Another way to put it: Unless you own massive infrastructure, you will *never* be able to compete with Google. Welcome to the new net, indeed. Meet the new boss…
Quick heads up on this, and I’ll probably write more later, but 3 is apparently going to do a bundle of the HTC Hero Android phone (widely-regarded as the best of the current crop) with a premium Spotify account for the two year lifetime of the contract.
And, by strange coincidence, it’s priced at the same level as the cheapest o2 iPhone package.
More to follow, no doubt.
And it’s from the normally-reliable Mr Gruber:
“(There seems to be widespread consensus that Windows 7 has to be a hit because Microsoft needs it to be a hit. I wonder how much this assumption has colored the reviews.)”
Sure John. Sure. I mean, it couldn’t possibly because, well, you know, Win7 is actually not bad?
Is it just me or has Gruber gone really down hill lately?
Alan Patrick succinctly points out why referring to YouTube as an asset for Googleis wide of the mark:
“A small quibble, if I may – words like Asset, and Value, get badly diluted in Newspeak 2.0. These words’ original meanings are based, however, on the basic principle of gaining positive returns at some point. Being important by dint of massive subsidy is, well, its an approach, but its not sustainable, its not creating value at that point, and as for counting it as an Asset – accountants define an asset as something that gains, not loses, a business money.”
Exactly. YouTube continues to lose money. The more popular it gets, the more money it loses. And that means that rate at which Google has to increase its revenues from YouTube is constantly increasing too.
So, while Google may indeed carry on increasing revenues from YouTube, unless the growth in revenue exceeds growth in traffic (at a healthy level, too) it will continue to be a financial black hole.
Is the HTC Hero the first Android phone to measure up to the iPhone?
Karmic Koala is Koming soon.
I have no opinion about whether this is a good thing or bad thing. Yet.
“I can find no documentation of the iTunes music library format. It’s mentioned in a KB article, yes, but only alongside other iLife applications. It’s a way for Apple to decouple their iLife apps and have, say, iPhoto play music while doing slideshows.
He’s really saying ‘don’t use this unsupported made-up API, use THIS unsupported made-up API that happens to have been more reliable in the past’. But presenting it like it’s the Proper Way of doing things is deceptive.”
Tom’s right. That XML file – like many of Apple’s file formats – is undocumented. Sure, you can work out what it means, but there’s absolutely no guarantee that Apple will not move to another approach in the future, rip up that file, and do something entirely different.
Craig should remember that just because something can be reverse engineered doesn’t mean it is open.
Of course, none of this means Apple is against being open. It just means that it’s not a priority for the company.
File under "no shit, Sherlock".
If it's good, I'll buy it and subscribe.