, I've heard the little birds sing that the device isn't just a concept. Most probably will be a real prototype later on, apparently by Kicker Studio.
I think it's pretty cool Bonnie R&D has the cojones to go for the physical device market. Something I'd like to see more in various media companies.
Do the little birds know whether Bonnier is seriously considering or will it be strictly hardware porn to use the R&D budjet on?
As I have said before, real cojones would be to put some skin in the game and not just poke around, but go for the win if at all. You think that's the future, then invest accordingly.
Just as Nick Mueller wrote in the earlier post (http://www.arcticstartup.com/2009/12/03/the-mediocre-future-success-of-the-bonnier-e-reader/), an e-reader that's overpriced and high on the novelty factor, is ultimately unnecessary. I truly hope Bonnier will have the balls and passion to step it up, but I'm afraid such decision don't come from companies that are run like giant media companies for an obvious reason: they think they have too much to loose to rock the boat.
I think it's not that simple as Nick wrote. Sure, the multipurpose devices will be easier to justify for the people living the bleeding edge but you have to remember that as the tech becomes more every day, the media corps such as Bonnier can ultimately give away the devices for subscriptions. Sure, that may finally mean the end of tabloid as a delivery channel but hey— what's a better way to "own" the customer relationship than actually control the channel itself?
Sami,
I'm not sure how much better is it to see them controlling the channel itself to a greater extent that they are now. That said, I believe they have always controlled the delivery channel, whether a dead tree, their WWW domain or an app that comes with a tablet. The problem is not so much controlling the channel but that they are currently not the only game in town, or the only channel in the Internet in this case. And most of the others are free channels.
Now its a question of whether the media can be customized for such devices to offer a better experience than your average webpage and maintain that lead, or rather whether people are ready to pay for that better experience compared to just getting the news in any format. This boils down to open Internet vs. Internet of apps. Thus, a channel with a better user experience does not necessarily constitute an improvement. Quite the contrary, it can be detrimental in the long run.
Chris Messina discusses the topic is length at http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-death-of-the-url/ ...something that everyone who prides themselves as a person understanding the web should read, let alone if you are a designer or a developer that gets to work with the tablets such as Bonnier's or Apple's.
I quote Chris here, since it gives new perspective to the whole tablet brouhaha, custom content and why it might help media companies gain part of their business model back:
"In a twist of McLuhanesque determinism, it would appear that the apparatus and determinism of the television experience will overrule the freedom and flexibility of the web — because, well, frankly — all that choice…! It’s so… unseemly and unmonetizable."
Here's another piece by Chris that discusses why we prefer what we prefer http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2009/11/27/designing-for-the-gut/
Am I contradicting myself by arguing that Bonnier should go for it and give everything they have in the tablet game and at the same time saying the whole direction tablet is taking us is dangerous? Perhaps. But one is talking about seeing a Nordic media business emerge that has balls, and a real sense of where the world is going, to invest in their beliefs in order to grow the business (whatever those beliefs may be). The other argument is a larger one about the importance of an open Internet that can act as a platform for innovation also in the future. You'll be your own judge to decide which is more important. Me, I bet the smarter of us can combine the two ends to create something better.
Re: Apple / Bonnier: One thing worth considering is that these are two very different animals. If one believes John Gruber, the Apple tablet will be something quite different and definitely NOT a single purpose device, the Mag+ concept clearly will be more focused around a certain type of content from a set of certain, curated providers. Just like iTunes app store right now.
Completely another thing is the content formatting: despite there will be several separate tablets and form factors, there will be standardized content sooner or later. Different devices will always have different form factors, screen sizes, capabilities and maybe even interaction paradigms (eg. physical vs virtual) but sooner or later, the content will be standardized. Hopefully from the very beginning. This enables a solid, tv-like ecosystem around the usage and need, instead technology. And like Messina wrote, most probably without urls as well.
Log in or Sign up to leave comments