Apple crossing the Chasm - again?
In 1991, Geoffrey Moore published one of the seminal marketing books for high-tech companies (Crossing the Chasm). The fundamental point was to concentrate on getting a first strong, defendable niche (or beachhead) for your product before attempting to take on more of the market. One of Apple Computer's original beachheads was the Graphics/Design market. I was a big fan of Apple Computer in those early days, but I had come close to writing them off a few years back. They never could really break out of that first sector. Successive versions of Windows seemed to have eroded any real differentiation. How a few years and a new niche can change things! By focusing on “Home Digital Media”, Apple is back on favour again. The overwhelming success of the iPod (and its iTunes music store) has transformed the company’s image and success. They currently have over 80% of the
Critics will point to the fact that Apple’s overall share of the mainstream PC market has fallen below 3%, but there are other issues here. As most of the large PC makers have discovered, the margins and profits in the corporate PC market have become ugly and refresh rates are down. Where else are there profits? The home market. Combine this with Apple’s drive to position their new home PC (the latest iMac) as “from the makers of iPod” and things get interesting. A recent survey showing that 13% of iPod owners had already switched or intend to switch from a PC to a Mac is a classic example of breaking out of the well secured beachhead. Expect additional digital-media products and services, particularly those that integrate wireless technology, to capitalize on this success as they expand their presence. Maybe this is part of the reason why Apple’s stock is now over $60 a share (3 times what it was a year ago) and there have been predictions of it hitting $100 within another year.
Entrepreneurs and established companies alike would do well to re-read Geoff Moore’s classic book. Some things just never change and I can’t help but think the Geoff is enjoying a modern example of his (now 14 year old) advice.
Computer, do I have Alzheimer’s?
A recent study by University College London has revealed that the last novel (Jackson’s Dilemma) of the late Iris Murdoch showed early signs of her Alzheimer’s disease, even though it was undiagnosed at the time. Computer analysis of the text by the team found that choice of words was far simpler in her last book than those when she was considered at her peak (e.g. The Sea, The Sea). Although her use of grammar remained unchanged, the introduction of new words was reduced as was the “common-ness” of her choice of words.
What is interesting to consider is how easily such a system might be embodied into an automated computer based testing system, which could warn of early indication that something was wrong. Of course, you would need to make sure it could tell the difference between a few too many drinks the night before and something more serious – but one can imagine a regular testing regime building up a profile over years that could become a reliable indicator.
With the first medical breakthroughs against Alzheimer’s likely to be drugs that significantly slow down the disease; early diagnosis will be even more valuable than it is already.
Digital Actors, each and every one of us
Computer Generated Imagery (CGI) was once an expensive add-on that was reserved for a few sequences in Hollywood films. Within a few decades this has grown into a capability that gives us the animation movies such as Toy Story and Finding Nemo, movies with real actors but no real sets (Sky Captain & the World of Tomorrow) to movies that have 5 versions of the same actor (5 x Tom Hanks in Polar Express). The unrelenting increase in processor power that can be applied means that we are on the cusp where real and synthetic actors are about to blend. An early attempt was the totally synthetic Final Fantasy in 2001, which contained photo realistic sets and actors (known as synthespians). Just good entertainment, or is there anything we should worry about here? Well, ignoring any impact on the salary of real actors, one danger area is what happens when this kind of image processing power is available for more underhand purposes. Fake photographic evidence in court, blackmail by compromising photos, history (or even current affairs) revision and modification are quickly becoming feasible. Today, most experts would argue that close examination of the digital image can easily detect image manipulation – but as the manipulation technology gets more advanced I doubt this can be sustained.
This issue is partly fuelling the movement for digital watermarking of images to try and ensure such manipulation can still be detected. Techniques that encrypt signatures within the digital representation (a form of Steganography) have been explored for a number of years. However, the primary aim of this research is towards digital copyright of digital media (photos, video, music etc.) and this of course relies on the fact that the owner of the digital form has ensured the watermark is applied. Given the rapid rise of general photographic surveillance (for example CCTV cameras), a real concern is how these images are watermarked to ensure that they cannot be manipulated at a later date. Even though many of the recording systems now do apply some kind of watermark, the validity and acceptance of these have not really been tested in court. It is also an issue for companies - many of which now have extensive CCTV networks on their premises. Can they rely on the recordings made? Are they an aid or a liability? We may all be digital actors before we know it.
Size matters (or "My life is a PetaByte")
The continuous increase in processing power and disc storage will be known to most readers. Hard drives of 250-400 GigaBytes (1 GigaByte = 1000 MegaBytes) are common place in PCs this Christmas. With 1 TeraByte (1000 GigaBytes) drives common next year (they are already on sale now), one of the questions often asked is what will anyone do with all this space? The increased use of digital media is swamping all other personal uses of disc space - but once you get into TeraBytes of storage, even personal digital media starts to run a bit thin. 1 TeraByte is a couple of years of music or a month & a half of continuous video (at a nice 2Mb/s MPEG-2). That's probably more movies and albums than most of us need.
However, take a look at Microsoft's MyLifeBits. This research project has the ultimate goal of digitally recording your life, including everything thing you see and hear (a modern version of Vanneva Bush's Memex circa 1945). Right now it uses a small camera (SenseCam) you wear round your neck that takes around 2000 photos a day, that are then uploaded into your life store. Of course, eventually this should be just a stream of video so that you can record everything you experience. Combine this with some advanced s/w analysis and you have memory augmentation - you would never "forget" anything you experienced. How much storage would you need for your life? Well, in simple terms a 70 year continuous stereo (i.e. two stream) MPEG-2 recording would probably swamp anything else you needed to "remember" - and that would need around a PetaByte (1000 Terabytes) - disks of that size should be pretty common by 2010-2012. However, you don't need all that storage to start - you only need 14 TeraBytes a year (and in reality less than 10 TBs since you are probably happy not record while you are asleep) and you will be able to get drives that size in a few of years. Get ready to press Record.
Space Elevator – the first 290 feet
Many readers will be familiar with the concept of the Space Elevator. First proposed back in 1960 by Yuri Artsutanovby, the idea is to stretch a solid cable from the ground straight up into Geosynchronous Orbit. The advantages should be obvious – access to space can be achieved simply by riding a transport that climbs up or down the cable. This would, in theory, radically reduce the cost of access to space. The problems should be equally obvious – for example: how do you make anything strong enough that can sustain the weight and forces required? - and even if you had that, how would you build it? Despite such a concept being still someway off, real progress is being made. As reported earlier this year in Nature, recent
research in material science at Cambridge University have shown the combining of immensely strong carbon nanotubes into strands of almost any length. On the construction side, MIT recently hosted a test of the first 290 feet of such an elevator from the roof of one their campus buildings. The “cable” is in fact a ribbon and a prototype transport carrier was also built that could climb the elevator. More information about the test can be found at the LiftPort Space Elevator web site.