On Making Sense of the Maelstrom

Google's announcement that it would be closing down the Google Reader project has provided some terrific insight into the tech news industry as a whole. It will be interesting some day to look back at the data that has been posted online in the form of blogs, comments, and articles. In a couple of years the dust will settle and some interesting studies can be performed on the death of a web tool. In the meantime one can try to make some sense of the maelstrom.

One of the consistent themes surrounding the demise of Google Reader is the idea that Google was providing a back end service to a number of clients. This is intriguing for several reasons and we will explore several of them bellow. First, some background:

There were many users that navigated to the Reader webpage and consumed their news from the feed, but a large number of users linked their Google Reader feeds to a third party client to read their subscriptions. Mike McCue of Flipboard mentioned to Liz Gannes(All Things D) that 2 million users had linked Google Reader to their Flipboard accounts. If Flipboard/Google Reader crossover alone is so high, one can imagine the number  of users that have connected via other clients.

This has become a problem for Google. In the past few years, Google has made it inconvenient for one to connect external clients to any of its services, at least if the service needs to work everywhere. Mail clients are available on various platforms, but IMAP on a desktop/mobile client combination does not offer the same functionality as using Google's Gmail web client in Chrome and the Gmail app on iOS. Rather than limit what third party clients can access in Gmail, Google has created an environment in which their native apps are superior to other options.

The same is not true of Google Currents. Google decided to not offer APIs at all for that service and it is not hard to imagine Currents getting the "spring-cleaning" treatment. Currents is, after all, Reader's closest direct successor. Google+ and Google Calendar are in similar positions, in some ways, as Google Reader, but they form a part of the core experience offered by Android, and should not suffer the same fate.

All this to say: Google killed Reader because Google is not in the business of providing back end services to other companies. Amazon does that, and does it well, but Google wants to be a consumer services company. Google wants to take action on the data it collects and capitalize on the data through advertising. Why should Google send all of its data to any app that feels like plugging in? Other companies were taking great advantage of a service Google was providing, and doing so at Google's expense. Google is not in the business of providing services to third party developers; it provides services to consumers.

It is frustrating to have a product that one knows and loves yanked away, but Google Reader was not serving a function in line with Google's core business. Services that are in line with Google's goals are quite safe. Google Keep provides note taking ability that was a glaring omission from Android (do not try to replace Evernote with them, that leads to anger, fear, aggression, but copy and paste your content out of that tiny Tasks window in Gmail into a full screen Keep tab and close that piece of tasks garbage forever). Calendar is also a central core of Android, and Google+ provides a much need social angle for the company.

Google provides useful services at a small cost (tiny ads on the side of the screen) and there is no reason to avoid using those services unless one is sensitive to privacy concerns or does not like the way the services or interfaces work. Google always provides a way out of its services if the terms become to unbearable or it closes down a project through its Data Liberation project. In short, do not let the Google Reader shutdown ruin your digital life.

On Google Keep

Note: this post addresses the web version of Google Keep. Some of the points made below may not apply to the Android Version.

Google announced Keep on it's official blog. This after a teensy snafu picked up by Android Police last week. The web app is functional, but not yet fully featured. It works quite nicely as a replacement to Google's tasks feature in Gmail, and Google promises full Drive integration in the coming weeks. That update should take it from a useful note taker and list maker to a powerful productivity tool, especially if integrated into Google Now.

As mentioned above, there are some quirks that prevent it from being a true "Evernote replacement". Issues include everything from simple user interface issues (links posted in Keep are not clickable) to rather glaring integration issues (photos can only be uploaded from the local machine, not added from Google+ or Picasa). As a result, Google Keep is oddly isolated from the rest of Google's services.

The app version is Android-only for now, which is unfortunate. Google's iOS apps are stellar and can turn an iPhone into an excellent Google phone. Keep would appeal to users of Apple's Notes app and, with some updates, could the Reminders app as well. Updates integrating Keep into both Google Now (as well as bringing Google Now to iOS) and Google Drive will be crucial in expanding Keep's user base.

The Android app is more well-rounded, but lacks some useful features like the ability to share lists (Google Play Store review). Until Google Keep is more fully integrated with the rest of Google's services like Drive, and perhaps Google Now, it will be a helpful cloud based task and list tool, but will not replace the heavy weights of the notes and lists world such as Evernote and Any.DO. When it is able to replicate those features, Keep will be a tempting offer for those who live in Google's cloud.

On Lots of News

A lot of things happened yesterday, here's a quick update of some of the highlights. A big update will be posted after the Samsung event tonight.

 Andy Rubin stepped down as head of Android to be replaced by Sundar Pichai. Here's the Google Blog post and here is Andy Rubin's post about halfway down in a post on SlashGear.

 Google announced that they would be shuttering the Google Reader service. Here's the Google Blog post and a post from Wired describing the run up to it.

 New Pope.

 Phil Schiller dissed Android and everyone is upset about it. Here is the iMore post who tends to be more reserved and here is a post from the WSJ who is in panic mode about Apple.

On Google Now for iOS

Engadget posted a video of what appears to be a Google promo showing Google Now running in the Google Search App on iOS. The service would be accessed by swiping up from the bottom of the screen while signed in to the Search app. Google Now aims to give contextual information based on one's location and current activity, as well as providing sports and weather updates and other information. While Google Now lacks the personification of Apple's Siri, it fills much the same roll and appears to do so in a much more proactive way. Engadget also reports the video being pulled from You Tube (the video embedded in the Engadget post is hosted by Engadget).

Google has not been shy about submitting their apps to the Apple store. Many of their apps provide a just-as-good or better experience than the web versions including Gmail, Google+ and Google Search. Google Search updated with Google Now would provide a powerful and useful app and provide the added benefit of spurring Apple on to increasing the functionality of their own native apps.

It would be interesting to see Google port such a central part of the Android experience to iOS. Google Now is not just another web service like Gmail or Google+, it is a key point of differentiation between the two platforms. Of course, Google is like Amazon, they are not in the game to make money off of hardware, they make the hardware to make money on their content and services.

Baseless rumor and speculation: Pulling a video is more in character with a response to an accidental leak than for a gag post or faked video. If that were the case, one would expect a quick denial of an iOS port from Google. The fact that the promo video exists and was leaked may indicate a project that is near completion. 

One final thought: imagine the utility of the Google Search app with Google Now if Apple were to open Siri's APIs. Oh well.

On $0 getting you $300

Google announced that the Nexus Q will be delayed indefinitely. The email (quoted in a Wired.com article) from Google customer service says that they are working on adding new features. Customers who pre-ordered the device before Google closed the pre-orders will receive a preview device for free. While the Nexus Q got decent reviews the device was limited in that it only played content from a very few sources. This made it much less attractive that a $100 Roku or Apple TV.

Part of the attraction of the Nexus Q is the built-in 25 watt amplifier that can power a set of bookshelf speakers. However, a streaming player and basic stereo sound system is not terribly hard to replicate with separate, cheaper components. The Nexus Q difficult to categorize because the current feature set is so small and the price so high. It does not fit into the streaming video player category because of it's high price (it is three times as expensive as the high end Roku); the device is not an audiophile-type stereo system because streaming audio is not high enough quality to fit that market. Google realized the current feature set would appeal to only a small subset of Android users who use Android and Google Play for all of their entertainment needs and have a high enough income to buy a $300 device that makes life a little more convenient.

It is important not to miss the customer service story here. Google is still a relatively untried hardware manufacturer. Rather than shipping a device that is not ready for widespread use and may be a dissapointment to users, Google delayed the launch and were able to reward loyal pre-order customers by providing them with a free device. Future customers who did not pre-order also benefit by getting an improved device out of the gate. By being pro-active in their customer service and getting ahead of potential issues Google was able to disarm a situation that could be lethal to a new hardware company trying to establish a reputation.

 

Andrew

On Moving to Kansas

Google has finally released details on it's fiber optic internet project in Kansas City. There is a quick summary available here on the GeekMom blog from Wired and a video by Google describing the rollout process here. One of the more interesting pieces of information mentioned by the GeekMom blog is an infographic showing the speed and cost of internet access around the world.

According to the infographic, the US is middle of the road when it comes to broadband penetration, speed and cost. Google is doing some interesting things to help remedy the United States lagging infrastructure. They are offering the basic service for free after the customer pays the $300 installation fee (this can be paid in installments of $25 per month for 12 months). That makes sense, once the fiber has been laid and the service installed, there is little cost to the ISP to keep the pipe turned on, as it were. The free service is guaranteed for 7 years and provides 5 mbps download and 1mbps upload speeds.

Google is also offering speed upgrades. The second tier costs $70 per month with a waived installation fee, 1gbps upload and download and includes 1 TB of Google Drive storage. The third tier costs $120 per month and includes a Nexus 7 tablet, TV Box, 2 TB Storage Box, Network Box, and 1TB of Google Drive storage. The TV lineup listed is impressive but is still missing some notable channels including the ESPN networks and CNN as well as the major networks but they do claim to be adding new channels so they could be included at launch.

More details can be found here, and it's worth a read. There are several more interesting details that were not mentioned here such as the use of Android and iOS devices as remotes, automatic HD when you subscribe to the TV service and simultaneous recording of up to 8 channels. The most exciting aspect of Google Fiber is the pressure it will put on other ISPs to match the service. With bandwidtch 200 times greater than the average American Internet speed and an HD package with a 2 TB DVR, it will be difficult for other ISPs to compete. Needless to say, I'm looking for jobs in KC, MO or KS.

On Google Play and Nexus 7

Google announced a new Nexus tablet today. It was built by Asus, and is available on Google Play for $199 and $249 depending on whether you get 8GB of internal storage or 16. CNET has a condensed version of the livestream from the event here.

The Nexus 7 takes design cues from tablets like the Kindle Fire and iPad in that all three are designed simply. It's a slab of glass and plastic that doesn't detract from what is displayed on-screen. This allows the devices themselves to fade into the background and encourages the reader to engage with the content.

Google's new tablet has a 9 hour battery life, comparable to the two current bestsellers (8 for Kindle, 10 for iPad). Android 4.1 (Jellybean) even took a hint from Kindle Fire by putting Google Play content front and center on the home screen. And that brings us to the big question separating the Nexus 7 and the more established tablets: are customer's willing to buy in to Google's content ecosystem on a tablet.

Amazon and Apple created massive ecosystems that consumers bought into before the companies ever imagined a tablet that those ecosystems could tie in to. Google, on the other hand, was a search engine and email provider that created a smartphone operating system. Of course the reality is much more complex than the previous two sentences can describe, but at it's core I think the problem with a pure Android tablet is a trust problem.

It's not that Google makes bad devices; in fact, they make the software for terrific phones, highly-rated streaming boxes and innovative notebooks (Chromebooks, technically). But can Google break into the content delivery arena? Amazon originated as a content delivery company, starting with physical meda and expanding into the digital book, music and video markets as those developed. Apple was able to break into the music business, and later the video and book business, by leveraging consumer's desire to listen to music on the go (1000 songs in your pocket-Steve Jobs).

What does Google bring to the table? Customers have trusted Google to provide them with email service and other basic smartphone services. They trust Google's App Market. But many Android users buy music from the Amazon MP3 store, books from Amazon or Barnes & Noble and watch movies and TV on Netflix or Hulu. People just don't seem to trust Google Play for their entertainment needs.

Will Nexus 7 succeed? Google will probably sell enough to justify the device. There's a big market for Nexus devices and the folks that purchased a Kindle so they could flash ICS to a 7" tablet for $199 will be ecstatic. But success in the tablet market is not based on sales to niche markets. It's based on sales to the average consumer. It's hard to believe that average consumers looking for a tablet for movies, books and music will flock to the Nexus. In their minds, Google isn't an entertainment company. Oh, sure you can search forbooks and movies on Google, but when you're ready to rent or buy you click the Amazon link at the top of the Google Search page or open up iTunes and buy it there instead.

 

Andrew

 

Reading:

Variable Star: Page 86/318

We Love Dichotomies

An article I read on thenextweb.com sent my brain on a tangent today. The article was discussing the idea that Google's Project Glass could be its "iPhone Moment". Naturally, what came to my mind was only slightly related to the original article, though I think what I'm going to write about is a part of the paradigm that informs the article from thenextweb.com.

The way the article was written started me thinking about dichotomoes and how we as Americans often use them to oversimplify our complicated modern life. Apple or Android; Apple or Microsoft; Google or Yahoo!; Democrat or Republican; Whig or Torie.

I think this tendency towards thinking of the world in polar opposites often does us a disservice. I think it robs us of much of the richness that we can find in our world today. Not that the tech world is a glorious place full of richness and beauty, but I think these pairs of opposites are indicative of how we look at the world. We often dismiss other options that may be available to us that we may find more enriching or enjoyable simply because they are not on of the two choices at opposite ends of ye spectrum.

I find myself waxing philophical tonight, so I'll stop there. But next time you have to make a choice make sure you're not simply discounting smaller, lesser known options. Do your research first and maybe pick io a Windows Phone or Ask Jeeves.

Andrew

Reading: Little Fuzzy, John Scalzi. Page 27/154