Friday 23 March 2012

Best Buy is Selling Nearly as Many iPhones as Apple Itself







Apple’s move to make Best Buy an outlet for the iPhone back in 2008 is proving a wise one — lucrative, too.
Over the past few years, the retail chain has become an increasingly important outlet for Apple extending its reach and distribution via its 1100 stores. About 600 of them host Apple Store-within-a-stores, most in geographic locations that Cupertino feels are too small to support a dedicated Apple store.
And they’re selling a lot of iPhones.
Almost as many as Apple itself, according to new data from Consumer Intelligence Research Partners (CIRP).
The firm surveyed iPhone buyers in December 2011, and January and February 2012, asking them where they purchased the device. And it found that retail stores accounted for 76 percent of iPhone sales and online stores 24 percent. When the iPhone 4S first launched, retail stores and online outlets accounted for 67 percent and 33 percent of sales, respectively, largely due to online pre-orders.
More interesting, however, was the actual breakdown of the stores themselves. According to CIRP’s data, Apple sold 15 percent of all iPhones purchased in the U.S. during the period of the survey (retail: 11 percent / online: 4 percent). Meanwhile, AT&T sold 32 percent via it’s online and retail stores, Verizon 30 percent — again, online and off, and Sprint 7 percent.
And Best Buy? The big box retailer sold 13 percent, just 2 percent shy of Apple itself. The remaining 3 percent: “other,” which I’m told is a combination of retailers like Radio Shack and Walmart and respondents who received their iPhone as a gift and didn’t know where it was originally purchased.
So when it comes to iPhone distribution, it’s obviously the carriers that drive sales. But retail partners like Best Buy are clearly hugely important as well. Nearly as important as the Apple Store.
“Apple Stores and the Apple Web site are tremendously productive, but they are limited by their relatively small retail footprint,” CIRP’s Josh Lowitz told AllThingsD. “There are 4 times as many Best Buy stores and probably 20 times as many AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint stores, so aggressive distribution through all these channels is critical to Apple’s US strategy.”

Apple’s TV Remote of the Future? It’s Already Here, In Your Hands.


It’s possible that, one day, Tim Cook will stand
 up onstage and show off a “real” Apple TV set 
— an integrated box/screen/entertainment device
  – that will replace whatever’s sitting in your living
 room now.
Another possibility: Over time, Apple simply builds
 an Apple TV set right in front of us, in bits and pieces — so slowly that we don’t really notice it.
Take the remote, for instance. PatentlyApple has its hands on an Apple application for an “advanced TV remote” that would offer some cool features. Like the ability to automatically scan your other devices and figure out the right code to control them, instead of requiring users to use a combination of manuals and trial and error.
At least as important is that, while Apple’s patent, filed back in 2010, could be a standalone device, the application makes it seem much more likely that users will use their iPhones, iPods or iPads to control their TVs.
Which makes sense, because Apple is already offering a “Remote” iOS app that handles some basic functions for its existing Apple TV. That is: There’s a good chance you’re just a download away from owning a bona-fide Apple TV remote already.
This kind of incremental building may be even more important on the content side, which is the real key to an Apple TV: If it’s simply a very nice screen that offers the same content choices that TV viewers already have, then it’s just a very nice screen. Andfor years, Apple has been making attempts to wrangle different TV choices, at different price points, without much success.
But instead of one grand, sweeping video package, Apple may end up just cobbling together an array of offerings, piece by piece.
To wit: The latest refresh of Apple TVdidn’t offer any new content, but it did make it easier for Apple users to buy the content that’s already there. Anyone with an iTunes account can subscribe to Netflix, and soon, Major League Baseball’s MLB.TV service, directly from Apple, without having to pull out a credit card again.
Netflix + iTunes + baseball games won’t make up a full suite of programming choices for most people. But now that Reed Hastings and Bob Bowman have agreed to let Tim Cook handle their billing for them, more media moguls will likely follow in their footsteps. Get enough of them in there, and you could end up with something really compelling.

Monday 19 March 2012

Viral Video: Hollywood Loves Obama Again


This has gotten to be the mother of all political 
ads — directed by Oscar-winning director Davis
 Guggenheim, narrated by Tom Hanks and lasting
 17 minutes — all part of the campaign of President Barack Obama.
Plus, “The Road We’ve Traveled” video was posted right onto YouTube on its release.
It will be interesting to see how it will be received and if it will work. The Washington Post is calling it a “docu-ganda,” noting it cost $345,000.
What do you think?

The Failures and Fallacies of Mike Daisey’s Apple Attack and the Media


Who in their right mind would lie to Ira Glass?
That was my first reaction to the revelation that the theatrical monologuist Mike Daisey had lied or fabricated — or in his words, “taken dramatic license” with — certain parts of his stage play, “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs.”
When I met people at parties in recent weeks and told them that I write about technology and that I had devoted more than a decade to covering Apple, the first question I used to get was: “Did you know Steve Jobs?” Since about January of this year, that first question has become, “What do you think of Mike Daisey?”
I haven’t had a real answer. I hadn’t seen his show, which was favorably reviewed by the New York Times, nor had I heard the episode of the highly respected public radio documentary program “This American Life” titled “Mr. Daisey and the Apple Factory,” that had been adapted from his play.
The show — or shows — hit a cultural nerve at a critical moment. Apple is the biggest company in the world, sporting a market capitalization of $546 billion as of Friday, with $100 billion worth of cash and investments on its balance sheet and the most popular stable of consumer electronics products in the world, especially the iPhone and the iPad. All of them are manufactured by workers in China, who labor for wages that are low by Western standards, put in hours that by Western reckoning are long, under conditions that to Western eyes aren’t ideal, doing jobs that by any standard are incredibly tedious.
Daisey’s stage show, which became a sensation among New York’s chattering classes, sought to draw attention to the plight of allegedly oppressed workers at Foxconn, Apple’s manufacturing partner in China. As New York Times reviewer Charles Isherwood put it, the play “is a mind-clouding, eye-opening exploration of the moral choices we unknowingly or unthinkingly make when we purchase nifty little gadgets like the iPhone.”
The stage show had been adapted for radio on public radio’s “This American Life,” which is probably the most-respected radio documentary program in the history of broadcasting. And the Daisey episode was presented as documentary, meaning the radio show’s staff of journalists and producers were vouching for it being true.
The problem: Much of it wasn’t.
In the show, Daisey described a trip to China, as well as a visit to Foxconn’s outer gates and other manufacturing companies in Shenzen, where many are located. He delivers a detailed and emotionally riveting account of meeting girls as young as 12, 13 and 14 years old who claimed to work for Foxconn. This would be in violation both of local laws and of Apple policies.
He also told of meeting workers poisoned by a chemical called n-Hexane, used to polish screens.
And, perhaps most movingly, he related a tear-jerking scene in which he showed a working iPad to a man who said he had crippled a hand while making its parts in a Foxconn metal press, yet had never so much as seen one of the devices powered on. Seeing the iPad’s screen in action, he tells Daisey, “is like a kind of magic.”
The word “magic” fits oddly here, because these meetings didn’t happen as Daisey said. “This American Life” yesterday aired a lengthy episode entitled “Retraction,” documenting Daisey’s many liberties with the facts.
To help do so, a reporter for another public radio show — Rob Schmitz of “Marketplace” — did what no one else in the media seemed to be willing to do, which was subject Daisey’s claims to scrutiny. Most damning of all in Schmitz’s report was the testimony of Daisey’s translator, called Cathy. She was found — after Daisey had told TAL he had lost contact with her — and disputed many of the anecdotes taken from the play and used in the radio segment about Foxconn.
Among the fabrications: Daisey didn’t speak to quite as many people nor visit nearly as many plants as he said he did. She disputed finding underage workers. The n-Hexane poisoning incident occurred not at Foxconn in Shenzen where Daisey visited, but at a Wintek facility in Suzchou, more than 900 miles to the north of Shenzen.
The stage show, and therefore the radio show that was derived from it, turned out to be a mixture of facts and fiction. Which might be fine for a production on the New York theatrical stage, where fiction and fact blend readily. And, while it might be okay in entertainment products, you don’t expect it from a prestigious radio documentary program.
And that is where the problems began.
When Daisey’s monologue was adapted for “This American Life,” outrage began to grow among people who wanted to do something about it. It was, Glass says, the most downloaded episode of “TAL” ever, and public radio listeners did what public radio listeners tend to do. For one thing, they started a petition. More than a quarter of a million people have signed a petition at Change.org, inspired by the TAL production based on Daisey’s work, demanding that Apple make changes.
That includes crafting a “worker protection strategy” for new products released, as well as publishing data from Fair Labor Association audits.
Feeding the frenzy, Daisey stepped up as the leading voice for worker rights in China’s electronics industry. He was seemingly everywhere in the media. Since the TAL segment aired in January, Daisey has been seen on “CBS News Sunday Morning,” in a report that, like the “TAL” episode, is now going to have to be retracted or at the very least walked back.
Another CBS-owned property, CNET, hosted Daisey as part of “Reporters Roundtable,” alongside Charles Duhigg of the New York Times, co-author of a series of front page stories in that newspaper. Duhigg ended his “Roundtable” appearance by urging people who care about the issue to go and see Daisey’s play.
Daisey also appeared on MSNBC repeating the same anecdotes and tarnishing the usually shiny Apple. And on HBO. And PBS. And C-SPAN.
Needless to say, there will have to be many more retractions in the days ahead.
At this point, it’s hard to determine what’s more outrageous, Daisey’s lies to Ira Glass and his team, or the national media’s willingness to give Daisey a platform to repeat the same lies and fabrications without making the slightest effort to vet them.
The circumstances around Apple’s manufacturing arrangements in China aren’t new. As a columnist for Businessweek I wrote about Apple’s first round of “sweatshop” allegations in 2006, well before the age of the iPhone and the iPad, which had at the time first come to light in part because of the reporting by London’s Daily Mail.
I’ve never been to China. Many people know more about the on-the-ground facts concerning Apple’s factories than I do. But there are many reporters who have been there. In 2010, Bloomberg Businessweek’s Fredrik Balfour wrote a powerful cover story for that magazine, which aimed to get to the bottom of the string of suicides that occurred among Foxconn employees that year.
ABC’s “Nightline” visited Foxconn earlier this year. Its report was criticized in some circles, because at the time of his death, Apple’s late CEO Steve Jobs happened to be the largest shareholder of that network’s parent company, Disney. Also, ABC had been invited by Apple and Foxconn. Even so, “Nightline” anchor Bill Weir, seeing conditions very different from what Daisey described in the course of his reporting, wondered if Mike Daisey’s work was questionable.
At the very least, Daisey is a dramatist who now admits he chose to lie, but for reasons known only to himself. The chance to raise his profile and sell more tickets to his monologue are obvious potential motivations. Whatever it was, his dramatic product is meant to be consumed as thought-provoking entertainment, not as fact-based journalism, which many people assumed it was.
This is the crux of Daisey’s defense for lying to Ira Glass and his fact-checker: That he’s not a journalist and took dramatic license with the events, and now regrets doing the “This American Life” segment.
And that’s the real shame here.
Clearly, people care about how workers who make our electronics are treated, or there wouldn’t have been a market for Daisey’s show, or for an hour-long radio documentary adapting it. And the subject is one we need to discuss at length as a society. The net result of Mike Daisey’s efforts to put self-promotion ahead of the facts has badly muddied the waters, and has probably done more harm to the people he sought to help.
So, instead of illumination on a serious topic, we are left with little. Mike Daisey is an opportunistic fabulist and should be ashamed of himself for lying. Ira Glass and his team are ashamed for giving him wider attention, and have said so. But there are many more people who should be even more ashamed for taking Daisey’s lies at face value. There should be many more retractions and apologies in the days ahead.
But now we have to start the conversation about Apple and Foxconn and workers’ rights all over again, this time with real, verifiable facts at our command. Is that so much to ask?

Twitter and Facebook Are Tomorrow’s News Service. For Now, Though …


If you’re like me, you increasingly rely on Twitter
and Facebook as your news editors. But that means we’re in a small minority.
Just 9 percent of American adults frequently get their news from their pals at the two services. And those who do end up getting it much more frequently from Facebook than Twitter. That’s according to a new survey from the Pew Research Center and its Project for Excellence in Journalism.
That’s a lot more than a few years ago, when that number would have been a goose egg for both services, because they didn’t exist.
But it’s still a whole lot less than Google and other search engines*, which do the trick 32 percent of the time, or good old fashioned news sites, which account for 36 percent of the audience’s tips. Aggregators — Pew calls them “news organizers” — pick up the rest.
Take off your digital blinders for a minute and this shouldn’t be a huge surprise. It’s easy to extrapolate your behavior, and the behavior you see from your peers, and assume it applies universally. But that doesn’t mean it’s right. (If it was, we’d actually see statistical evidence of cord-cutting.)
At All Things Digital, for instance, we’ve been making a concerted push to bring in visitors via Twitter and Facebook, mostly through the efforts of our social media whizDrake Martinet. But even though our audience hangs out on the right end of the early adopter bell curve, Drake says social services account for about 15 percent of our referrals, predominantly from Twitter. (Which is a whole lot better than it was before Drake started working his magic.)
Wait a minute: Aren’t the Pew people the same ones who told us, a year ago, that Facebook was an increasingly important source of traffic for news site?
Yup. (Good memory!)
But these two reports aren’t mutually exclusive. Last year’s survey pointed out that social media is a lot more important to news sites than it used to be. This one just reminds us that for most sites, other stuff still matters more.
*Okay. Basically, just Google.

Apple Unveils Cash Plan Monday Morning


Apple has around $100 billion in cash sitting
 on its books. What on earth will it do with it all?
Wall Street has been asking the company some
 version of this question for years, and now 
investors may get some kind of answer. Apple
 has announced a conference call to discuss its
 cash position — and only its cash position — tomorrow morning, at 9 am ET:
Here’s the entirety of the release:
“Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, and Peter Oppenheimer, Apple’s CFO, will host a conference call to announce the outcome of the Company’s discussions concerning its cash balance. Apple® will not be providing an update on the current quarter nor will any topics be discussed other than cash.”
Apple has been hinting for a while that some kind of announcement has been coming. Cook made two public appearances this year — during the company’s earnings call and at a Goldman Sachs-hosted investor conference — and both times he said Apple was debating what to do with its stockpile.
Here’s John Paczkowski’s summary of Cook’s comments at the Goldman event, where Cook spent a lot of time talking about cash:
“We’re in very active discussions at the board level on what we should do,” he said, adding that careful consideration is the guiding principle here. “We are not going to run out and have a toga party.”
“We are judicious in our spending,” Cook said. “We are deliberate. We spend our money like it is our last penny. … I think shareholders want us to do that. They don’t want us to act like we are rich.”
“I’d be the first to admit we have more cash than we need to run the daily business. So we’re actively discussing it. I only ask for a bit of patience, so we can do it in a way that’s best for the shareholders.”

Sunday 18 March 2012

iPhone







The iPhone Finds Its Voice

The iPhone 4S is one of Apple’s less dramatic updates, but, when combined with the Siri, iOS 5 and iCloud features, it presents an attractive new offering to smartphone users, writes Walt. 

Yes, BlackBerry 10 Is Headed to the PlayBook … Someday


BlackBerry 10, the latest version of
 Research
 In Motion’s mobile operating system, isn’t 
intended for the company’s handsets alone.
 It’s destined for the PlayBook tablet as well.
Rob Orr, RIM’s vice president of product management, tells TechRadar that the company will debut a BlackBerry 10-based handset “toward the end of 2012,” and will follow it by bringing “BlackBerry 10 to our PlayBooks.”
Reached for comment, a RIM spokesperson confirmed Orr’s remark: “BlackBerry 10 is being designed for our next generation smartphones, as well as for the BlackBerry PlayBook. Owners of BlackBerry PlayBook today will be able to update their tablet to the BlackBerry 10 OS via a free software update once the tablet software version is available.”
That’s the plan, anyway. And it makes perfect sense, since BB10 is based on the same QNX platform as the current PlayBook OS. The only problem here is the one that’s plagued RIM for months now: The timeline.
The company has repeatedly delayed the launch of BlackBerry 10 and the next-generation devices based on it, while continuing to promote the hell out of it. And the further it pushes them out, the longer it has to rely on its current operating system, which is pretty dusty at this point. And the longer it does that, the harder it is to retain the attention of consumers and developers, both of whom have plenty of other options when it comes to smartphones.

Satisfaction, Thy Name Is iPhone


Here’s a data point sure to get prominent mention
 during Apple’s next big media event. The iPhone has
 once again claimed the top ranking in J.D. Power’s
For the seventh consecutive time.
The iPhone scored 839 out of 1,000 possible points. That’s a point more than it claimed in J.D. Power’s September 2011 survey, and 41 points more than its nearest rival, HTC, which scored 798 (down from 801).
It’s also 64 points more than the industry average of 774, beneath which rivals Samsung, Motorola, LG, Research In Motion and Nokia continue to toil. All five of those companies’ smartphones fell in customer esteem, some precipitously. Motorola’s score slipped to 758, down from 775; Samsung’s to 769 from 777; LG’s to 733 from 760; RIM’s to 733 from 762; and Nokia’s to 702 from 721.
What a sad commentary on the industry that smartphones from five of its seven largest vendors posted below-average scores in customer satisfaction.
Declining scores.
Ease of operation, operating system, physical design and the all-important battery performance — which, according to J.D. Power’s study, consumers identified as the least satisfying aspect of smartphones, by far — are features you’d think the smartphone industry would have pretty much dialed in by now. But evidently there’s still lots of room for improvement.

How Much Is Apple Worth?


Apple is a juggernaut. Its stock touched $600 on Thursday, which represents $560 billion in market capitalization. Compare this to Exxon Mobil, with a market cap of $400 billion, IBM’s $240 billion and Wal-Mart’s $210 billion. Can Apple really be worth that much?
The easy answer is that the company is worth whatever the market says it’s worth. Well, yes, the market is right every day — but it is right only for that day. What about tomorrow?

Google Apps VP Dave Girouard Leaving to Start a Company


Dave Girouard, who is Google’s VP of apps, is leaving
 the company, Google said today.
Girouard had been responsible for Gmail, Google Calendar
, Google Docs and other cloud applications.
After eight years at Google, Girouard plans to start his own 
company, though not in the enterprise space. Google Ventures will be investing in his start-up, alongside Kleiner Perkins and NEA.
(Update: Girouard’s new company is called Upstart, with the tagline “The Startup is You.” According to a splash page, “Upstart lets you raise capital in return for a small portion of your future income.”)
Meanwhile, back at the Goog, Girouard’s responsibilities will transfer to Sundar Pichai, leader of the Chrome and apps team. Pichai is one of Google CEO Larry Page’s septumvirate of product heads, who were established when he took over the company last April. Part of Pichai’s agenda has been to lessen the divide between enterprise apps and consumer apps.
Departures by long-time Googlers are surprisingly rare. Google’s first employee, Craig Silverstein, left to join Khan Academy last month.

Titre dHow to Signal That You Have an iPad 3 (Comic)u message


New iPad a Hotspot Now for Verizon, Not So Much With AT&T



So we jumped the gun a bit when we said that the new iPad can act as a hotspot for both Verizon and AT&T.
As our now-corrected story notes, the hotspot feature is ready now for Verizon. AT&T, meanwhile, says it is working with Apple on the feature. However, it won’t be ready for those buying or getting their iPads today, nor is there an ETA for when it will be available.
The hotspot capability lets the iPad serve as an Internet connection for a laptop or other Wi-Fi device.
It’s not immediately clear what the holdup is, as Verizon is offering the feature, and AT&T already offers a hotspot option on its iPhone lineup.
An Apple representative said that the company has turned on the feature at the hardware level, and that it is available to any carrier that wants to offer it.
Meanwhile, a couple of other notes on the iPad models with built-in cellular connectivity.
As a reminder, the iPads in both the AT&T and Verizon options will run on high-speed LTE networks, where available. However, because AT&T and Verizon use different frequency bands, buyers have to decide at the time of purchase which one they want.
Beyond North America, Apple isn’t supporting LTE, but is supporting faster flavors of the HSPA network that are being adopted faster than LTE abroad. Models purchased abroad will support LTE on AT&T’s network, while both Verizon and AT&T iPads bought in the U.S. will be able to roam internationally on 3G.
Apple isn’t making a version of the new iPad that works on networks from either Sprint or T-Mobile USA.
Of course, chances are that none of this was on the minds of the happy folks who lined up this morning for the first units, like this crowd in New York City:

Apple’s New iPad Costs at Least $316 to Build, IHS iSuppli Teardown Shows


Apple’s new iPad hit store shelves today.
 That means that along with the lines at the
stores and the requisite applause of store
 employees cheering people who buy them, 
there were among the many iPad buyers today
 people who just couldn’t wait to get the gadget
 torn apart.
The analysts at the market research firm IHS iSuppli, considered by the investment community to be the most reliable of the organizations that conduct teardowns, were among that set. Today, somewhere in Southern California, an iSuppli analyst stood in line at a store and promptly took an iPad to a lab, where it was torn into, initiating the interesting process of estimating what it all cost to build.
Here’s what iSuppli’s team found: First off, there weren’t many changes from the last iPad, in terms of suppliers. “It’s most of the same characters we saw last time around,” analyst Andrew Rassweiler told me today. Wireless chipmakers Qualcomm and Broadcom both reappeared — Qualcomm supplying a baseband processor chip, Broadcom a Bluetooth and Wi-Fi chip, TriQuint Semiconductor suppling some additional wireless parts. STMicroelectronics once again retained its position supplying the gyroscope. Cirrus Logic supplied an audio codec chip.
The 16 gigabyte, Wi-Fi-only iPad that sells for $499 costs about $316 to make, or about 63 percent of the device’s retail price. On the upper end, the 4G-ready 64GB model that sells for $829 costs about $409 to make, or about 49 percent of the retail price.
The new cost figures represent an increase of between 21 percent and 25 percent, depending on the model, from the iPad 2, which iSuppli tore down last year.
So what did they find inside? An expensive Samsung display, for one thing. All thosemillions of pixels don’t come cheap. ISuppli analyst Andrew Rassweiler estimates that the display, which cost $57 on the iPad 2, has grown in cost to $87 on the latest iPad.
Rassweiler says that two other vendors, LG Display and Sharp Electronics, have inked display supply deals with Apple for the latest iPad, but only Samsung is thought to have fully ramped up production. Depending on the vendor, the display may cost as much as $90, he said.
One set of components remained essentially the same as before: Those that drive the touchscreen capabilities. Rassweiler says that three Taiwanese companies, TPK, Wintek and Chi Mei, supply parts related to driving the central interface feature of the new iPad, but he says to expect a major shift in how Apple handles the touch interface on future iPads.
The combined cost of cameras, including the front-facing and back camera, is pegged at $12.35, more than three times the cost of cameras found on the iPad 2, Rassweiler says. But it’s essentially the same setup as that on the iPhone 4, he says. As has been the case with cameras, the identity of the supplier wasn’t easy to determine because they try hard to hide identifying information from the prying eyes of teardown analysts. The candidates, however, include Largan Precision Co., a Taiwanese supplier of camera modules to wireless phone companies, and Omnivision. On the iPhone 4S, a research firm called Chipworks identified the supplier of the CMOS sensor in one of the cameras as having come from Sony.
As with other Apple devices, the main processor chip is an Apple-made A5X processor, one manufactured under contract by Samsung. The estimated cost of that chip is $23, up from $14 on the iPad 2.
Another part that’s more expensive than on the last iPad, but also better for a variety of reasons, is the battery. This one is estimated to have cost Apple $32, up from $25 on the iPad 2. But it constitutes a significant upgrade, Rassweiler says, with 70 percent more capacity than before. Apple benefited in part by lower prices in the lithium polymer material used to make the battery, offsetting the cost of adding a vastly improved battery.
ISuppli wasn’t the only outfit conducting teardowns of the iPad today. An enthusiast site called iFixit that encourages consumers to learn how to repair and upgrade their own electronics, flew technicians to Australia to conduct its own teardown analysis.