Michael Janzen

I recently had the opportunity to visit the Google Headquarters in Mountain View, California and left with the lingering impression that Google must know everything.

I realize this is the stuff of science fiction and conspiracy theory but I think we’re at a place in time where fiction is becoming reality. Shoot… just look at the technology in your own pocket and then look around your house; then think back to what life was like 20 years ago.

Speaking of time slipping by, on this date twenty years ago the founders of Google, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, were 23 and 22. Google got its start in March of 1996 as a research project by  as a school project, specifically it was the Stanford Digital Library Project. You can read the complete history on wikipedia but I wanted to put into perspective that in the short time Google has existed they have been able to concentrate an enormous amount of information, wealth, and power.

But like all centers of power they are also double edged swords simply due to their size. Brands like Google and Apple have earned a lot of public trust, but now that they have acquired so much power, can they still be trusted?

It’s kind of like having an immortal benevolent giant as a pet who is really good at taking care of himself. As he grows he becomes more and more helpful. In fact soon you begin to depend on him for everything and he seems perfectly happy to look after you. But at some point living with giants can get a little dicey when they forget who’s in charge.

This is the potential problem with immortal benevolent giants. When power concentrates and the human scale is forgotten we all become at risk of experiencing the other side of the double edged sword. No conspiracy theory here… just a bit of philosophical rambling and something to noodle over the next time you’re out surfing the information waves.

I’ve been saying this a lot lately and mean a lot by it. I also suspect most of us need a little reminding that every system (natural or human-created) is stronger than the sum of it’s parts. Not to beat an old cliché to death, but sometimes we forget why the simple truths are true.

This particular truth happens because the connections between the separate parts actually contribute to the value of the combined group. In other words, strength doesn’t just come from the total mass of the group but the relationships that are formed between the parts. It’s like the connections themselves add mass to the total.

In business we see this happen in large companies regularly which are simply large organized groups of very talented people working toward the same set of goals. Corporations often get disrespected when their goals don’t include serving society or one abuses its power; I can think of many examples. I can also think of a few large corporations that serve society well, like Google. Google is an excellent example of how a large group of focused brilliant people can create incredibly powerful tools and technology. But even this gentile giant could easily step out of line and inadvertently step all over the people it intended to serve if its goals changed and excluded the people it once served.

In nature we see this happen when there is a wide diversity of natural living things in an ecosystem. A balance is found when the fabric of the interconnections finds a sustainable level. In other words when everyone has enough to eat and no one is getting eaten into extinction.

In a democracy we see this happen when the people still feel like they have a say their government and have joined together around central beliefs and values.

In communities we see this happen all the time when people come together around common issues, topics, and values. This can happen at many scales from a group of two or more people with the strength increasing as the number of people increase.

I personally stumbled on this realization as a community of very real people began to form around my blog, Tiny House Design. I’ve been amazed with the rapidly forming online community of people determined to solve their own housing challenges.

I’ve also experienced this first hand with the community of tiny house bloggers and builder who are as passionate as I am about raising awareness around housing issue and the benefits of living with less. As we share our learnings we’ve been able to focus in on the most important issues and topics is helping to grow the community.

In these days following Apple’s iPad announcement many people have pointed out the flaws in the iPad. Gizmodo and Lifehacker both have good lists of glaring flaws with the device that will definitely impact it’s adoption and usefulness.

Announcing all the details 60 days before they have a shipping product gives Apple the opportunity to make some quick changes to the design and price point based on public reaction but it also gives competitors an opportunity to catch up faster, and there seems like a lot of folks are moving in the low cost tablet direction.

My money is still on Google. Apple has left the door wide open for Google to swoop in and steal this new market segment Apple just defined.  It also looks like I’m not the only one who agree’s with this theory, see what the Android Guys say. But only time will tell if Google thinks it’s a smart move and has willing partners, for example it looks like HTC is ditching the idea of a tablet and refocusing on Android phones. Now that they know what the iPad will feature, will they get re-interested or back-off? It will be fun to watch.

Here’s the line up of potential competitors. Photo credit Gizmodo.

Today Apple announced the iPad, which is essentially a cross between a tablet computer and an iPhone. It appears to have a super easy-to-use interface and the expected sexy wrapper. It is most certainly a new class of device and should be a success; but it’s NOT the Amazon Kindle or netbook killer it was expected to be simply due to the price.

iPad Price

The price will range from $499 to $829. Kindles cost $259 and netbooks typically range in price from $300 to $500. Had Apple found a way to offer a version in the sub-$400 range I think they could have dominated this market.

Defending Apple’s Price Point

The iPad will be a far more capable device than any ebook reader or netbook for at least a year or two. So I can understand their reasoning for pricing it between low cost Macs and netbooks. My guess is that they are hoping buyers will agree that the added value justifies the added cost… but I’ll stick to my guns in saying that they could have cornered the market on this segment with a slightly lower price.

The other major competitor for them will be Google Chrome based tablets, (more here). In fact Google seems to be quickly becoming Apple’s and Microsoft’s biggest competitor on multiple fronts from hardware, to operating systems, to mobile devices.

In the end my money is on Google, not because they have a superior product, but because they have a superior business model and approach. They also seem to get that quality + low price will always beat top quality + premium pricing. Sad but true.

For those of you salivating over the prospect of owning a new Apple iPad you’ll need to get a sponge and mop up your keyboard because it will be some time before it hits store shelves.

It looks like Google is quickly charging into many realms outside internet technology. The Google Nexus One is well positioned to move the mighty iPhone out of the way and now Google is getting into the Energy game too with the start-up of a green utility company. Their operating system Google Chrome must be sending shivers up the spines of the executives at Microsoft. What’s next… a bank?

In the mean time take a look at their phone.

Apple is rumored to be announcing their new tablet device on January 26, 2010, but have you noticed all the buzz about the tablet market heating up. For example, Google has been rumored to be working with HTC on the hardware for a Google Chrome based tablet and Freelance Semiconductor will reveal their new tablet any time now.

When the iPhone was launched it took competitors 1-2 years to catch up with viable competitors. Today the market is filled with great smart phones but the lead Apple gained early on will keep them in a strong position in that segment for quite some time.

But the tablet market appears to be a different animal. Unless Apple has something truly mind-blowing and low-cost to show the world on the 26th I suspect it’s not going to make the impact the iPhone did just three years ago today when it was initially announced.

Will the Apple tablet be another leapfrog like the iPhone or will Apple get lapped by the strong competition making their new tablet a relative failure like the Apple TV? I guess we’ll have to see… but in any event I would highly recommend avoiding limited devices like the Kindle since we’re about to see the emergence of a large number of low-cost tablet based computers.

As our technological world races faster and faster we see a common trend emerging. Innovation and meeting people’s needs always will always beat the competition in the long run.

Google appears to be at war with Microsoft as far as I can tell. Visit Google with Internet Explorer and in the top right of the page you’ll be strongly encouraged to switch to Google Chrome. I’ve been using Chrome on my Mac since they released it and I’m simply stunned at the stability and speed.

I’m not exactly your average computer user either and have years of experience managing teams of online application designs and web usability researchers. Not bragging just saying I’ve seen a lot of good and bad software and Google Chrome is amazing… an Internet Explorer Killer.

Apple has been rumored for months to have a breakthrough tablet in the works. Having watched Apple leapfrog the industry for a couple of decades now I suspect this new device will have the potential to stomp all over mono-function devices like Kindle and the print industry, just like it’s doing to the music industry. Apple could be positioned to steal more market share in print and recorded media markets.

Both of these examples illustrate the how the old-school digital and print world is loosing customers everyday because someone else from another industry is entering their information distribution world and stealing it away… simple because the newcomers aren’t bogged down in old-school thinking.

Survival of the fittest, and the fittest adapt and innovate.

Oh… by the way… television is next to go. Early adopters, like me, have already given up on that dreadful box and get our information and entertainment far more efficiently online. As Telcos speed up the internet more users will go online for their TV fix.

Now hardware builders like Dell are publishing notes for installing Google Chrome on their low cost netbooks. This little puppy runs Ubuntu Linux and while the install is still for geeks I suspect it’s only a matter of time before the open source community creates a installer for newbies. This will be followed by official pre-installed Google Chrome releases from the hardware makers themselves.

The key to all of this is user adoption of course and if Google has really build a no-nonsense operating system and the hardware costs stay low Google will stomp all over Microsoft in the personal computing market segment. Read my first post on Google Chrome to hear how I think Microsoft can survive Google Chrome.

I just watched these two videos produced by Google that demonstrate Google Chrome OS. Basically Google has taken the Pareto principle and applied it to an operating system providing more than 80% of what average users need their computer to do. I suspect Linux, Apple will survive Chrome but Microsoft will need to shift its focus.

• Linux will probably take the smallest hit because most geeks that use Linux will continue to do so and if anything dual boot Chrome. Linux also has the advantage of being an open source community and not a corporation.
• Apple has a diverse collection of strong footings like iTunes, iPhone, iPod, in addition to supplying a hardware/software package that is way ahead of the competition in terms of usability.
• Microsoft will be hit hard by Google Chrome because their Windows foundation will be weakened as common end-users begin to adopt this easy to use option. Apple has already shown that usability is the giant’s Achilles’ heel. Like most giants Microsoft has multiple strong footings like Apple but the demand for Windows will begin to shift away from home users. If Microsoft fails to see this unavoidable truth and doesn’t start to shift resources to their core strengths they are sure to fail.

I realize this is an outlandish prediction but it’s based on a simple idea. When someone (including a corporation) focuses on their core strength they succeed. Google has always seemed to do this extremely well. They are also masters of innovation and seem to still be growing fast and exploring new areas… which could actually be thought of as a core strength in itself.

Microsoft appears to be at a stage in it’s life were some serious change needs to happen. I suspect it’s because they are clinging to past successes instead of embracing the future of open source code and fulfilling user needs. To compete for mass user adoption one must keep up with what users want.

For example… Apple helped move the cellular phone industry ahead in one huge leap forward with the introduction of the iPhone. Google is about to do that to home computers. Those that aren’t well positioned and exercising their own strengths will figure out the hard way that old-school models are a recipe for failure.

From my perspective Microsoft’s core strength is it’s ability to provide enterprise scale solutions. Google tends to scare corporations because of their blackbox systems and unlimited thirst for data. So it makes much more sense to me for Microsoft to move more of its resources to enterprise solutions and away from home users. If they want to compete with Google in the home computing space quickly come up with a revolutionary simple new tool like Google has… otherwise don’t waste any more time in battle with someone who has you beat.

Have you heard that billionaire Rupert Murdoch wants his content removed from Google? I think it’s a great idea. Clinging to old-school ideas is a wonderful self-destructive approach to business and I can’t think of any organization I’d rather see self-destruct. Just think of the wonderful positive effect this will have on the world. This Murdoch quote says it all:

“I think we’ve been asleep. It costs us a lot of money to put together good newspapers and good content and they are very happy to pay for it when they buy a newspaper, and when they read it elsewhere they are going to have to pay.” [Source]

That’s right buddy boy… you keep right on thinking boneheaded ideas like that. Keep your old school head tucked right there between your cheeks and if you focus your brown shirts on monetizing the old-school way and you should be bankrupt by the end of 2010. Go get-em Murdoch! Show those Silicon Valley blokes how to run a newspaper!

Is it too early for champagne?