Archive for 2009

INM Presenting at Webcom Montréal

Thursday, October 15th, 2009

Next Thursday October 22 at 2:10 pm, I will be speaking at Webcom 2009 on the topic of “Repairing the Broken Shopping Cart” in collaboration with Stephane Lesieur from Adobe Canada. I will illustrate my point with a highly demanding consumer application, show an elegant solution using Adobe technologies such as Flex, Air and LiveCycle DS, and discuss best practices to implement such a solution.

Full details at: http://www.webcom-montreal.com

My colleague Benoit David and myself will spend most of the day at Webcom and will be delighted to meet you there. Please let me know if you plan on attending too.

20th Anniversary of a Non-Serial Entrepreneur

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

Last Thursday we celebrated INM’s 20th anniversary around some fine cheese and equally fine wine. I was delighted to see our good friends, clients, staff members and former staff members join us.

Surviving 20 years in this hectic industry is an achievement in itself. But I feel particularly proud that we did so while remaining true to our core values, thus avoiding the latest technological hype, financing fad, and other medicine-man gobbledygook.

While tools and technology changed over the years, we remained focused on the same goal: to design robust and finely engineered software that perfectly align with business needs, as well as human needs.

Of course, things have changed so much that I sometimes feel like I lived through the entire history of our industry in fast forward. From the dinosaur era right through to Modern Times, and with a few brief relapses into the Dark Ages along the way.

I could tell 200 odd stories from those 20 years, but let me tell you one that occurred to me in a quick flashback this week.

It was 1990 and I had just replaced my Mac Plus 128KB with the new Mac IIcx – a sleeker, more power model with a flatter keyboard that promised to relieve the early symptoms of what turned out to be carpal-tunnel syndrome (I was a precursor to that too!)

I decided to turn my Mac Plus and its whopping 20 MB hard drive and full 8” footprint into a QuickMail server – the precursor to email. It ran on Apple Talk and pre-dated the TCP/ IP standard used today, so it used a modem to store and forward emails through a regulator phone line. After getting through some of the challenges of setting it up, I faced a larger and more intractable challenge: Who could I send an e-mail to? I was the only person in my ecosystem to have such a device.

Thus, the next logical step was to exchange e-mails with my good friend Rafi in Paris (who turned out to be the first commercial Internet Service Provider in France a few years later!). For a good while, we felt like Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Watson – alone in our ability to communicate with one another, but proud that we were on to something so big, so early on in the game. Despite spending an unreasonable amount of time and money making this rather unreliable system work, we had fun and we learned a lot.

I could tell you many similar stories of ideas and technologies that started one way and ended up going in unintended, though more beneficial, directions. Of course, I don’t imply that one should run random experiments. But planning for various futures and constantly re-planning them is an essential part of what I’ve learned in 20 years.

I now feel ready for a second 20-year round if you are. Our success was only possible thanks to our clients, partners, staff members and former staff members, many of whom I was very pleased to see this last Thursday.

A Historic Battle of Operating Systems

Monday, July 27th, 2009

There is an interesting and, in my opinion, historic battle unfolding around Operating Systems these days.

At one end, Microsoft is readying the next version of their OS: Windows 7. Windows 7 is nothing more than Windows Vista done right: more stable and polished. At the other end, Google announced Chrome OS, a Linux-based minimal operating system meant to run a web browser on a computer without any further sophistication.

Our position at INM clearly leans towards the latter side, not because we prefer Google’s logo to Microsoft’s but mainly because we had predicted that Operating Systems were becoming irrelevant commodities (see conclusion of “All aboard! The new Intel-based Mac is leaving the station; here’s how to switch platforms”) and that real challenges were moving away from the metal and closer to the mental. Our key argument is that, thanks to RIAs and technologies such as Adobe Flex, MS Silverlight and HTML 5, it is nowadays possible to deliver rich content and interactivity without the cost and hassle of desktop applications.

Ironically though, while Google’s core message is that an operating system ought to be small, subordinate to the web browser and mostly free; they are precisely drawing attention to the relevance on the operating system by discussing it in the media.

On the other hand, Microsoft is crafting a sophisticated pricing plan for Windows 7, with an array of colors and flavors ranging from Home Edition to Ultimate thus underscoring that the choice of the right OS, and hence the OS per se, matters.

Moving forward, I think there will be confusion and internal conflicts at Google, and ultimately Android will prevail as Google’s canonical operating system for all devices ranging from smartphones to tablets to small PCs (as well as yet-to-be invented small devices).

Windows and MacOS would obviously remain the OSes of choices for users of Photoshop, video editing and other high-end applications. But as the cloud becomes more reliable and people discover the true benefits of RIAs, most common applications will migrate to lightweight (and invisible) OSes, and only specialists would need to shop for heavier operating systems.

The RIA Battle is On Despite the Economy (and Other Overwhelming News)

Thursday, July 16th, 2009

I was on under the impression that nothing on planet Earth was happening besides Michael J’s death (last name withheld to protect anonymity), but it looks like there is a lot of action in our industry.

Last week, Microsoft released Silverlight 3.0, a very promising RIA (Rich Internet Application) development platform. Thus far, Silverlight 1.0 was too limited to allow for any kind of serious interactions, and Silverlight 2.0 was just a Windows-centric platform.

Silverlight 3.0 features better media support (3D, graphics acceleration, higher quality video) and richer interactivity (richer user interfaces, ability to run outside the browser, ability to interact with other applications). It is an impressive platform for Windows but little is known so far on its prowesses on MacOS and Linux.

The current incumbent on the RIA scene is Adobe and, although it was known that 99% of all computers worldwide could run Adobe’s Flash Player, details on the specific segment of Enterprise clients were sketchy. A Forrester Research based on 50,000 respondents highlights that almost 97% of enterprises can run the standard Flash Player (the one required by today’s common Flex applications). Within 3 months of the release of Flash Player 10 (the player required for the upcoming generation of development tools), 36% of enterprises were ready to use it.

So, despite a slowing down economy, the RIA race is fiercer than ever thus asserting that the case for RIA’s is a solid one.

I will shortly blog my perspective on another hot battle these days: the Operating System’s one.

The Business Case for Cloud Computing

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009

McKinsey’s recent “discussion document” on Cloud Computing has triggered an activity stream of Google Alerts, Tweets and Re-Tweets from all over the Interwebs.

Similar to the Twitter phenomenon, the conversations regarding an evolution to a Cloud Computing infrastructure are disruptive to our traditional ways of thinking about IT. To make things worse, the noise level that is generated from these types of reports doesn’t help us better understand or make the right choices.

The McKinsey document provides too many assumptions and generalizations regarding IT infrastructure costs, and not enough focus on the business cases that could benefit from a Cloud Computing model. The Cloud model disrupts the traditional IT infrastructure by introducing a virtually infinite pool of computing resources that are available on-demand and payable by the hour. Businesses need to figure out which one of their applications currently running inside the firewall can take advantage of this type of virtual IT infrastructure.

A future in Cloud Computing is not only about saving IT infrastructure costs — it is also about progressively outsourcing pieces of a company’s IT operations onto a Cloud platform, and letting someone else worry about managing the underlying hardware, network and operating system.

There seems to be too much noise on the negative implications of Cloud Computing and not enough positive discussions on how it can be used for things such as prototyping ideas, building virtual test labs and synchronizing user’s laptops and mobiles devices in the cloud.

Whether we like it or not, Cloud Computing will “cross the chasm” very soon, and when it does, it will touch every aspect of our business and personal lives. It is not a question of IF, but WHEN.

Time or Money spent? Which do consumers value most?

Friday, May 15th, 2009

Time or Money spent? Which do consumers value most?

Alice LaPlante asks that question following a study conducted by researchers at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

So what about time saved? Is it as satisfactory? Do consumers value being able to do something fast so they can then quickly do something else? Or even do more of the same thing?

This is what Rich Internet Applications are all about: making the user experience as best as it can be, whether you are searching, learning or shopping. Good examples are RIAs built for eCommerce, to help consumers easily and quickly get what they want. The return is more conversions and loyalty, and less drop-off. Read this previously released white paper for more info.

YouTube Fuels Debate

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

When US democratic leadership hopefuls took to the podiums last week in Charleston, South Carolina for their televised debate of the campaign, they didn’t just face off against pre-formatted press questions and a local audience. Instead they opened themselves up to questions from citizens across the globe. Pretty much anyone with a web camera and a question to ask was able to participate in the debate.

For the first time in history thousands of Americans recorded and uploaded their questions to YouTube for the two-hour debate on Monday evening. CNN editors chose about 25 questions from more than 2,000 YouTube submissions.

With the debate complete, it’s been touted by the media as a groundbreaking event and the first debate of its kind to enlist the Web as a tool to open politics up to the public. But its significance goes beyond just opening up the political process.

This broad use of YouTube really legitimizes it as a valid communications vehicle. Sure, YouTube’s been used in the past for many commercial purposes, including as a way to stealth market new products, and build brand awareness and affinity. However, this extends YouTube’s direct exposure to reach the entire US population.

With this event, YouTube, and the concept of user generated content as a whole has gone from a novel concept that a few businesses really grasped the impact of to a necessary channel to explore.

At the very least, it was fun to see Anderson Cooper trying to explain the concept of “user generated content”.

Adobe Flash takes to the big(ger) screen

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

To keep up with the convergence of media devices occurring at rapid-fire speed, Adobe has secured a deal to embed its Flash software within televisions, Blu-ray players and set top boxes to allow for developers and content providers to create and deploy web content such as news, weather and stock charts. The applications are set to deploy on televisions early in 2010 and will allow users to engage in the all of activities they are used to performing on the web.

There are a few televisions on the market that are using Yahoo’s widgets to provide a rich media experience for viewers but this deal will allow for the creation of a single standard for a media application that can be re-used for numerous other devices.

“Adobe Flash Platform for the Digital Home will dramatically change the way we view content on televisions,” said David Wadhwani, general manager and vice president, Platform Business Unit at Adobe. “Consumers are looking to access their favorite Flash technology-based videos, applications, services and other rich Web content across screens. We are looking forward to working with partners to create these new experiences and deliver content consistently across devices whether consumers view it on their desktop, mobile phone or television.”

With this announcement, Adobe has lined up partnerships with content providers such as Comcast, Netflix, the New York Times and Disney to deliver the “Adobe Flash Platform for the Digital Home”.

BBC News reports that “Adobe is aiming to become the global standard for all rich media in the “three screen” world – PC, TV, and mobile. Up to 40% of all mobile devices shipped in 2008 are expected to carry Flash Lite. However, the big omission remains Apple’s iPhone.”

As a side effect from this announcement, INM expects for Flash on TV sets to dramatically enhance the usability of devices that have now become too complex to use for most consumers. We’re looking forward to seeing how Flash will help to personalize, simplify and enhance multi-device navigation and programming systems. In essence, Adobe’s move is helping consumers to move closer towards the full convergence of their televisions, DVD players, gaming systems, photo album viewers, internet browsers and multi-media devices.

More Rumors of a New Apple Tablet Device

Tuesday, April 14th, 2009

We’ve been eagerly awaiting Apple’s next move in the Tablet or Netbook space. The product category doesn’t yet exist, or have a name to go by, but it will most likely not be called Ultra-Mobile or Tablet or Netbook or Personal Digital Anything. It would primarily meet the needs of audiences who need mobility and a larger display than smart phones, and who will mainly use the device for Read-Only tasks (eBooks, eLibraries, educational material, etc.) and occasional note taking or communication.

The rumors are back: it seems that Steve Jobs and team are working on a reincarnation of the Newton based on a 10-inch touchscreen.

There is an artist’s rendition of what the device might look like at the Appleinsider website.

You may also want to take a look at the patent Apple filed in relation to input devices: it is pretty creative and extremely smart from a product line management perspective

The Ongoing Debate on Who Owns Multi-Touch

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

In a previous post, we noted that it is likely for RIAs to begin to “propagate to mobile devices” as the next natural step in their evolution. We believe that having a highly natural and organic user interface is primary to the success of any technology to ensure adoption, repeated use and success.

There’s much debate going on these days on who is the rightful owner of ‘multi-touch’ – a technology that has moved into many areas of our day to day life and become a pervasive part of our experiences. On this note, T-Mobile has just announced that they are planning to offer Google Android beyond mobile phones to extend to both the home phone as well as tablet computer.

Recently it has been reported that Microsoft has documentation showing it was the first to file a patent application back in May, 2006, a bit before Apple launched their bit for rights to claim this technology in April, 2008 and well before the anticipated launch of the Palm Pre.

In this comprehensive white paper, Bill Buxton, Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research provides a detailed history of “Multi-Touch systems that I Have Known and Loved” and offers up a very diplomatic approach to the debate on who was, or should have been, first in line at the patent office. It’s interesting to note that the claim is made that the story of multi-touch could be said to have begun with electronic music keyboards.

Beyond the keyboard, mobile phone and other traditional-looking multi-touch objects which traditionally have taken a flat, squared-off form, in 2010, Moixa is set to launch a 3D interactive multi-touch unit by the name of ‘Sphere’ that is the size and weight of an apple and can be used for to display applications such as Google Earth, web browsing, interacting with applications and environments or as a game controller.

Moixa are demonstrating that it’s not about being the first to lay claim to the technology, but rather it’s what you do with the technology that counts. I hope that they can deliver a top quality product.