ForbesOnTech

Why Lab-Based Reviews Hurt Notebook Marketing -- Part II

Looking critically at the coverage of Intel’s Centrino 2 announcements this week leaves me solidly convinced that the PC Press is stuck in a rut racing head first over a cliff.

            Let me ‘splain: Beyond a certain point increases in the speed of a processor are as fractionally important as the actual speed improvement. Based on about 20 years of testing notebooks, I never once encountered a new processor that was 15 or 20 percent faster than a previous family member deliver the same level of increased usability of system throughput.

            I know this and magazine tech editors know it too, yet they continue to parrot Intel and other manufacturer’s claims that a bump up in speed is equivalent to the Second Coming.

            What’s important today isn’t processor speed, it’s the new capabilities included in core logic that accompanies many new processor launches. And it’s this last set of capabilities that get the shortest shrift from computer magazine editors.

            What I find really annoying are editor’s spending three of four paragraphs to statistically quantify increases in processor speed as demonstrated by the performance results of obscure software benchmarks or battery run down loop tests.

            The real news in most processor manufacturer announcements is the new features made possible by the addition of new capabilities in core logic or related chipsets.  And it’s this part of the computer trade press’ coverage of Intel’s Centrino2 announcement that demonstrates how stuck the press is in it’s old lab-based methodology.

            Let’s consider for a minute that Intel claims its new core logic improves graphics performance and enhances Bluetooth connectivity. Both of these features help to enhance the user experience—a critical component in the “What makes a good notebook” success equation.

            In the lab-based quantification model used by most computer magazines, they may chart graphics performance but most often leave out specific examples of what that number means to a user.

            I’ve become an NCO in the Bluetooth Borg Army and I’m extremely interested in whether or not Centrino 2-based systems improve my Bluetooth experience. Again, lab-based magazine benchmarks omit any quantification of this feature, or of improvements made to 802.11 components in new notebooks based on Intel’s recently announced products.

            The use of Power Point decks by product marketing managers to highlight features may actually hinder product launches. As someone who sat through more than a thousand such pitches I always found hands on demonstrations by product designers to be a much more effective demonstration mechanism. A couple of examples: two of the pros who fueled my interest in notebook technology were IBM Think Pad Brand Manager Kevin Clark (now with Lenovo) and Gary Elsasser then with Toshiba (now a VP with Gateway/Acer). Both of these professionals knew their products inside and out and related the benefits of those features to the user experience. Those two professionals weren’t the only ones whose work on product introductions turned dry marketing matrix entries into important points in the user experience. 

            Two other people who deserve mentioning are: Guy Kawasaki --A member of Apple’s second-generation evangelist staff-- and Dave Winer --founder of Living Videotext (now the voice of blog site Scripting.com). Both were the kings of positioning a product based on suitability or usability without ever dipping into the bag of dry as dust performance metric results.

            The lab-based mentality that permeates most of today’s computer magazines may have suborned, marketing efforts that emphasize the user experience over performance metrics. Most of today’s notebook marketing is done using presentation graphics software, which does absolutely nothing to illustrate how a set of features binds a user to a brand or particular machine.

            And that’s my take on notebook marketing.

            Damn the metrics! Now sit down in front of a notebook and see why you like the experience. Now  vote with your pocketbook, not a year’s subscription to a product based on dead trees and testing methodology from the last century.—Jim Forbes on 07/18/2008

 

           

Why is Today's Portable Computing Marketing Stiill Stuck in the last Century's Model?

 

Portable computer technology is at a seminal point in history, yet most portable computing marketing is still mired in 1990’s marketing that’s little more than a feature checklist that’s been stuffed into a spread sheet and then turned over to a graphic artist before it’s posted on the web. And all of this flies in the face of tha availability of flash-based animation or video technology that can be used to highlight great portables.

Nothing makes this more apparent than this week’s rollout of Intel’s new chipset and Centrino II brand. My overwhelming reaction to the is a yawn and a direct phrase words: “Get out of the 1990’sm marketing model and break new ground!”

Faster processor speed for me is a yawner.  I’ve come to expect them from Intel. What are important today are the increased and new capabilities of chipsets. Better WiFi range, or integrated support of WiMax are very important, but unless you see or experience their tangible benefits, they’re just words in a self-serving marketing presentation.

I’m not ashamed that I spent a portion of my professional life as a PR person. I learned a lot working the opposite side of the table from editors. And foremost among the things I understood was whenever it was possible I should show the direct benefits of something, rather than merely gabbing about it.

If I were working in PR today for Intel or one of its portable computer marketing partners, I would have set up tables with new notebooks that incorporate the new technology in a parking lot or field. Each of the tables would also have an older notebook with legacy wireless networking chipsets.  And each of the tables would set in front of as range marker listing the distance between it and the WiFi router.

The very visible point of the demonstration is that the new chipsets free notebook users from being close to a WiFi access point.

Now let’s think a minute about Intel’s WiMax WAN technology. Want a fun way to demonstrate it?  Set up a test network along Amtrak’s Oakland, CA to Sacramento right of way. Now load up 15 reporters, editors or industry luminaries in several of the cars on a train’s consist ( the term used to describe an engine and cars expressed as a single unit). Let them experience true persistent mobile connectivity, sit back and wait an hour or so for the rave reviews to appear.

Mobile persistent connectivity is a transformational experience for most users.

I’m an occasional user of Verizon’s Edge network when I ride the train between San Diego and eastern Los Angeles County. It turns my commute from a passive to an extremely productive experience. Great wireless, and most of all persistent wireless connectivity is something that’s so transformational you often wonder why it’s not more pervasive.

To restate my original premise: It’s time for notebook marketing to catch up with the times.  Notebook product managers shouldn’t being showing big PowerPoint decks, they should have their audience out in field 150 (or more) yards away from an access point, doing what I’m doing right now, writing a blog post underneath a fruited peach tree in my front yard.

It beats sitting in a conference room looking at a Presentation graphics marketing deck with a product manager or PR person who refuses to go off message for even one second.—Jim Forbes 07/15/2008.

 

 

 

MacBook Air and A Rising Tide-- Waiting for a Flood of New Features

Reports last week of higher than expected demand for Apple’s MacBook Air thin and light portable here could be great news for all notebook makers with products based on similar form factors.

            The reports, which originated in a New York regional business magazine, indicate that Apple retailers are struggling to stay abreast of the demand curve (which has also had an impact on systems purchased through Apple.com,, which now carry a waittime of up to seven days).

            So far there’s been no break down in sales figures detailing which configurations are Apple’s top sellers.

            Apple’s success with the MacBook Air could become a tale of a rising tide raising all boats in the remerging thin and light notebook market. Thus far, only two other mainstream notebook makers—Toshiba and Lenovo, have joined Apple, but most of the major players in the portable market will launch “competitive” products by year’s end, I believe.

            Thin and light notebook makers won’t be the only companies benefiting by sales of this class of machine. Some of the other technologies that will be boosted by the MacBook Air include:

The 802.11 n wireless specification. The MacBook Air’s use and reliance of the “n” specification is likely to make it “official” in less time than its taken the IEEE standards committee to sanctify it.

Wireless router makers haven’t wasted much time in getting 802.11 n products  to market and there are enough on the shelves now to make 802.11 n technology price sensitive. 

Keyboard and screen back lighting two of the technologies in the MacBook Air technologies I like a lot and which go a long ways to make any portable computer more useable in low light situations like conference rooms and classrooms. Portable computing component technologies have come a long way since the first thin and light notebooks were introduced about ten years ago. Plagued by short battery life, backlighting doesn’t significantly take away from the amount of time a notebook can be used on its batteries.

But one of the greatest technologies found in the MacBook Air is it’s use of gesture-based controls. Apple isn’t the only company to support gestures,  HP also supports rudimentary gesture based computing does it on its IQ755 Touch Screen all in one desktop. Palm Inc. is another company with a long history of using gestures as part of its interface technologies and there’s no reason not to believe that it isn’t enhancing its technologies for release with a new version of its operating system, which is expected this Fall. The 900-pound lurking gorilla of this technological segment is Microsoft, which has privately shown advances it has made in gesture-based technologies such as facial recognition, since the late 1990’s.

            Whether or not Microsoft will release gesture-based enhancements to forthcoming versions of its Windows operating systems isn’t clear.

            If Notebook makers hope to stay in synch with Post MacBook Air and Lenovo ThinkPad X800 they’ll need to lengthen their mooring lines to stay afloat in a portable market where the tide of features and user expectations are neck and neck on a flooding tide.—Jim Forbes 03/10/2008

The SweepStakes Winner at MacWorld?-- 802.11 n Wireless!

The real win at MacWorld this week wasn’t Apple’s super thin new MacBook Air.  Rather, the sweepstakes winner is the 802.11 pre (n) wireless specification, which is the basis for Apple’s wireless backup, remote software installation and other data transmission schemes used on Apple’s new products.

            Apple gets major points in my technology ledger for its adoption and endorsement of 802.11 n. Right off the top, 802.11n provides Apple or any other computer maker more than mere bandwidth, the technology also has greater signal saturation and range than existing 802.11 technologies. Apple is the first computer maker to do more than just incorporate 802.11 n into its portables. It has made a wholesale adoption of the technology to improve its consumer computing experience.

            Using the new wireless standard to overcome the major shortcomings imposed by the MacBook Air’s form factor is the type of engineering that’s at once unusual for Apple but also the type of elegant workaround that marked Apple and its third-party developer community in the early days of the Macintosh. Apple correctly assumes that users of the MacBook Air are likely to also have older Macintoshes with integrated CD drives. By allowing users of the new MacBook Air to remotely install applications and back up data using wireless technology softens some of the edges associated with acquiring bleeding edge technology. The catch with this approach however is this: while 802.11 n is downwardly compatible with the older a and g spec, if users want or need n’s extended range and greater bandwidth, the computer loading the application should also be equipped with an 802.11 n compatible wireless transceiver.

            In daily use, it’s unlikely many users of the MacBook Air will benefit from the 802.11 n standard’s increased bandwidth or range, since few corporations of hot spots have upgraded their access points yet. But around the home or on the road where 802.11 n is available, it makes cloud-based computing enjoyable and worthwhile.

            And although Apple doesn’t own and didn’t invent the new wireless standard it’s adoption of 802.11 n is, I believe, a very important milestone. Now the world needs to catch up. —Jim Forbes 01/18/2008

            

I Can Live Easily with 802.11 pre n technology--So Can my Neighbor

I guess PCMag doesn’t much care for the idea of 802.11 draft n routers in the home:here

So unless you're using your draft-n router in the middle of a

Kansas

cornfield, there's almost no chance you're actually going to see true draft-n performance at 2.4 GHz. The throughput numbers I gathered below are all best-case. In real life, all of these routers (with the exception of our Editors' Choice, properly configured) will most likely get you only between 75 and 95 Mbps. Maybe.

Based on practical experience, I have to agree with PCMag’s take on the realistic state of 802.11 N today. Right after the holidays—thinking I was willing to take a chance and ride the curl of an incoming technology wave-- I combined a bunch of gift certificates and got an 802.11 Pre n router and a matching dongle for some of my older machines.

Expecting that the base leg of the new network (the router to the one machine in which I had an 802.11 Pre n card installed would help me fine wireless Nirvana (which I herewith declare to be persistent connectivity and acceptable signal saturation while slurping tangerine juice from my fingers as I sit under a neighbor’s citrus tree some 350 feet from the router which sits very high in my attic). I logged on to YouTube as a field test.

Pop! Bang, Zow! The connection was faster than anything I had ever experienced.  And I was connected to Rancho Bizarro N farther away than I’ve ever traveled from my home network before.

Then my contractors added their 802.11 g portables to the network and the throughput dropped, even after I stopped shouting “No Porn on my home network, guys!” After about 10 days of use I still think 802.11 pre N is an important technology. And not just because it’s wicked fast. For me, its increased range and excellent signal saturation at the outer limits of the network continue to make it a no-brainer addition to my home network. At the moment spending $80 to $100 for each of the cards I’d need to bring all of the equipment I own up on the network precludes a wholesale adoption of the technology.

But, my neighbor—who lives just beyond the crest of the mountaintop I live on, innocently asked me two days ago if he could “try-out the new card on his laptop?”

Hell, I raid his plum and Reed avocado trees so I thought: “It’s only fair” then 10 minutes later I watched the network throughput drop as he successfully leached bandwidth for the first time in four years. I dialed his cell phone “Hey no porn or Baja 1000 racing videos on my network, neighbor!”

He innocently asked “where’s the cheapest place to buy an 802.11 pre n card?” Looking out my kitchen window, I could see the faint glow of a screen in his upstairs den.

My dish washer started. I chuckled “I guess he’s on the network forever now.”

I don’t live in a

Kansas

wheat field, but I do live in an area of rural northern

San Diego

County

where avocados and navel oranges out number people. Besides, I really don’t mind sharing when I have bandwidth to spare. Moreover, my neighbor has some great air tools and I still have to replace the bearings in my boat trailer and add “bearing buddies” to protect them against the saltwater corrosion of launching my boat in the forth coming yellowtail season.

As if my neighbor’s satisfaction of being able to get a strong wireless connection from his side of the avocado trees wasn’t enough, the contractors working on the MaForbes addition here seem to like it too.  Every couple of minutes, during their lunch or breaks I repeatedly hear “Holy Makita! You ain’t going to believe this You Tube Clip!” And then the bandwidth drops. Eventually I again can’t hear myself think over the sound of nail guns and jack hammers”

New technology isn’t cheap. But it often makes life easier, especially if you live at the confluence of wild lands and Nirvana. Pre n 802.11 works for me--Jim Forbes, 01/10/2008.

Finding an Exploitable Niche with Many Potential Partners-- A Winning Strategy

As the days until Demo 08 --which kicks of late next month—roll down, I think a lot about new products and how they can prosper in today’s hyper connected environment.

            There’s one product in particular I’m watching that won’t be at Demo. I wish it was ready for launch, but it’s developer told me he doesn’t want to show it until it’s user interface is completed. I promised the developer I wouldn’t preannounce his product and I won’t.

            But I do want to write about this particular developer’s approach to product development. Some history: this developer has one of the most diverse backgrounds I’ve ever seen in any technologist. He’s an ex-reporter, a former publishing exec, and has a first-rate pedigree in consumer and technology marketing. He’s passionate about software and has an innate ability to find and exploit niches.

            What’s remarkable is this developer’s ability to find market opportunities that coincide with the rapid acceptance of new peripherals. The only comparison I’ve seen over the years was Symantec’s Turner Hall subsidiary, which created a profitable niche in the late 1980’s by publishing add-ons for Lotus 1-2-3 that let you add features such as word publishing and elegant printing solutions to Lotus spreadsheets.

            This developer has already had one moderate success by adding a new capability to a popular peripheral. That first product was used by people who needed a one-click solution for printing data in a variety of formats.

            Casing around for a new product, this developer looked no farther than some of the new laptops that were being used by family members and peripheral that he uses on calls to his family in the Pacific Northwest. What he noticed is that the laptops had a feature that was underused, but loaded with untapped potential.

            The developer is also known for his market due diligence skills. He discovered that the particular peripheral that caught his attention is sold in 100,000 unit volumes but noted that the peripheral’s potential is seldom exploited.

            I’m trying very hard not to tip the developer’s hand.

            But what he’s ready to provide users is an elegant piece of software that will let you customize a very personal data type in a way that’s not been easily done before.  But more important to me is that the developer’s technology reduces to a few clicks a process that use to require mastery of a very complex application.

            More importantly, consumer goods and services companies will want to license versions of this application to provide fun links between their companies, product, services or events and the consumer.

            It’s been a long time—since I produced Demo events—that I met with a developer whose product and business pitch made me itemize the proposed product’s potential. What struck me about this veteran entrepreneur’s idea was the vast licensing pool and the technology’s ability to create highly personalized and amusing content.

            Sorry to be mysterious, but I didn’t want to tip the developer’s hand. Keep your eyes open for more on this product, as it gets ready to launch.  You’ll want it, honest! Jim Forbes, 12/31/2007.

Palm-Still Able to Come Back With Combination Punches

The deep thudding sounds veteran technology watchers are now hearing as they zoom past Sunnyvale, CA, is the sound of everyone piling on Palm Inc.

With flat revenues, a recent 10 percent lay off and the withdrawal of its new Folio platform, Valley insiders have quickly decided that the once bright and shiny enterprise called Palm Computing is winking out.

            Contrarian, that I am, I think Palm can survive. To make my point, let’s take a quick look at Palm’s considerable pluses:

            Palm has always been a somewhat lean organization and has done its best when it brings it considerable talents to bear on its core business.

            Palm continues to attract great technologists who understand that a product can be made or broken by pioneering and delivering a first-rate user experience.

            Palm’s core business has changed over the years and this company has expanded almost very technological beachhead it’s established. The Palm 600 and 700 Smart phone families have entrenched user bases that are intellectually invested in the products (which makes the Palm installed base very similar to that of Apple Inc’s).

            Palm’s new Centro smart phone is selling well through one of the largest national carriers, Sprint, and is likely to appear on other networks later next year. Centro is one of the best examples of how Palm excels by giving users access to core tasks in quickly and simply. Furthermore, Centro is rugged enough to stand up to hard use, which is a core feature for cellular carriers like Sprint who has large numbers of entities with field operations.

            Palm’s technologies set industry standards by which other products are compared. Moreover, Palm has remained nimble enough to respond to changing user requirements with stable technology. At its core, Palm is also a design leader and as the company pulls more talent from companies like Apple, its industrial designs could become industry standards.

            Elevation Partners investment in Palm may be one of the best things that ever happened to this pioneering company. New managers are more likely to focus on what the company does best and less likely to go flying after untried niches. Palm has had a succession of owners over the years and its best performance has been in periods when the company is hunkered down and focused on core businesses.

           The downside for Palm is that it’s very late in delivering a new version of the Palm OS, no matter what form it may take. The Palm OS can make or break this company and marketing this architecture is a task where Palm excels.

            I think it’s a huge mistake for anyone to think Palm is going down for a short count. Of all the technology companies I have covered, Palm is the one entity I’ve drop to a knee, grab a breath and come up swinging with powerful combination punches.

            One year from now I look for Palm to be back as a contender with products that sell through their channels and which have become industry standards, again.  Jim Forbes 12/20/2007.

{Mandatory disclosure: I was a member of Palm’s advisory council for a number of years in the last century.}

Biometric Security; It's Not Limited to Finger Print Readers on Corporate Notebooks

I try to be honest about technology that I use intentionally, or which I am forced to accept because of its integration in hardware.

            So let’s talk about biometric security devices.  Some years ago I was involved in a series of twice-a-year discussions about whether so-called “corporate notebooks” would have to include biometric security to qualify for adoption by volume buyers. The atmosphere for those discussions was better than any graduate class I’ve ever taken. Members of the discussion group were free to explore, take and defend positions.

            At that time, I had ambivalent feelings about biometrics:

1                    I did not like anything that increased the amount of time it takes me to get going on a portable computer and biometrics then added about 15 to 30 seconds to the startup time.

2                    I could clearly see that some large organizations, federal agencies or large sales organizations were correct in doing everything they could to safe guard tactically and strategically critical information stored on something as easily pilfered as a portable computer.

3                    Biometrics security devices would increase the bill-of-materials costs of portable computers.

4                    At the time, the market for portable computers was beginning to become cost sensitive.

5                    I was unconvinced that biometrics of the then day couldn’t be defeated. I wasn’t alone in this either. At a Mobile Council Meeting in 2000, I had to stop laughing when the only analyst I regard as a legitimate “futurist” (MR) then at Dataquest pulled his wallet out of his back pocket and pulled out what at first I thought was a medical finger cot. The analyst snapped the cot on his finger, said “watch this” and defeated the biometric device in a single swipe of his sheathed finger.

My feelings about biometric security have changed radically over the last five years. Today, I can’t imagine not using a portable computer that doesn’t include this feature. My reason isn’t that I’m toting super secret information on my laptop. It’s that I rely on my notebook too much to risk losing the data files I use as the basis of my taxes and investing decisions, or the data associated with an all-consuming remodel/addition project that’s underway here at my house.

            And looking back in time, I think I should have been a stronger advocate for this technology in the late Nineties and into this century.

            I still don’t like it that biometrics add to my boot time. However, I suspect that hard disk technology is about to make that argument moot. Like a lot of people who watch portable computing, it’s become very hard for me not to imagine new notebooks rolling out with hybrid disk drives that use flash memory to support rapid boot up.

            And more than any other technology, hybrid drives will reduce start up and come-on from Hibernation boot times, as well as help tame Vista; all of which are good things.

            But biometrics security hardware isn’t limited to finger printed readers.  A couple of far thinking notebook designers have realized that the integrated cameras mounted on display bezels can be used just as effectively as finger print readers.  And in the immediate future you’ll begin to see biometric facial recognition become a standard feature, not just on corporate notebooks, but on consumer portables sold by the thousands to home office and academic computer users.

            Like I said earlier, sometimes a really important technology slips into my life because it’s a minor part of a technology that I rely on. Biometrics falls into this category and I’ve changed from a doubting Thomas to a True Believer. Now I just wish someone would come up with a one-click solution that lets me use my notebook’s integrated camera to create video greeting cards.

            But that’s something I’ll write about later this week. Jim Forbes. 11/25/2007.

Verizon Pops My Dream of Persistent Connectivity-- How to Turn a Good Customer Experience Into a Nightmare

In the world of personal computing there have been moments when I’ve wanted to take a large maul to what only days before had been a perfectly functioning personal computer and turn it into a small pile of smasked plastic, silicon chips and flat pieces of wire. And nothing brings this rage on faster than to have something I relied on and crowed about for months on end to stop working or become very difficult to use.

Congratulations Verizon, you turned one of the most important features of my go everywhere sub compact into crap. And Verizon managed to do this at a time when I was waiting for a loved one to come out of an oncological surgery suit and when I needed persistent connectivity most desparately.

Over the years, I’ve forgiven technology companies for a lot of errors and misdeeds. It’s always come down to my belief: In the end, well run companies "get it right."

But my view started changing three weeks ago when I tried to get a day pass from Verizon for its National Broadband wireless network. Until then – as San Diego County was aflame from its wildlands almost to the edge of the Pacific Ocean—accessing Verizon’s broadband network on an ad hoc basis (paying $15 for a day pass) was so simple that I had to take it for granted.

But I suddenly found that it was n o longer easy . Furthermore, I very quickly came to believe that one department at Verizon wasn’t talking to other departments. Over three days, I made a total of 15 phone calls to Verizon trying buy a day pass. A quick count of the numbers I wrote down and circled on my notepad shows seven different phone numbers. I lucked out on one call and got connected to a tech support specialist who finally got me connected. After I hunted down and found the ESN number for my X60’s internal Sierra WWAN modem. But the other numbers I called generated some of the most unsatisfactory customer experiences of my life.

It didn’t take m very long to figure out that not many people at Verizon are aware that the company offers several ways to connect to its wireless broadband network; PCMCIA cards and computers that include built in WWAN modems. Or that network access is available for a monthly fee on one- and two-year contracts, or on an ad hoc "day pass" basis. I patiently explained that I wanted a day pass to more Verizon phone reps than I want to count. Eventually I discovered that some departments at Verizon regard this feature as a "prepaid phone."

On top of this, Verizon expects anyone who calls for help with prepaid phones to know their phone number. But, as an occasion network user that’s something I have to get from deep within the help or Options menus in Verizon Access Manager application. But wait there’s more, on one computer the number is plainly recognizable, on another it’s not. Moreover, I’m handicapped and can’t write legibly with my dominant hand.

I’m probably the worse case scenario for a positive customer service experience: my wireless network provider had laid a path to a painless signup experience that I had used successfully many times; the service I purchased from my provider was so good I had to think very critically about things they could do better; Relatively few people have my handicap and are still as active with their computers as I am; Finally, I believe I have the right to a good customer and consumer experiences.

What’s most amazing to me about my damaged relationship with Verizon is this large communications company had the foresight to use a web page for day-pass signup. My experience using this signup service was so good, it was a big factor in my decision to tout Verizon’s national broadband wireless network in this blog.

For whatever reason, I can no longer access and use the signup web site and Verizon seems unable or unwilling to help me.

How important is persistent connectivity to me? You can bet that any cellular network that offers me an acceptable data rate (which I believe to be .76 MBps or faster) and an affordable national rate plan will get all of my household’s business and get my personal recommendation.

In Verizon’s defense I have to add that its National Broadband network fit my needs so well that my only complaint was it’s monthly price. And, in my travels up and down the west coast I’ve only found a couple of places where I couldn’t grab and hold a connection. Verizon was my first great experience with persistent connectivity. I hope it’s not my last.

After four failed attempts to get a day pass this week on this cell network’s national broadband service, I’m about ready to give it up. Sadly this also comes at a time when I have to renew my wireless plans.

Like a lot of technology buffs I thought that Intel’s WiMax technology would revolutionize persistent connectivity. However with the recent dissolution of the Clear Wire/Sprint alliance, my dream may have been shattered.

Persistent connectivity is as transformational as it is disruptive. If you experience it, come to rely on it and then lose it, you miss it a lot.

I hope Verizon makes a big commitment to broadband access. For the moment, it has acceptable network bandwidth and above average network penetration. I just hope that they return to a web-based signup procedure. That way I don’t get frustrated as I dial a long list of 800 numbers and speak to a legion of call center employees who get as frustrated as I do when they can’t match my needs with the offering their company provides.—Jim Forbes, now jumping from one free WiFi hotspot to the next, on 11/14/2007.

Should Operating Systems Matter Anymore?

I've been watching two of the smartest bloggers I know begin to explore the question "Do operating systems matter any more?

The initial discussion opened up here and got picked up as a post by David Churbuck on his blog here. This conversation and my growing dependence on web-based applications has forced me to ask myself "Do I really need to care who makes my operating system?"

I'm writing this on Google Docs and spreadsheets so I guess I've answered my own question. For the moment, I really don't care much whether I use an operating system developed by Microsoft, Apple or Adam's off ox.

    What I care about is connectivity and occasional local computing. And reliability and efficiency.

Microsoft has had it's decades in the sun. But it's latest operating system may be it's biggest commercial failure. From my side of the computer, Vista is a pig wearing vermilion lipstick and bright red rouge. I used it on a convertible notebook I had for about two weeks and disliked its performance and memory footprint. I really don't want to go back to Vista and I honestly don't want to be forced into using an operating system because it's the only choice I have on my preferred hardware platform.

    Going a step further, let me add that I"m not your average computer user.  I bought a spiffy 15-inch MacBook Pro last year and found some of its features so unsuited for my basic requirements that I sold it  to a friend who works for an all-Macintosh company.

I try hard to be specific in my criticisms. What turned me off about my MacBook Pro was the sub-par range of its WiFi transceiver and the fact that it ran very warm

     But I'm writing this morning about why anyone should give a damn about operating systems, not about why I disliked the MacBook Pro I bought and discarded.

    But there were and are things I really like about Apple today and right at the top of the list is the OSX operating system family and Apple's iLife applications. I believe OSX sets a very high bar for all operating systems. It's rock solid, fast and very reliable. Secondarily, the bundled applications included with the Mac may be the best ever shipped with any personal computer.Ever! And the iLife software suite works very well with Apple's OSX operating system. Unlike Vista it doesn't choke up when I switch apps.

     Moreover, OSX can accommodate 4GB of system memory, but moves out nicely with much less memory. Vista by comparison wants 2GB for full functionality but still requires that some programs run in a "compatibility" mode.

    And Linux? Give me a break. For all I care the penguin could be dropped into a try pot at some whaling station in the Baja Falklands and rendered into earth-friendly, biologically inert, facial soap.

     I use a personal computer to perform specific tasks, some of which could not otherwise be done very easily. My blog is one example.

          I really don't want to be forced into learning operating system minutiae. I also don't think most other PC users really want to be forced to become  network engineers or systems analysts. The God's truth for me is that such discussions are about as useful as enthusiast's arguments over an automobile store parts counter on what modification to an upright 1600cc Volkswagen engine produces the most horsepower. There was a time in my life when I cared about such things. That time ihas now passed. I want my operating system  and my computer to be like my Toyota Prius; I hit a round "on" button and I get to the task at hand without really thinking about what makes it possible.

     So please, please spare me the arguments about the efficiency of various "kernels" and "page swaps." I really,really, don't need, or want, to know about them. I just want to accomplish my sundry tasks. It's  personal computing, damn it, not the crusades.

     But there is an angle to this discussion that I care a lot about. It has to do with the underlying hardware and the capabilities it provides. Any hardware I use has to be drop dead reliable,  very sturdy (and for the sake of this discussion and its relevance to mobile computing-- which after all is one of this blog's primary topics, it has to be light enough for me to tot around for hours at a time and be able to get an Internet connection no matter where I am, the very first time I use it.

    I'm relying on shrink wrapped applications less and less today, so time to initial productivity is a key consideration when it comes to any portable computer I choose. Time spent looking at my fingernails as my computer loads an operating system is wasted time in my life. So the quicker an operating system gets out of my way, the happier I am.

All I want is a simple, solid operating system. I really don't want to spend a lot of time learning intricate keyboard dances to get to work, or having to remember to switch to a compatibility mode in order to run TroutFinder 2.0 as I sit by the side of some mountain road, waiting for my notebook to boot up perched beside me on the home built wood doghouse nestled between the driver's and passenger's seats in my beloved '68 Volkswagen bus.

     Operating Systems. Discussions about toasters are nearly as interesting. Oh, there are no magazines called "Toaster", "toaster Week", or "Toaster World."

     Well that's my two pennies worth--Jim Forbes, 10/09/2007.