tuesdayDeveloper;

Google intends to launch a surprise attack on all grocery stores, kitchen pantries, and child lunch boxes in an effort to seise control of every last Twinkie in the world. The purpose? Because the snack food helps Google’s developers concentrate and because Hostess (the maker of Twinkies) recently announced they’re filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy; Google has no choice if they are to remain on top.

“We must have all Twinkies, help us think,” said one Twinkie-deprived Google team member with glossy eyes and an inability to concentrate.

Of course Google hasn’t come out and announced this to the world. The Twinkie plot is cleverly hidden within its new simplified privacy policy.

Of course, you won’t find anything if you search for the words Twinkie, Hostess, or even

Enriched Bleached Wheat Flour [Flour, Reduced Iron, B Vitamins (Niacin, Thiamine Mononitrate (B1), Riboflavin (B2), Folic Acid)], Corn Syrup, Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Water, Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable and/or Animal Shortening (Soybean, Cottonseed and/or Canola Oil, Beef Fat), Whole Eggs, Dextrose. Contains 2% or Less of: Modified Corn Starch, Glucose, Leavenings (Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, Baking Soda, Monocalcium Phosphate), Sweet Dairy Whey, Soy Protein Isolate, Calcium and Sodium Caseinate, Salt, Mono and Diglycerides, Polysorbate 60, Soy Lecithin, Soy Flour, Cornstarch, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Stearoyl Lactylate, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Sorbic Acid (to Retain Freshness), Yellow 5, Red 40. (source)

Google lawyers are way to clever, but their’s no doubt about it, Google’s up to something.

Of course Google says that they are simplifying their policies to better serve everyone. Everyone else on the Internet seems to believe that Google wants to control the combined aggregate user information to serve more targeted ads and thus destroy the free world as we know it, but now you know the truth. Think about it though, what is the most simple explanation? It’s obvious that Google isn’t trying to make things simpler for its end use or provide more relevant ads. It’s very clear that Google is trying to take all the Twinkies for themselves in order to lose the trust of its users to get out of the search business and to stop providing revenue generating services to its users because they don’t like money!

The last Google CEO said if user’s don’t trust us, they’ll go somewhere else. That very telling. They want out. And they want Twinkies!

Or maybe…

Maybe when Google is releasing a new privacy policy to make things easier on the user and to provide more relevant ads. Wait a minute, doesn’t everyone do this? Facebook, Pandora, New York Times: they’ve all advertised to me something that wasn’t relevant to the page, but something that I’d recently been researching on the web. Maybe Google is just trying to catch up.

What are your thoughts on Google new Privacy Policy changes? Is Google going to intentionally make a move to scare its users over to Bing and Yahoo (who likely have very similar practices)? What is the world going to do when Twikies are harder to come by?

Post Ratings: (No Ratings Yet)

Google’s Android OS is doing very well, on phones at least, but according to some surveys people would rather have an iPhone. It seems that a lot of people have only joined the Android ranks because it was available on their network and the iPhone wasn’t. This could be a problem for Android since all three of largest mobile phone providers may be offering the iPhone soon since AT&T and Verizon have it already and Sprint may soon join the party.

When it comes to tablets, Android tablet sales are still lagging quite a bit compared to the iPad. There are several possible reasons, some say that iPads are better, perhaps its due to the large number of apps Apple has to offer compare to their competition. No matter what the reason, however, Google has a great OS and it should be doing better than it is.

So what can Google do with a stagnant tablet market and a phone market that may not be so successful in the future? Well, the whole $99 fire sale HP just had could give us one hint. If Android phones and tablets where significantly lower priced than their iOS rivals, that could win over the masses. Of course, Google is subject to the manufacturers choices of hardware and prices, and they don’t control the pricing of the products that hit the market—but the could. Here are two ways that Google can make their platform more successful.

1. Subsidize

The United States Government has subsidized corn production in the US so much that you can find corn byproducts in just about every food you pick up in the grocery store. (Of course this only hurts the farmers and its not good for us either, but that is beside the point of this article.) Why can’t Google subsidize its products?

What if Google started paying manufacturers to produce the hardware of systems running a certified version of Google Android. This would have some big advantages. First, it would limit the customization that OEMs can do to the system and provide a more seamless experience for users moving from one device to another (something I know Google wants). Second, the price savings would go to the customers, meaning that more Androids will be running around than ever before because people love inexpensive toys. (The OEMs wouldn’t suffer like farmers do with corn production, since there isn’t really a middle-man.) Third, it may even bring some Android OEMs back into the fold of consistent experience (Amazon has completely overhauled Android, changing the UI and removing the marketplace…that’s not good for Google.)

If Google subsidized the purchase of certain types of hardware for systems that had the Android Marketplace, Google as the default search engine, and respectable hardware, customers would get a great deal and would flock to Android the way people flocked to the HP TouchPad (even though the thing has no perceivable future).

2. Make the Marketplace More Enticing

There are a couple things Google really needs to with their Marketplace, including making discovery easier, but I’m going to focus on something else.

Amazon has the right idea of offering a free app everyday. When I do finally get my own Android device, I will surely install Amazon’s App Store, simply so I can reap the benefits. If Google did this, or perhaps a “buy ten paid apps get the next one free” kind of deal, the Marketplace would surly be more successful attracting more developers. Google doesn’t really care if they make money on their Marketplace, they really just want people to make more Google searches, so this Marketplace strategy is really intended to attract more users to attract more developers to get higher app numbers to attract more users (who will then make more Google searches when they use their device).

Conclusion

Google is certainly one of the big mobile OS powers, but the game is still new enough that things can change quickly. Google better start acting with some strategy before, say Microsoft, gets ahold of these ideas and makes their platform more enticing for the users.

What ideas do you have to make the Android platform better?

Post Ratings: (No Ratings Yet)

So the most recent Windows 8 preview is out:

Initially my thoughts are pretty generous. The new Windows 8 stuff looks like a well thought out system, but then they also show a full version of Windows desktop running on this touch screen laptop.

While I wonder about how well a system like this would do (partially built for keyboard and mouse but crammed into a tablet, but also a system obviously built for touch expanded to a desktop) my real questions go deeper than the UI.

Tablets (at least all of the ones that I know of that aren’t just convertible laptops) all use solid state storage. This is good for several reasons. First, it keeps a device small and light. Second, it makes devices faster than a slow rotating harddrive based system would be. Solid state storage is ideal for tablets, but it also has its drawbacks.

At the moment, solid state storage is expensive. At tigerdirect.com, solid state harddrives with 120 GB run around $300, if you search for regular harddrives, your first results show 2TB for a mear $80. That’s 16 times the storage for about 25% of the cost!

The cost of solid state drives is typically the reason you only see tablets with 16 – 64GB. Of course solid state harddrives will come down in cost eventually, today they are only affordable by the masses with less capacity.

So coming back to a Windows 8 tablet, how much storage will just the operating system take? If you take Windows 7 and add more onto it for the touch stuff you’re looking at a significant chunk of storage. My Windows 7 VM (with only a couple added programs) takes up more than 20GB of storage.

So without any files, I’d expect Windows 8 to take up the same amount of storage. Not including any programs. Not including huge music/video collections.

One of the reasons iPad has been successful is because it is so affordable, its base model starts out with 16GB. Most of that storage is free when you get the device. For Windows to provide the same amount of free space on a Windows 8 machine they would have to have at least 32GB. Of course that is still in competition with iPad and its upper models, but it also means that Windows tablets can’t compete with the lower models on price.

Perhaps I’m blowing this out of proportion. Maybe an OEM will make an inexpensive model with lots of storage and still beat Apple on its pricing. What do you think?

Post Ratings: (No Ratings Yet)

So Apple released a new subscription model. It says that all in-app purchases will be subject to a 30-70 split in profits, much like the music and App Store currently emulate. Further, all purchases that can be made outside of an iOS app, must also be available for purchase inside the app and no link can be provided within the app to outside stores. And they can’t be priced lower outside of the iOS app either. This seems to be bad news for Amazon.com because they just so happen to put a 30% profit margin on their books, I’m sure that other eBook retailers with iOS apps are also thinking for ideas.

There’s quite bit of controversy over this policy; I’ve even seen people that decided to sell their iPad because of it. I’m a of Apple, but this last move seems like too much. 30% is a huge chunk. Not allowing publishers to opt for different prices outside of the iOS app or to provide a exterior link inside the app seems to be anti-competitive to me. But I’m not a lawyer and (by the laws of the land) that means I don’t know what is right or wrong (go figure).

What would I do if I were Amazon? Well, they have a few questions to ask themselves. Their main questions will revolve around how much profit they make from the iPod/iPad and how much revenue they would lose as soon as they stopped providing an iOS app. If the answer is, “not much” then I’d say it’s safe to say that the iPod app is safe. If the answer is more than is comfortable then we’d see Amazon do one of a few different things.

• Amazon could stop providing an app in the App Store.
• Amazon could just not worry about it.
• Amazon could raise the price of eBooks to mitigate the cost.
• Amazon could make it possible, but very difficult to buy books inside the Kindle App.
• Amazon could hire a hypnotist who has some kind of access to Steve Jobs and “persuade” him to revise this policy.

You see, when Amazon is making their decisions, they have to think about people like me. I’d be a library book person myself, but the unfortunate thing about that is that my local library is very small and the very interesting books I’ve been reading (Sources of Power and This Year I Will both very interesting) as well as the books I plan to read in the near future are almost never available there, so I get kindle books from Amazon. They are around $10 each, and I like the fact that I’ll have them forever, so it’s not that bad of a deal (though someone really needs to develop an eBook library). The only problem is that I don’t particularly like reading them on my computer, I’m glad I have an iPod Touch for that. I’m not interested in buying a one-use-only gadget. If I couldn’t read Kindle books on my iPod, I wouldn’t buy them at all.

The only problem is, if I can’t read them on my iPod, I won’t buy them. But even if I did buy them inside of the iPod App, Amazon wouldn’t make any money. Personally I’d probably opt to buy them online anyway, my wife and I get free Amazon gift cards so I wouldn’t want my iTunes credit card used, but most people wouldn’t care how they are paying for the book, so that means that isn’t an option really.

Maybe Amazon will choose to raise the price of their Kindle Books 10-15%. This would still give them a somewhat smaller profit when the book is purchased within the Kindle App, and they would receive more than 30% profit when purchased elsewhere. Of course, they run the risk that people may stop buying the more expensive eBooks, but if they find the right percentage perhaps they won’t lose anything on their revenue.

But they could decide that Apple’s idea of fair, isn’t fair, and leave the App Store until Apple decided it would be more “reasonable”. It could well mean that Amazon chooses to call Apple’s bluf and leave the iOS App Store altogether, retreating to the haven of their own Kindle, until Apple comes crawling back. Whether that would happen I don’t know, but there could be unintended consequences for Apple (lower sales, lower profit). Again, that wouldn’t be all good of Amazon either. Like I said, I have no interest in a Kindle and I’m sure there are others who feel the same.

I don’t know what Amazon will do. I suspect they’ll raise prices, probably 10-15%, or leave the iOS App Store entirely. I can say that I hope Apple and Amazon work this out.

Post Ratings: (No Ratings Yet)

A ZDNet writer, Christopher Dawson, believes that Flash will continue to rise and that Apple will eventually begin to support Flash. Maybe, but I’m doubtful.

As I’ve repeated probably a hundred times, tablet computers are the future. Most people don’t need anything more than a simple and inexpensive device to check email, browse the web, maybe play a few games. That fact aside I think that tablets will become more and more popular and we’ll start seeing people with more diverse needs, needs that future tablets will be capable of doing. So we’ll continue to see the rise of tablet computers. The question becomes, who will be supplying those tablets. I admit that Android based phones are becoming increasingly popular, but my guess is that tablets will be even more popular than they are.

It seems that everyone either is selling a tablet or will be coming out with one soon, but really the market belongs to Apple at the moment. It’s obviously a challenge for new tablet makers to compete with Apple, we haven’t seen any option that is as inexpensive as the iPad, though some have competitive prices if you count subsidies (which are paid for in subscription costs later by the user). If any company wants to compete with Apple, they have to live with the price range that is defined, without subsidies, just like Apple did, which may mean they leave out a few features.

But as Adrian Kingsley-Hughes, another ZDNet writer pointed out, this is a difficult thing to do. Apple’s prices are just too low for other flash banner waiving competitors to compete. Their only hope is to simplify the hardware and make their devices cheaper—which doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon. By the time that tablet competitors realize what they need to do Apple will have an even greater lead than they have now, meaning that Apple wins. Apple doesn’t have to support flash because they will be the industry standard that everyone is developing for.

In other words:
Flash-allowing tablet systems are too expensive.
Apple will continue to sell better than other competitors because they have the right prices.
Apple will continue their lead and remaing the industry standard.
The industry standard still won’t support Flash.
Developers will develop with HTML5 and other non-Flash tools to reach a larger audience.
Flash will die because it isn’t supported.

Now I could be wrong, if tablet suppliers want to, they can build a more competitively priced product that blows Apple out of the water, but now, do you really think that’s going to happen?

Post Ratings: (No Ratings Yet)