Windows8 is still searching for its USP

OMG the PC business is tanking. The likes of HP and Dell are suffering. Really too bad, how come actually and should we be worried? These interesting questions are in my opinion easier to answer than most think. How about: the days of the PC are over, we won't need powerful desktop machines any longer, unless you are in the video or sound recording business. Come on guys accept it, the desktop PC is a dead horse and we should be happy.

The last time I bought a desktop PC was in 2004. It was a huge machine, can't remember the processor speed, the hard disk size nor the RAM memory but it had one thing that impressed everyone; 3 SVGA screens. 

So yes, it looked the part in my small recording studio. It had a DVD-R drive, way ahead of most other PC's. I never ever recorded anything on it though. But then I moved on professionally and privately and my mobile lifestyle started with a Dell laptop that was surprisingly powerful.

Since then I never ever considered going back to having a desktop PC. The stuff I do, word processing, surfing on the web, Powerpoint presentations and so on and so forth do not require a powerful machine. On top of that I switched professionally from a lamentable experience consisting of a laptop PC with Windows Vista to a MacBook Pro and I swear, I will never go back again, unless Apple turns into the next Microsoft.

So back to the desktop PC topic. This type of machine was meant to help you executing tasks. Specifically for video and audio recording and editing local processor power is very important. But how many of us actually do this? Without knowing the actual numbers I'd say that at least 80% of the all the computer users never ever need the full processing power available today.

Even better, most of what we need to achieve is possible on pretty much any laptop or ultrabook if you must. If you then look at the convenience of the laptop form factor one really wonders why you would ever buy a clumsy desktop PC. Even if you need an additional large screen all laptops today have a graphics card that allows you to connect a massively big external screen that will satisfy most users. Ok, I don't know about three screens but hey, isn't that what Thunderbolt would allow?

So back to Windows8, what is its USP actually? Touch screen support? Interesting enough few people know that this is a standard feature of Windows7. It has a few drawbacks when you use it on a touch screen since some interactions are optimized for classic mouse-clicking. But other than that it generally just works.

The Windows8 tiles are nice at first but the value add of having an overview on one screen of your activities is exaggerated. Most of the programs running on Windows8 do not really match this User Interface paradigm, at least not yet and after using it a while, I found myself actually switching back to the classic interface. The reason for this might be that I'm so much used to this that I feel I'm getting quicker to what I need. Maybe a younger generation will prefer the Tiles, no idea.

That I'm not the only one switching back to the 'classic' Windows interface, is confirmed by IDC Analyst Bob O'Donell in this article. Also recently Jun Dong-soo, Samsung's head of memory business, stated that the poor attach rate for ultrabooks is linked to Microsoft's "less competitive Windows platform". He predicted this and took the decision to focus on memory for mobile a while ago. We can simply say today that this decision has more than paid off for Samsung.

On a tablet Windows8 may have its charms compared to iOS but in trying to be different it comes with drawbacks, specifically when it comes to speed and smoothness of the experience.

But what is really disappointing is the Search function in Windows8. Although its a leap forward compared to Windows7 and all previous iterations, it still can't match the sheer powerful elegance of Spotlight MacOS. The most important key-combination for me every day (cmd + spacebar), gets me Google-like quick to everything on my laptop.

For Microsoft I guess times are changing, to stay ahead of the change from desktop PC's to mobile, a super nice UI doesn't make the cut it. What does? Search, voice command even eye-tracking comes to mind. Although Microsoft has exciting things like Kinect among its offerings and it has a SDK available, suggesting that it will be part of Windows in the future, I am still not convinced that the integration will be as elegant as we're used to have from Apple, specifically from the times where Steve Jobs was still at the helm.

Thanks for reading my blog.

Matt

Why Nokia should enter the 3D Printer Business

I never worked at Nokia but I did work for them on a number of Consumer Data and Consumer Experience projects as Client Partner for a Berlin based mobile agency. That's the time where I saw first hand, back in 2009, how stubbornly blind they were to what was coming their way. I was one of their first clients back in the 90's when I got my first Nokia 1011 and always loved their phones. I had one till 2010 or so, the last one being the E71. Then came the iPhone, also for me, followed by the Android Tsunami and the rest is history. The latest Lumia models are nice, very nice indeed but I find it hard to believe that they can survive on a "Me has smart phones too". Although nice and refreshing Windows Phone is simply not the disruptive change and jump forward we'd all love to see and have as consumers.

So where should they go from here? My suggestion: they should enter the 3D Printer Business. Here's why.

From past to present

Look up Nokia and on Wikipedia you learn that this company started out in the wood pulp business and then went into the electricity generation business near Tampere in Finland. It added Rubber to its portfolio and started marketing rubber boots under the Nokia Brand Name. It then evolved into a conglomerate of businesses that included over a period of decades, telegraph and telephone cables, bicycles, robots, television, military communication equipment, gas masks and chemicals. The first step towards telecommunications was made in the 70's when they produced a digital switch for telephone exchanges which became the workhorse of the telco industry.

Through its military engineering experience Nokia started experimenting with wireless telephony in the 70's as well and they were directly involved in creating the first communication standards for wireless telephony. Its first GSM phone came out in 1989 and was delivered to Finish telco operator Radiolinja. From there, in less than a decade Nokia quickly dominated the mobile phones business with Motorola and Ericsson in its slipstream.

What does the history of Nokia teach us? Well, they have a lot of experience in engineering, designing and building electronic hardware and they have two decades of programming software for this hardware under their belt. But all of this experience is now at a critical cross road where they risk loosing lots of this heritage if their smartphone business strategy doesn't deliver.


What about 3D printers?

If you believe the hype, 3D printers are going to change the way we live and do business in under two decades from now.
For those who don't know here's why 3D printers are so important:

• They will change the way we produce an increasing number of products dramatically. From prosthetics, via glasses, household items and jewels all the way to the scandal inducing possibility of guns and rifles. 
• This new way of producing one off and personalized goods can potentially make a chunk of what's mass produced today redundant. It will open the door to a new type of retail commerce, i.e. specialized 3D printer stores, that are simply there to turn digital ideas into tangible objects. I'm sure you will see specialized stores springing up because not all printers can deliver all objects. You could metaphorically consider 3D printers as the last missing output module of the internet.
• Although the technology is still in a very early stage and end-results are not always satisfactory, its just a matter of time till we will buy a 3D printer for at home or in the garage and start using it to enhance our daily lives. 

3D printing today is in its infancy. You can buy a 3D printer today for a price that would buy you a sophisticated fridge or washing machine but defining 3D objects, using graphical software, is not an easy task. Of course one can find 3D printer forums and blogs by the dozen and they most will offer  some form of file sharing. Experimentation is still part of the process though but as said before, the promise of being able to print personal objects for a wide variety of applications is getting the attention of an increasing number of consumers, start-ups and businesses. 

So why should Nokia go into the 3D printer business?

Its my strong believe that if any company in the world is capable of entering this space and turning it into a strong new business its Nokia. As I pointed out before they have long standing history in hardware AND software manufacturing. My guess is also that they have access to a well trained workforce and an extensive line up of production partners around the globe. All that's needed is a nod from Stephen Elop and the creation of a 3D printer task force with a R&D budget attached. My  guess is that they'll be able to churn out a 3D printer with an easy to use interface and software within a year. They should not forget to leverage their experience in creating eco-systems. Anyone remembers Ovi or MyNokia? If they create an eco-system around these 3D printers using the same principles as Apple once did with Music and Movies via iTunes, they're in for a healthy future.

So, who introduces me to Mr. Elop so I can pitch the idea? :-)

Thanks for reading my Blog.

Matt

For further reading:
http://3dprintingindustry.com

If you want one yourself check Cubify

Message to Nokia: Stop Featurism - Start Experience Branding

The iPhone5 vs. Lumia 920 infographs keep popping up on the web and more specifically on Facebook. Whether directly driven by Nokia or not, the comparison of the Camera quality, the touchscreen sensitivity or the wireless charge feature, show that Nokia and its community are still thinking that more features mean a better product, a better user experience and ultimately Brand loyalty. But to beat the iPhone at its game there's more at stake than a choice of device colors.

Its no news to most of my blog readers that the iPhone5 beats the Lumia on all accounts is its eco-system. If you set-up your iTunes account properly in combination with Apple's cloud service, migrating from any iPhone to the iPhone5 is fairly painless, although some major 'fxxx-ups' have been reported.

Yes, we know by now that the new Apple Maps is not what it should be, not by far. With Apple openly apologizing and suggesting the use of other Map apps I'm not sure whether this is the first of more blunders to come in the absence of Steve Jobs or just a temporary bump on the roadmap (pun intended).  This interesting article sheds some light on Apple's changes under Tim Cook.

Whatever it is, none of these Apple problems will stop them from having the better integrated user-experience with music, apps and media available over one coherently designed platform.

Lumia in yellow anybody?

With the Lumia 920 Nokia will have a device on offer with a number of sleek features (and colors!) but there's not much of a consistent eco-system coming with it, at least not at first. So for now the Lumia 920 is a device, heavily leaning on a Windows Brand feature, its UI and less on Nokia's Brand values which is, as far as I can remember, about 'Connecting People'.

This won't change much when Windows 8 is rolled out and Microsoft, who all of sudden discovered User-Oriented Design and seems to be winning back some of its mojo, gets its eco-system act together. Because the question remains, where does it leave Nokia as a Brand in this equation? Their focus on hardware and features, instead of offering a compelling experience in line with the Brand values, is not the right way forward. When it doesn't integrate deeply in a user's life, it will not be a sustainable offering against the competition.

Microsoft forced more or less all Hotmail users to migrate to an Outlook branded interface. This is, according to some internal sources at Microsoft, one of the steps towards a thorough harmonization of its consumer brands. Only if that happens any time soon will Nokia stand a chance luring some users towards their smartphone products, specifically among those who are currently on BlackBerry for professional reasons. Why? Well because a strong and streamlined eco-system will help convincing potential users to make the switch. The question here from a Branding perspective is still how Nokia will remain visible in an otherwise Microsoft branded eco-system. But maybe it would be good if they can survive by selling more hardware in the first place.

I am currently keeping a close eye on how the IT-community is picking up Windows 8 and what the speed of migration here is. Once small, medium and large companies have adopted Windows 8, switching the workforce to Windows Phone mobile devices will make sense. With Apple remaining weak in the mail and calendar applications space, there's a real chance for the Nokia-Windows tandem to gain serious traction at the expense of BlackBerry and Android and ultimately, also at the expense of Apple if they keep committing Map likes gaffes.

Focus on smart not on phones
Strategically it is actually refreshing to see how Nokia starts playing the role of the underdog. They finally seem to understand that being small and agile has an advantage. When also  having the immense pressure of potential failure in the next few years on their shoulders, smarter thinking starts popping up. 

I would sincerely welcome Nokia as a player that drives Windows 8 devices forward. They have to start thinking eco-systems though and the opportunity could be in the small and medium sized business space on the one hand. On the other side I think that there's an opportunity in creating solutions that would integrate with user's daily lives. With the upcoming surge in connected household appliances Nokia could think of solutions that embed their devices through a clever eco-system, e.g. a dedicate platform, in their daily activities. When you think about their credo 'Connecting People' than this concept would make total sense.

Why don't they focus on a phone that takes their own Maps experience to the next level. Much like Apple made iTunes indispensable for iPhone, Nokia Maps could integrate so well with the Lumia devices that you want to use it since it improves your life for particular use-cases you tremendously. Out of the box thinking, or really getting rid of the whole box altogether is required here. But whether Nokia's leadership is in the right place to got there? 

So far there's little sign of Nokia going in that direction. In a recent interview with cnet Stephen Elop says even 'We'll spend to break through', the question remains: spending it on what? In the interview it is clear that one more time they focus on hardware. But its like selling Ferrari's in Africa. There's no infrastructure there to enjoy such a car to its full potential. 

Maybe there's a small guerrilla group somewhere in Nokia House driving this change, completely under the corporate radar. That this can result in great changes is what we've seen at Audi with the Quattro concept. If not then all the spending in the world is not going to connect Nokia to reality and it will remain the burning platform as described by Stephen Elop in his first internal memo he sent at the start of his tenure as CEO.

Nokia is on my radar-screen in any event.

MV

The ART of Digital Branding

 
That Digital has changed Branding forever is by now common knowledge. So what's new now that anyone can talk, blog or tweet about your Brand with sometimes unbelievable power. What is essential to ensure that conversations about your Brand are constructive and positive? Here is a suggestion: learn about the ART in Digital Branding.

In the Brand Governance piece on this blog I highlighted the importance of Digital Brand Governance already. Digital Brand Governance should help Brand Managers to deal with discussions that include your Brand in Social Media by providing a framework. IBM has a great example of how this can be formalized, without turning it into a Rulebook. Their IBM Virtual World Guidelines provide employees with the general code of conduct for all actions and communications in Virtual Worlds such as Second Life. Although targeted at these Virtual Worlds these Guidelines could also be used to guide employees for Social Media. Completely in line with common practice in Social Media, this Framework is publicly accessible. 

The IBM guidelines refer mostly to common sense and honesty. In fact by stating it the way they do IBM empowers its employees to act as they see fit and take responsibility for their actions. 

So now one step forward to Social Media itself. Brand Governance or Employee Guidelines are only one part of the Digital Brand reality. In Social Media it is not only your employees or biggest fans that talk about you. Anyone can talk about your brand, the quality of your services, the individual responses of employees to Twitter communications and Facebook posting and so on. These conversations cannot be controlled or switched off. You can only influence them with Guidelines such as those proposed by IBM.

You could consider the ongoing conversations and discussions about your Brand as a test for your own Brand Values. In fact every day your Brand is tested regarding 3 value dimensions:

• Authenticity
• Relevance
• Transparency

If all 3 are considered to be a positive part of the Brand's perceived image, the conversations originating about this Brand in Social Media will be more meaningful and positive. If a Brand is authentic, relevant and transparent it will also be easier for employees to participate in the dialogue in which case the aforementioned Branding Governance Framework is of great value.

Authenticity

On Wikipedia Authenticity is defined as follows: 

In philosophy, the conscious self is seen as coming to terms with being in a material world and with encountering external forces, pressures and influences which are very different from, and other than, itself. Authenticity is the degree to which one is true to one's own personality, spirit, or character, despite these pressures.

Interesting is the aspect of pressure and influences. This Brand Pressure is e.g. clearly a topic when it comes to making a profit in comparison to sustainability and social responsibility. The Pressure on Brands has clearly increased with the arrival of Social Media. It is e.g. there where MacDonald's recent Twitter campaign around the use of Biological Products went horribly wrong. A group of Twitter users considered MacDonald's claim as non-authentic and used the hashtags to Tweet about there own issues with the Brand.

Relevance

Referring to Wikipedia again, Relevance could be defined as follows:

"Something (A) is relevant to a task (T) if it increases the likelihood of accomplishing the goal (G), which is implied by T." (Hjørland & Sejer Christensen,2002).

Interesting here is accomplishing goals. Many Brands suggest that using their products or services has a benefit. These benefits are almost invariably related to improving one's life or to achieving goals. 

When a Brand uses its relevance, e.g. like Kodak did in photography, it will attract less or ignite negative conversations. Brand Relevance is closely related to Marketing and Product/Service Design with a defining influence in the Digital space. 

Transparency

When a Brand is clear about how it behaves, reacts and functions to the outside world, it gains in Transparency. Transparent Brands explain how they behave and stick to the rules and regulations they've communicated. Some of these rules can also be implicit and are learned when someone interacts with the Brand. A simple example is e.g. the time it takes to respond to a comment or answer a question. A quick response time will contribute to a feeling of Transparency.

Applying ART

So Authenticity, Relevance and Transparency are important Brand Dimensions. In Social Media these three are consistently tested. The question is of course how a Brand can Monitor and Measure this.

Measuring ART for a Brand is a soft non-quantifiable practice in the first place. If we look once more to the IBM guidelines there's nothing which quantitatively defines correct behavior. By referring to ART as a natural part of any inter human social activity one could argue that when a Brand starts to feel like it is isolated or bullied, it is also loosing on one or more of the 3 dimensions. It is always important to measure traffic and count the number of times people use your Brand name in conversations. 

It is then important to have someone in your team reading and understanding posts. You should check regularly with the Social Media managers about tonality of ongoing conversations. In fact you can ask them directly: are we still seen as Authentic, Relevant and Transparent? If they have even the slightest doubt about any one of the 3, consider ringing the alarm bell. It is then probably time for a RestART.

Update: what about Apple?
A colleague asked me an interesting question after reading this article. Apple is Authentic and Relevant but not Transparent, at least not when it comes to when it comes to their Product announcements and planning. Also their decision making process in the App Store is an unpredictable Black Box. Yet as a Global Brand they are in the op 3, so how does that work against the ART principle?

The answer I guess is two-fold. On the one hand, Apple is very Transparent when it comes to existing products, the way the work and the way Apple's services works. From a usability aspect Apple is without competition. In fact the Usability is in complete harmony with Apple's great design philosophy.

That Apple is not so Transparent about their next products contributes in fact to the power of the Brand. It enhances the reputation of those sources who know and who proof to be right when they predict something about Apple's product roadmap. It is also proof of Apple's power. They can partially go against the Transparency principle because they are so strong in the Usability area which makes them extremely relevant.

That the AppStore Certification process is opaque might be inconvenient for developers and others who occasionally depend on the outcome.

The incredible Apple Usability should be an inspiration for a great many other Brands out there, specifically if they manage to match the Brand's Story and Identity with usable products.