Vox: All Posts by Bob O'Donnellhttps://cdn.vox-cdn.com/community_logos/52517/voxv.png2017-11-01T13:30:02-04:00https://www.vox.com/authors/bob-odonnell/rss2017-11-01T13:30:02-04:002017-11-01T13:30:02-04:00Forget the cloud. Computing is heading into the fog.
<figure>
<img alt="Dubai skyline with buildings poking up out of the fog" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/pb6kJUlNwFcisuLR7uqcMCamTNE=/165x0:2836x2003/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/57424639/854626138.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Tom Dulat / Getty</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Fog computing leverages and unifies a surprising number of cutting-edge technologies into a comprehensive whole.</p> <p id="C4a3pr"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/will-the-future-of-computing-emerge-from-the-fog/51440"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="7aODy0">
<p id="QqFKNR">Many scary movies have at least one scene where someone — or something — emerges from the fog. There’s something about fog that’s both a bit eerie and yet intriguing — we can’t seem to help it, but we want to see what appears from it.</p>
<p id="L93OGJ">Surprisingly, the future of computing may actually be one of those things. But, in this case, its emergence shouldn’t be seen as frightening, but instead, as a very exciting and intriguing new development. I’m talking specifically about the relatively new, but little understood, concept of “fog computing.”</p>
<p id="YZFNpg">The basic idea of fog computing is to leverage the key new software technologies, processes and applications built to take advantage of cloud computing infrastructure, but deployed on computing hardware closer to the edge of the network. Thus, it’s about bringing the cloud close to the ground — hence “fog.”</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="LrinFu"><q>Fog computing brings together just about every tech buzzword you’ve likely heard over the last few years: Cloud, edge, IoT, AI, virtualization, blockchain, containers, DevOps, 5G, analytics, autonomous cars, smart cities ...</q></aside></div>
<p id="gV1ncS">What’s fascinating about the concept of fog computing is that it brings together just about every major tech buzzword that you’ve likely heard over the last few years into one place. Cloud, edge, IoT, AI, virtualization, blockchain, containers, DevOps, 5G, analytics, autonomous cars, smart cities and more all come together in fog computing, as do several other lesser known but critically important concepts like TSN (time-sensitive networking — essentially a time-prioritized version of wired Ethernet), distributed computing (where computing applications are split across multiple environments) and IT-OT collaboration (that is, IT department and operations technology departments working together to solve real-world problems).</p>
<p id="fVr0TC">In fact, despite its somewhat hazy definition, fog computing leverages and even unifies a surprising number of these important and cutting-edge technologies into a comprehensive whole. To be sure, not every kind of computing application is, nor will need to be thought of as, a “fog computing” opportunity, but a lot of the most interesting ones in business environments are going to be.</p>
<p id="J38c29">Fog computing isn’t being described and discussed just because it’s an interesting concept, either. Products and services are being built for it because of real-world problems. As I discussed in a <a href="https://techpinions.com/edge-computing-could-weaken-the-cloud/51293">previous column</a> a few weeks back, we’re starting to witness a massive shift away from the centralized computing model that enabled the cloud and toward the distribution of more computing power back out to the edge of the network. The reason for this is that big-picture applications like autonomous driving, smart cities, smart agriculture, smart homes and even remote medicine all have requirements that can’t always be addressed by the cloud in its current form.</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="e4ofc7"><q>We’re seeing a massive shift away from the centralized computing model that enabled the cloud and toward the distribution of more computing power back out to the edge of the network.</q></aside></div>
<p id="yW2Pjj">Issues such as latency (small time delays), security, network reliability, performance, privacy and many others are extremely difficult to completely overcome in centralized cloud computing models. As a result, companies are both reshaping and reworking traditional data center computing components, as well as building completely new types of hardware, to bring computing elements that previously only existed within the cloistered confines of data centers out to new types of devices and new types of environments. At the same time, software is being rethought, rearchitected and freshly built to bring applications from the cloud out onto the edge of the network.</p>
<p id="czvCuP">One of the many fascinating outcomes from this development is rethinking where and in what forms this new distributed computing hardware environment will exist. For example, can and should computing elements be integrated into network equipment (built by traditional network vendors) that sits out at the edge of the radio network? Or should we start to see new types of micro-sized data centers (built by more traditional computing companies) get deployed into entirely new types of places? The answer, of course, is that both are likely to happen, leading to some interesting new competitive situations.</p>
<p id="3lP22N">From a software perspective, the challenges are figuring out how the kinds of complex workloads traditionally done in big data centers can be broken up and/or simplified. For example, we could start to see things like AI-based inferencing being done on something as simple as a Raspberry Pi circuit board. Doing so would likely leverage Docker-style containers, virtualization and other complex software advancements in entirely new ways.</p>
<p id="T9oJSb">Even with all these interesting efforts, we aren’t going to see traditional cloud, network, data center or common endpoints going away. These new fog computing efforts are typically created in addition to these still-critical infrastructure elements, sometimes through the use of small fog nodes. In fact, several companies have started building proprietary solutions that leverage some of these ideas to create unique opportunities for themselves. As with most web-based initiatives, however, it’s going to take more open efforts — like those being driven by the OpenFog Consortium — to gain more widespread success.</p>
<p id="B0mCTC">Moving forward, though, it’s becoming surprisingly clear that the future is in “the fog.”</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="xW8bwg">
<p id="CREcoo"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="GmnLxW">
<aside id="c2Aov4"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/11/1/16592692/fog-computing-cloud-centralized-infrastructure-softwareBob O'Donnell2017-09-19T15:35:01-04:002017-09-19T15:35:01-04:00Tesla’s remote upgrades to its vehicles during Hurricane Irma are the future of tech
<figure>
<img alt="Tesla CEO Elon Musk" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8wH79OPlaaw-BiB-SvxmYzRZ9gc=/0x2:3000x2252/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/56757335/GettyImages_487524212.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>James Devaney / Getty</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We haven’t seen entire new hardware functions being made available through software upgrades — that’s going to change.</p> <p id="H382Bw"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/what-is-the-future-of-upgrades/51079"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="3RQh0T">
<p id="DSTg9R">One of the most appealing aspects of many tech-based products is their ability to be improved after they’ve been purchased — just this morning, Apple released a flotilla of updates, turning up its iPhone software to <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/19/16328404/apple-ios-11-review-iphone-update-control-center-how-to">iOS 11</a>, its Apple Watch to <a href="https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/19/apple-releases-watchos-4/">watchOS 4</a>, and Apple TV to <a href="https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/19/apple-releases-tvos-11/">tvOS 11</a>, with a <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/12/16277554/apple-mac-os-high-sierra-release-date-download-announced">Mac OS update called High Sierra</a> due on Monday. Whether it’s adding new features, making existing functions work better, or even just fixing the inevitable bugs or other glitches that often occur in today’s advanced digital devices, the idea of upgrades is generally very appealing.</p>
<p id="T6j9sb">With some tech-based products, you can add new hardware — such as plugging a new graphics card into a desktop PC — to update a device. Most upgrades, however, are software-based. Given the software-centric nature of everything from modern cars to smart speakers to, of course, smartphones and other common computing devices, this is by far the most common type of enhancement that our digital gadgets receive.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="TsFZNR"><q>Tesla has offered software-based hardware upgrades — not only to increase driving range but to turn on its autonomous driving features — for several years.</q></aside></div>
<p id="u1yyOR">The range of software upgrades made for devices varies tremendously — from very subtle tweaks that are essentially invisible to most users, through dramatic feature enhancements that enable capabilities that weren’t there before the upgrade. In most cases, however, you don’t see entire new hardware functions being made available through software upgrades. I’m starting to wonder, however, if that concept is going to change.</p>
<p id="v7hmPG">The event that triggered my thought process was Tesla’s recent decision to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2017/sep/11/tesla-hurricane-irma-battery-capacity">remotely and temporarily enhance the battery capacity, and therefore driving range, of its Tesla vehicles</a> for owners in Florida who were trying to escape the impact of the recent Hurricane Irma. Tesla has offered software-based hardware upgrades — not only to increase driving range but to turn on its autonomous driving features — for several years.</p>
<p id="qQH7H8">Nevertheless, it’s not widely known that several differently priced models of Tesla’s cars are identical from a hardware perspective, but differ only in the software loaded into the car. Want the S75 or the S60? There’s an $8,500 price and 41-mile range difference between the two, but the only actual change is nothing more than a software enablement of batteries that exist in both models. Similarly, the company’s AutoPilot feature is $2,500 on a new car, but can be enabled via an over-the-air software update on most other Tesla cars for $3,000 after the purchase.</p>
<p id="EFwlxr">In the case of the Florida customers, Tesla was clearly trying to do a good thing (though I’m sure many were frustrated that the feature was remotely taken away almost as quickly as it had been remotely enabled), but the practice of software-based hardware upgrades certainly raises some questions. On the one hand, it’s arguably nice to have the ability to “add” these hardware features after the fact (even with the post-purchase $500 fee above what it would have cost “built-in” to a new car), but there is something that doesn’t seem right about intentionally disabling capabilities that are already there.</p>
<p id="q9q9Mf">Clearly, Tesla’s policies haven’t exactly held back enthusiasm for many of their cars, but I do wonder if we’re going to start seeing other companies take a similar approach on less-expensive devices as a new way to drive profits.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="K1xfbv"><q>Tesla remotely enhanced the battery capacity, and therefore driving range, of its Tesla vehicles for owners in Florida who were trying to escape the impact of the recent Hurricane Irma.</q></aside></div>
<p id="k1wwVP">In the semiconductor industry, the process of “binning” — in which chips of the same design are separated into different “bins” based on their performance and thermal characteristics, and then marketed as having different minimum performance requirements — has been going on for decades. In the case of chips, however, there isn’t a way to upgrade them — except perhaps with overclocking, where you try to run a chip faster than what its minimum stated frequency is — and there’s no guarantee that it will work. The nature of the semiconductor manufacturing process simply creates these different thermal and frequency ranges, and vendors have intelligently figured out a way to create different models based on the variations that occur.</p>
<p id="5tpc94">In other product categories, however, I wouldn’t be surprised if we start to see more of these software-based hardware upgrades. The benefits of building one hardware platform and then differentiating solely based on software can make economic sense for products that are made in very large quantities. The ability to source identical parts and develop manufacturing processes around a single design can translate into savings for some vendors, even if the component costs are a bit higher than they might otherwise be with a variety of different configurations or designs.</p>
<p id="G7cx9D">The truth is that it is notoriously challenging for tech hardware businesses to make much money. With few exceptions, the profit-margin percentages for tech hardware are in the low single digits, and many companies actually lose money on hardware sales. Most hope to make it up via accessories or other services. As a result, there’s more willingness to experiment with business models, particularly as we see the lifespans for different generations of products continue to shrink.</p>
<p id="FAhojh">Ironically, though, after years of charging for software upgrades, we’ve seen most companies start to offer their software upgrades for free. As a result, I think there’s more reticence for consumers and other end users to pay for traditional software-only upgrades. In the case of these software-enabled hardware upgrades, however, we could start to see the pendulum swing back the other way, as virtually all of these upgrades have a price associated with them. In the case of Tesla cars, in fact, it’s a very large cost. Some have argued that this is because Tesla sees itself as more of a software company than a hardware one, but I think that’s a difficult concept for many to accept. Plus, for many traditional hardware companies who may want to try this model, the positioning could be even more difficult.</p>
<p id="9aYpcP">Despite these concerns, I have a feeling that the software-based hardware upgrade is an approach we’re going to see a number of companies try variations on for several years to come. There’s no question that it will continue to come with a reasonable share of controversies (and risks — if the software upgrades become publicly available via frustrated hackers), but I think it’s something we’re going to have to get used to — like it or not.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="fkKIXQ">
<p id="lPqnzb"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="m0F6qy">
<aside id="gRwJ37"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/9/19/16335054/elon-musk-software-hardware-upgrades-tesla-hurricane-irma-apple-ios11Bob O'Donnell2017-09-05T17:30:02-04:002017-09-05T17:30:02-04:00We need to stop pretending that the autonomous car is imminent
<figure>
<img alt="Tetsuya Lijima demonstrates a prototype Nissan Leaf driverless car around the roads of East London." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Vzx8w1yDYuZ9emWVAJ3FUAFcfMI=/0x456:2625x2425/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/56528901/hands_free_driving.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Tetsuya Lijima demonstrates a prototype Nissan Leaf driverless car around the roads of East London. | Philip Toscano /PA Images / Getty Images)</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Tap the brakes.</p> <p id="H382Bw"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/the-autonomous-car-charade/50963"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="b1zphL">
<p id="GL6tuu">It’s time to face some challenging realities when it comes to autonomous cars. While consensus seems to imply that the future of driving is nearly upon us, even a relatively cursory check of some of the necessary enablers for truly autonomous automobiles would suggest otherwise.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="uwXoFY"><q>There are lots of legitimate concerns that represent a serious challenge to the near-term release of truly independent vehicles.</q></aside></div>
<p id="TauMgU">From security concerns to high costs to missing infrastructure to car design complexity to uncertain legal expectations and more, there are a host of legitimate concerns that, in some cases, by themselves represent a serious challenge to the near-term release of truly independent vehicles. Taken together, however, they strongly suggest a much longer timeline for adoption than many have been led to believe.</p>
<p id="hYv5Z2">Let’s start with some basics. The general expectation is that autonomy is intrinsically linked to vehicle electrification. The big problem here is that very few consumers are buying or planning to buy electric vehicles. Sure, we can point to the hundreds of thousands of preorders for Tesla’s Model 3, but even if they all get delivered over the next two years, they will represent a tiny single-digit percentage of total U.S. auto sales.</p>
<p id="VrELfY">Throw in all the other electric vehicles from other carmakers, and the number still remains well below 5 percent. Why? In part because U.S. consumers are generally very concerned about getting stranded if the batteries run out. Rightly or wrongly, until we see nearly as many charging stations as we have gas stations, there will be reluctance on the part of car buyers to give up their gas-powered vehicles. (Of course, throw in the fact that there are multiple electric-car charging standards, and that charging “fill-ups” are measured in tens of minutes — or even hours — and you start to get a sense of the problem.)</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="4KPLIn"><q>Until we see nearly as many charging stations as we have gas stations, there will be reluctance on the part of car buyers to give up their gas-powered vehicles.</q></aside></div>
<p id="T6Posn">We could start to see more interest in electric vehicles as second cars that are used primarily for short errand trips around town, but then we run into pricing concerns because few people want to spend more for a second car than their primary vehicle. Plus, the costs and potential impact on the electric grid as consumers start to install in-garage charging systems — yet another expense associated with electric cars — are potential concerns.</p>
<p id="7kvXnA">Even if we get past the electric car issues — or if, as I suspect, we start to see more autonomous driving features in hybrid or even gas-powered vehicles — plenty of other obstacles remain.</p>
<p id="EXrjeo">Foremost among these are security issues — at many levels. First, there is the physical security and safety of both autonomous vehicle occupants and the other people who interact with autonomous vehicles. While it’s clear that great advances in autonomous driving algorithms have been made, it’s also obvious that there are still concerns about how “ready” this technology currently is. The fact that several engineers from Tesla’s AutoPilot program actually went so far as to leave the company, in part because of their concerns about the potential safety concerns of current implementations, speaks volumes about the current state of affairs in autonomous driving systems.</p>
<p id="iUgoTs">Beyond physical safety are the cybersecurity concerns. As has been discussed by many before, enormous potential threats are opened when the connectivity necessary to build and run autonomous cars is put into place. The notion of hacking when it comes to automobiles moves from an annoyance to a life-threatening concern.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="6ikh9y"><q>The notion of hacking when it comes to automobiles moves from an annoyance to a life-threatening concern.</q></aside></div>
<p id="ZWFcB0">Many companies are currently doing excellent work to try to combat or prevent these kinds of issues. However, their work is made significantly more difficult by the fact that modern car designs and internal architectures are both extraordinarily complex — Rube Goldberg-like is not far from the truth — and, in some instances, based on old, limited standards that were never intended to support today’s computing and connectivity requirements.</p>
<p id="dtG3YA">The recent discovery that the CANbus (which is an absolutely essential part of how a car’s various systems components are linked together) is fundamentally broken when it comes to preventing some modern types of digital threats, for example, is just the latest in the long line of concerns about current car architectures. The truth is, we’re way overdue for an entirely new approach to car design — especially for autonomous cars — but the auto industry’s supply chain, infrastructure and entire way of working is stacked strongly against these kinds of necessary major changes happening anytime soon.</p>
<p id="nm0AsT">Even if we’re much more optimistic about the technology work being done within the cars, there are yet other external factors that will continue to act as an impediment to near-term deployment. For example, one of the key technologies expected to enable full autonomy is the ability for cars to communicate with each other and other elements of the transportation infrastructure (stoplights, road signs, etc.), commonly referred to as V2V (vehicle-to-vehicle) and V2I (vehicle to infrastructure).</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="zO2AOU"><q>We’re way overdue for an entirely new approach to car design — especially for autonomous cars — but the auto industry’s entire way of working is stacked against that happening anytime soon.</q></aside></div>
<p id="Mpmuc1">The problem is, even though the U.S. auto industry agreed about 15 years ago to use a technology called DSRC (Dedicated Short Range Communications), there are essentially no major deployments of the technology, and now there are strong efforts to switch to a more modern standard based on the kinds of technologies expected to be part of 5G cellular networks. It’s going to be a long and likely messy battle to get this figured out, and to get the infrastructure built before any cars can start to really use it.</p>
<p id="3pyjzC">Finally, there are also concerns about regulatory standards, insurance liability and other legal issues that could dramatically slow down deployments even if all the aforementioned technical, security, infrastructure and other issues do get resolved.</p>
<p id="agWLl0">The bottom line is that it’s hard to imagine widespread availability and usage of autonomous cars for a very long time to come. Having said that, I believe there are enormous benefits around “assisted driving” features that are much more likely to have a very strong and very positive near-term impact. From automatic braking to more advanced cruise control, there are some great new technologies coming soon to cars that will both help save lives and make our driving experiences more pleasant and more convenient.</p>
<p id="FxxfxN">In addition, I believe we will see real deployments of autonomy in the near future for applications like fleet driving of large cargo vehicles on interstates and other places where the return on investment is much clearer and the risks are a bit lower. Even still, those applications will likely not become commonplace until well into the next decade.</p>
<p id="FnYvhB">But for those predicting radical changes in how consumer-purchased cars and trucks are built, bought and used over the next few years, however, it’s time to stop the charade.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="VhFjDr">
<p id="EtICTW"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="6lfYYf">
<aside id="h2DsTL"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/9/5/16257314/stop-autonomous-self-driving-cars-not-coming-soon-futureBob O'Donnell2017-08-15T15:45:02-04:002017-08-15T15:45:02-04:00Will smartwatches ever become the general-purpose wearables we were told they’d be?
<figure>
<img alt="smartwatch with apps" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jQjcnzO1E8hB1KmZEoYBNVbSYEE=/576x0:5184x3456/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/56206301/everything_smartwatch.0.jpg" />
<figcaption> | dolphfyn / Shutterstock</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Even now, it’s still hard for most people to figure out exactly what these devices are, and what uses they’re best suited for.</p> <p id="8EtyHB"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/the-myth-of-general-purpose-wearables/50818"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="84ztEZ">
<p id="CaOAlu">Understanding one’s true role and purpose is one of life’s greatest challenges. But it’s not supposed to be that way for devices. If they are to be successful, tech gadgets need to have a clear purpose, function and a set of capabilities that people can easily understand and appreciate. If not, well ... there is a large and growing bin of technological castoffs.</p>
<p id="gdNSDx">Part of the reason that the wearable market hasn’t lived up to its early expectations is directly related to this existential crisis. Even now, several years after their debut, it’s still hard for most people to figure out exactly what these devices are, and what uses they’re best suited for.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="rptlRV"><q>We were led to believe that wearables — particularly smartwatches like the Apple Watch — were going to be all-purpose computing and communication devices.</q></aside></div>
<p id="P5vYUO">Of course, wearables are far from a true failure. The Apple Watch, for example, has fared reasonably well. In fact, revenue from the Apple Watch turned the tech juggernaut into one of the Top 2 highest-grossing watchmakers in the world — though I’m starting to think that says a lot more about the watch industry than it necessarily does about smartwatches or wearables in general.</p>
<p id="AXOIUS">The problem is that we were led to believe that wearables — particularly smartwatches like the Apple Watch — were going to be general-purpose computing and communication devices capable of all kinds of different applications. Clearly, that has not happened, though some seem to hold out hope that the possibility still exists.</p>
<p id="yqNT9O">Those hopes were particularly strong over the last few days, with rumors about both a potential <a href="https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/8/4/16099746/apple-watch-lte-model-series-3">LTE modem-equipped version of the Apple Watch</a> coming this fall and a potential deal between Apple and Cigna to provide Apple Watches to their health-insurance customers. Some have even argued that an LTE-equipped Apple Watch is a game-changer that can bring dramatic new life to the smartwatch and overall wearable industry.</p>
<p id="nhPxvM">The argument, essentially, is that by finally freeing a smartwatch from the tyranny of its smartphone connection, the smartwatch can finally evolve into the general-purpose tool it was always intended to be. Applications that depend on a network connection can run on their own, duplicative efforts on the watch and the phone can be eliminated, and who knows, maybe we can finally get the Dick Tracy videophone watch we’ve always dreamt of.</p>
<p id="tawze1">Color me skeptical. Sure, it would be nice to be able to, say, use Spotify or other streaming apps to get dynamic playlists as you exercise, or get texts and other phone-related notifications while you’re away from your phone. Industry-changing and market moving, however, it is not — especially when you factor in the additional costs for both the modem and the service plan you’re going to have to sign up for, as well.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="Oxrawi"><q>Several vendors (notably Samsung and LG) have already released modem-equipped smartwatches, and they haven’t exactly stormed up the device-sales charts.</q></aside></div>
<p id="16TbfE">Plus, let’s not forget that several vendors (notably Samsung and LG) have already released modem-equipped smartwatches, and they haven’t exactly stormed up the device-sales charts. This is due, in part, to the same basic physics challenge that Apple will also have to face: Add a modem to a device, and it will reduce battery life. Given that many people are frustrated with the battery life on their existing smartwatches, having to dramatically (or even minimally) increase the size of the device in order to accommodate a larger battery, seems like a strong challenge — even for the device wizards at Apple.</p>
<p id="hItzRH">The potential of crafting a more health-care-friendly smartwatch, on the other hand, seems much more appealing to me, and the alleged tie-up with Cigna could be a very interesting move. Apple was said to have some very sophisticated sensors in the works when the Apple Watch was first announced — such as a noninvasive blood glucose monitoring component, and a pulse oximeter — and with every new release, there’s increased expectations for those components to finally arrive. If (or when) they do, the health-care benefits could prove to be significant for people who choose to use the device. Of course, the need to report all that data back to your insurance company on a regular basis — as a connection with a health-care company certainly implies — will undoubtedly raise a number of privacy and security-related concerns, as well.</p>
<p id="OOCUMV">Even if those new sensors do appear on the next-generation Apple Watch, however, they will further cement the growing sentiment that wearables are actually specialty-purpose devices that are really optimized for a few specific tasks. Not that that’s a bad thing — it’s just a different reality than many people envisioned.</p>
<p id="VIPC80">In the end, though, dispelling the myth that wearables can or should be general-purpose devices could, ironically, be the very thing that helps them finally reach the wider audience that many originally thought they could.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="Tz3rqb">
<p id="LeLejn"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="XAuhbR">
<aside id="uJ9YuW"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/8/15/16152062/smartwatch-wearables-apple-watch-general-purpose-untethered-health-care-cigna-lteBob O'Donnell2017-07-25T15:30:02-04:002017-07-25T15:30:02-04:00We have unrealistic expectations of a tech-driven future utopia
<figure>
<img alt="Google Hosts Its Annual I/O Developers Conference" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/sSAhbxLAtOlvwPBOr53XdjR0eDY=/525x272:3538x2532/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/55878459/451216630.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Stephen Lam / Getty</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s time to talk about the potential value of limits on technology.</p> <p id="lYu17t"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/the-value-of-limits/50631"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="GYB4W1">
<p id="6Xkoex">No one likes to think about limits, especially in the tech industry, where the idea of putting constraints on almost anything is perceived as anathema.</p>
<p id="zpVDV3">In fact, the entire tech industry is arguably built on the concept of bursting through limitations and enabling things that weren’t possible before. New technology developments have clearly created incredible new capabilities and opportunities, and have generally helped improve the world around us.</p>
<p id="Ppxzbg">But there does come a point — and I think we’ve arrived there — where it’s worth stepping back to both think about and talk about the potential value of, yes, technology limits ... on several different levels.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="w1zjcZ"><q>On the positive side, there’s a sense that technologies like AI or autonomous driving are going to solve enormous societal issues in a matter of a few years.</q></aside></div>
<p id="ctJLoT">On a technical level, we’ve reached a point where advances in computing applications like AI, or medical applications like gene splicing, are raising even more ethical questions than practical ones on issues such as how they work and for what applications they might be used. Not surprisingly, there aren’t any clear or easy answers to these questions, and it’s going to take a lot more time and thought to create frameworks or guidelines for both the appropriate and inappropriate uses of these potentially life-changing technologies.</p>
<p id="vmqk8F">Does this mean these kinds of technological advances should be stopped? Of course not. But having more discourse on the types of technologies that get created and released certainly needs to happen.</p>
<p id="IbV367">Even on a practical level, the need for limiting people’s expectations about what a technology can or cannot do is becoming increasingly important. With science-fiction-like advances becoming daily occurrences, it’s easy to fall into the trap that there are no limits to what a given technology can do. As a result, people are increasingly willing to believe and accept almost any kind of <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/7/25/16026184/mark-zuckerberg-artificial-intelligence-elon-musk-ai-argument-twitter">statements or predictions about the future of many increasingly well-known technologies</a>, from autonomous driving to VR to AI and machine learning. I hate to say it, but it’s the fake news of tech.</p>
<p id="YscWld">Just as we’ve seen the fallout from fake news on all sides of the political perspective, so, too, are we starting to see that unbridled and unlimited expectations for certain new technologies are starting to have <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/7/24/16021630/cash-payments-cashless-mobile-inequity-square-apple-pay-venmo-amazon">negative implications</a> of their own. Essentially, we’re starting to build unrealistic expectations for a tech-driven nirvana that doesn’t clearly jibe with the realities of the modern world, particularly in the time frames that are often discussed.</p>
<p id="QFoPM5">In fact, I’d argue that a lot of the current perspectives on where the technology industry is and where it’s headed are based on a variety of false pretenses, some positively biased and some negatively biased. On the positive side, there’s a sense that technologies like AI or autonomous driving are going to solve enormous societal issues in a matter of a few years. On the negative side, there are some who see the tech industry as being in a stagnant period, still hunting for the next big thing beyond the smartphone.</p>
<p id="73H4M9">Neither perspective is accurate, but ironically, both stem from the same myth of limitlessness that seems to pervade much of the thinking in the tech industry. For those with the positive spin, I think it’s critical to be willing to admit to a technology’s limitations, in addition to touting its capabilities.</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="hajaBy"><q>On the negative side, there are some who see the tech industry as being in a stagnant period, still hunting for the next big thing beyond the smartphone.</q></aside></div>
<p id="dGwEGb">So, for example, it’s okay to talk about the benefits that something like autonomous driving can bring to certain people in certain environments, but it’s equally important to acknowledge that it isn’t going to be a great fit for everyone, everywhere. Realistically and practically speaking, we are still a very long way from having a physical, legal, economic and political environment for autonomous cars to dramatically impact the transportation needs of most consumers. On the other hand, the ability for these autonomous transportation technologies to start having a dramatic impact on public transportation systems or shipping fleets over the next several years seems much more realistic (even if it is a lot less sexy).</p>
<p id="T7adc7">For those with a more negative bias, it’s important to recognize that not all technologies have to be universally applicable to make them useful or successful. The <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/google-glass-2-is-here/">newly relaunched Google Glass</a>, for example, is no longer trying to be the next-generation computing device and industry disruptor that it was initially thought to be. Instead, it’s being focused on (or limited to) work-based applications, where <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/23/the-return-of-google-glass-surprising-merit-in-failure-enterprise-edition">it’s a great fit</a>. As a result, it won’t see the kind of sales figures that something like an iPhone will, but that’s okay, because it’s actually doing what it is best designed to do.</p>
<p id="3W4Y4A">Accepting and publicly acknowledging that certain technologies can’t do some things isn’t a form of weakness — it’s a form of strength. In fact, it creates a more realistic scenario for them to succeed. Similarly, recognizing that while some technologies are great, they may not be great for everything, doesn’t mean they’re a failure. Some technologies and products can be great for certain sub-segments of the market and still be both a technical and financial success.</p>
<p id="wZpISE">If, however, we keep thinking that every new technology or tech industry concept can be endlessly extended without limits — everything in my life as service, really? — we’re bound to be greatly disappointed on many different levels. Instead, if we view them within a more limited and, in some cases more specialized, scope, then we’re much more likely to accurately judge what they can (or cannot) do and set expectations accordingly. That’s not a limit, it’s a value.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="G25k7K">
<p id="4eE6UZ"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="tXgoqp">
<aside id="JJsncN"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/7/25/16026870/technology-advances-limits-ethics-vr-ai-autonomous-google-glassBob O'Donnell2017-06-06T17:10:01-04:002017-06-06T17:10:01-04:00Apple is pitching the HomePod as a super-high-quality speaker. That’s going to be a very tough sell.
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/b_BCSD-TNr3mQ3af4yBcl9DS3xo=/0x0:2787x2090/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/55123261/WWDC_HomePod.0.jpg" />
<figcaption> A prototype of Apple's new HomePod is displayed during the 2017 Apple Worldwide Developer Conference at the San Jose Convention Center on June 5, 2017. | Justin Sullivan / Getty</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The real question with HomePod will be how good of a Siri experience it can deliver.</p> <p id="oE7Oqw"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/the-overlooked-surprises-of-apples-wwdc-keynote/50282"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="HfTgj4">
<p id="ZWxKcn">For some, Apple’s WWDC keynote event went like they hoped — the company introducing some exciting new products or technologies that hit all the sweet spots in today’s dramatically reshaped tech environment. Augmented reality, artificial intelligence, smart speakers, digital assistants, convolutional neural networks, machine learning and computer vision were all mentioned in some way, shape or form during the address.</p>
<p id="T29Svx">For others, the event went like they expected, with Apple delivering on virtually all the big rumors they were “supposed” to meet: Updated Macs and iPads, a platform for building AR apps on iOS devices and a Siri-driven smart speaker.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="jQw5RQ"><q>Apple laid the groundwork for ongoing advancements in overall contextual intelligence, which will likely be a critical distinction across digital assistants for some time to come.</q></aside></div>
<p id="WzRvkD">For me, the event was a satisfying affirmation that Apple has not fallen behind its many competitors, and is working on products and platforms that take advantage of the most interesting and potentially exciting new technologies across hardware, software and services that we’ve seen for some time. In addition, the company laid the groundwork for ongoing advancements in overall contextual intelligence, which will likely be a critical distinction across digital assistants for some time to come.</p>
<p id="qKw1WY">Part of the reason for my viewpoint is that there were several interesting, though perhaps a bit subtle, surprises sprinkled throughout the event. Some of the biggest were around Siri, which a few people pointed out didn’t really get much direct attention and focus in the presentation.</p>
<p id="RzeTmd">However, Apple described several enhancements to Siri that are intended to make it more aware of where you are, what you’re doing, and knowing what things you care about. Most importantly, a lot of this AI or machine-learning-based work is going to happen directly on iOS devices. Just last year, Apple caught grief for talking about differential privacy and the ability to do machine learning on an iPhone, because the general thinking then was that you could only do that kind of work by collecting massive amounts of data and performing that work in large data centers.</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="z11Gsw"><q>Apple didn’t mention differential privacy this year, but it did highlight that by doing a lot of this AI/machine learning work on the device, it can keep people’s information local and not have to send it up to large cloud-based data centers.</q></aside></div>
<p id="jVKYjW">A year later, the thinking around device-based AI has done a 180, and there’s increasing talk about being able to do both inferencing and learning — two key aspects of machine learning — on client devices. Apple didn’t mention differential privacy this year, but it did highlight that by doing a lot of this AI/machine learning work on the device, it can keep people’s information local and not have to send it up to large cloud-based data centers. Not everyone will grasp this subtlety, but for those who do care a lot about privacy, it’s a big advantage for Apple.</p>
<p id="mYmpKx">On a completely different front, some of Apple’s hardware updates, particularly around the Mac, highlight how serious it has become about computing again. Not only did the company successfully catch up to many of its PC brethren, it was demoing new kinds of computing architectures — such as Thunderbolt-attached external graphics for notebooks — that very few PC companies have explored. In addition, bringing 10-bit color displays to mainstream iMacs is a subtle but critical distinction for driving higher-quality computing experiences.</p>
<p id="q6kyDa">On the less positive front, there are some key questions on the detailed aspects of the HomePod’s audio processing. To be fair, I did not get to hear an audio demo, but conceptually, the idea of doing fairly major processing on a mono speaker of audio that was already significantly processed to sound a certain way on stereo speakers during its creation strikes me as a bit challenging. Yes, some songs may sound pleasing, but for true audiophiles who actually want to hear what the artist and producer intended, Apple’s positioning of the HomePod as a super-high-quality speaker is going to be a very tough sell.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="cYQ8Id"><q>The real question with HomePod will be how good of a Siri experience it can deliver.</q></aside></div>
<p id="hPN35m">Of course, the real question with HomePod will be how good of a Siri experience it can deliver. Though it’s several months from shipping, I was a bit surprised there weren’t more demos of interactions with Siri on the HomePod. If that doesn’t work well, the extra audio enhancements won’t be enough to keep the product competitive in what is bound to be a rapidly evolving smart speaker market.</p>
<p id="o5sSU0">The real challenge for Apple and other major tech companies moving forward is that many of the enhancements and capabilities they’re going to introduce over the next several years are likely to be a lot subtler refinements of existing products or services. In fact, I’ve seen and heard some say that’s what they felt about this year’s WWDC keynote. Things like making smart assistants smarter and digital speakers more accurate require a lot of difficult engineering work that few people can really appreciate. Similarly, while AI and machine learning sound like exotic, exciting technological breakthroughs, their real-world benefits should actually be subtle but practical extensions to things like contextual intelligence, which is a difficult message to deliver.</p>
<p id="WzFlcC">If Apple can successfully do so, that will be yet another surprise outcome of this year’s WWDC.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="a6CNnq">
<p id="zs17xB"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="wEQ67e">
<aside id="a32Dtn"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/6/6/15747612/apple-wwdc-homepod-speaker-siri-experience-contextual-intelligenceBob O'Donnell2017-05-23T14:00:02-04:002017-05-23T14:00:02-04:00The future of the modern car is actually digital
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Pf-9OysEqhr1hyQ-5QyrPLmXKAY=/291x0:1127x627/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/54911537/MAG_Svahn_Digital_Innovation_Cars_Volvo_1200x627_1.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>MIT</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The technological and business model for autos is slowly but surely moving toward a software-and-services-focused approach.</p> <p id="oE7Oqw"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/the-digital-car/50164"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="zBoAF3">
<p id="tLNJ3d">The continuing evolution of the modern automobile is arguably one of the most exciting and most important developments in the tech world today. In fact, it’s probably one of the most important business and societal stories we’ve seen in some time.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="xWvYHj"><q>If ever there was an industry ripe for disruption — and in need of a tech overhaul — the automotive industry is it. </q></aside></div>
<p id="EHrhyF">The leadership at no less venerable a player than Ford Motor Co. obviously felt the same way — they just <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/5/22/15674398/ford-ceo-mark-fields-jim-hackett">replaced their CEO</a>, despite his long-term tenure with the company and the record-setting profits he helped drive during his three-year leadership there. The reason? Not enough progress on advancing the company’s cars forward in the technology domain, particularly with regard to electric vehicles, autonomous driving and new types of transportation service-focused business models.</p>
<p id="OnNRLk">As has been noted by many, these three capabilities — electrification, autonomy and cars as a service — are considered the key trends driving the auto market today and into the future, at least as far as Wall Street is concerned. In reality, the picture isn’t nearly that simple, but it is clear that tech-industry-driven initiatives are driving the agenda for today’s carmakers. And it’s pushing many of them into uncomfortable positions.</p>
<p id="LZ70QD">It turns out, however, that in spite of the importance of this critical evolution of automobiles, this is one of those issues that’s a lot harder to overcome than it first appears.</p>
<p id="vsvHFf">Part of the problem is that as cars have advanced and various technologies have been integrated into them, they’ve evolved into enormously complex machines. Today’s automobiles have as many as 150 programmable computing elements (often called Electronic Control Units, or ECUs), surprisingly large (and heavy) amounts of wiring, numerous different types of electronic signaling and interconnect buses, and up to 100 millions of lines of software, in addition to the thousands of mechanical parts required to run a car. Frankly, it’s somewhat of a miracle that modern cars run as well as they do, although reports of technical glitches and other problems in newer cars do seem to be on the rise.</p>
<p id="Z02kN8">In addition to the mechanical and computer architecture complexity of the cars themselves, the organizational and business model complexity of today’s car companies and the entire auto supply chain also contribute to the problem. Having evolved over the more than 100-year history of the automotive industry, the system of multiple Tier 1 suppliers, such as Harman, Delphi, Bosch and others, buying components from Tier 2 and Tier 3 suppliers down the chain and car brand OEMs (such as Ford) piecing together multiple subsystems from different combinations of Tier 1s to build their cars is notoriously complex.</p>
<p id="R2YokB">But toss in the fact that there are often groups within the carmaker that are specifically responsible for a given ECU (such as, say, heating, air conditioning and other “comfort” controls) and whose jobs may be at risk if someone suggests that the company change to a simpler architecture in which they combined the functionality of multiple ECUs into a smaller, more manageable number and, well, you get the picture.</p>
<p id="9k0RHS">If ever there was an industry ripe for disruption — and in need of a tech overhaul — the automotive industry is it. That’s why many traditional carmakers are concerned, and why many tech companies are salivating at a chance to get a piece of the multi-trillion-dollar global automotive industry.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="dtss2F"><q>The technological and business model for autos is slowly but surely moving towards a software-and-services-focused approach.</q></aside></div>
<p id="9FqZ7C">It’s also why companies like Tesla have made such a splash. Despite its very modest sales, it is seen as a credible attempt to drive the kind of technological and organizational disruption that many people believe is necessary to transform the automotive industry. In truth, however, because of the inherent and ingrained nature of the auto supply chain, even Tesla has to follow many of the conventions of multiple Tier 1 suppliers, etc., that its rivals use. The problem is that deeply embedded.</p>
<p id="HSTaG5">But even as those issues get addressed, they are really just a prelude to yet more innovations and opportunities for disruption. Like many modern computing devices — and, to be clear, that’s what today’s cars have become — the technological and business model for autos is slowly but surely moving toward a software-and-services-focused approach. In other words, we’re moving toward the software-defined “digital car.”</p>
<p id="BgimKg">In order for that to happen, several key challenges need to be addressed. Most importantly, major enhancements in automotive security — both through architectural changes and software-driven advances — have to occur. The potential for life-threatening problems if either standard or autonomous cars get hacked should make this point painfully obvious.</p>
<p id="3JpTe3">Connectivity options, speed and reliability also have to be improved, and that’s where industry-wide efforts like 5G and specific products from vendors like Qualcomm and Intel can make a difference.</p>
<p id="CpbHcE">Finally, car companies and critical suppliers need to figure out the kinds of services that consumers will be willing to pay for and deliver platforms and architectures that can enable them. Like many other types of hardware devices, profit margins on cars are not very large, and with the increasing amount of technology they’re going to require, they could even start to shrink. As a result, car companies need to think through different ways of generating income.</p>
<p id="kxLqGM">Thankfully, a number of tech startups and established vendors, such as Harman, are working on creating cloud-based platform delivery systems for automotive services that are expected to start bringing these capabilities to life over the next several years.</p>
<p id="LVYF9l">As with any major transition, the move to a digital car model won’t be easy, fast or bump-free, but it’s bound to be an interesting ride.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="V5Hrjj">
<p id="IJTiEG"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="iEJ1Kj">
<aside id="2TLstb"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/5/23/15681058/digital-car-automotive-industry-software-designed-disruptionBob O'Donnell2017-05-17T17:00:01-04:002017-05-17T17:00:01-04:00The next looming battle in the tech world will be based around digital assistants
<figure>
<img alt="A collection of new Google products on a white background. " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/tKaDXlqr2jRt5p-t2wOQPLn9CQI=/100x0:1700x1200/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/54830671/20161004-google-family-hero-shot.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Google Assistant is headed to the iPhone to take on Apple’s Siri. | Google</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Like Google Assistant, which is moving to iOS to take on Siri, digital assistants may completely devalue the platforms they run on.</p> <p id="oE7Oqw"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/digital-assistants-drive-new-meta-platform-battle/50084"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="Cad52K">
<p id="ZrT0gy">In case you hadn’t noticed, the OS platform battle is over.</p>
<p id="xynkkW">Oh, and nobody really won, because basically all the big players did, depending on your perspective. Google has the largest number of people using Android, Apple generates the most income via iOS, and Windows still commands the workplace for Microsoft.</p>
<p id="hJnFrK">But the stakes are getting much higher for the next looming battle in the tech world. This one will be based around digital assistants, such as Amazon’s Alexa, Apple’s Siri, Microsoft’s Cortana and Google’s Assistant (which is <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/5/17/15654076/google-io-biggest-announcements-keynote-highlights-2017">rolling out to iOS</a>), among others.</p>
<p id="wkgjc3">While much of the initial focus is, rightfully, around the voice-based computing capabilities of these assistants, I believe we’re going to see these assistants expand into text-driven chatbots, AI-driven autonomous software helpers and, most importantly, de facto digital gateways that end up tieing together a wide range of smart and connected devices.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="PA0D5k"><q>These digital assistants have the potential to completely devalue the underlying platforms on which they run.</q></aside></div>
<p id="iLKAuD">From smart homes to smart cars, as well as smartphones, PCs and wearables that span both our personal and professional lives, these digital assistants will (ideally) provide the consistent glue that brings together computing, services and much more across many disparate OS platforms. In short, they should be able to make our lives better organized, and our devices and services much easier to use. That’s why these assistants are so strategically important, and why so many other companies — from Facebook to Samsung — are working on their own variations.</p>
<p id="dO3hn4">Another fascinating aspect of these digital assistants is that they have the potential to completely devalue the underlying platforms on which they run. If I can use, say, Alexa across an iPhone, a Windows PC, my smart home components and a future connected car, where does the unique value of iOS or Windows 10 go? Out the door ...</p>
<p id="AsyuO9">This overarching importance and distancing from different platforms is why I refer to these assistants as the preeminent example of a “meta-platform,” something that provides the potential for expansion, via both APIs for new software development, and the connectivity of a regular platform, but at a layer “above” a traditional OS.</p>
<p id="9nYdj0">With that thought in mind, it’s interesting to look at recent data that Technalysis Research collected as part of a nearly 1,000-person survey of U.S. consumers on usage of digital assistants on smartphones, PCs and the hottest new entrant, smart speakers such as Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home.</p>
<p id="6OLlKN">As mentioned earlier, in their present incarnations, these digital assistants are primarily focused on voice-based computing and the kinds of applications that are best suited for simple voice-driven queries. To get a better sense of how these assistants are used, respondents were asked in separate questions how often (or even if) they used digital assistants on smart speakers (such as Amazon Echo), smartphones and PCs. The results were combined into the chart below:</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/moaOZYqV3nie1yMngw16_AQLOK4=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8535463/Smart_Assistant_Usage_by_Device_Chart.png">
</figure>
<p id="MKN6bK">What’s fascinating is that, even though the smart speaker category is relatively new (the Echo is less than two years old) and Siri, the first smartphone-based digital assistant, arrived in 2011, it’s clear that people with access to a smart speaker like Echo (around 14 percent of U.S. households, <a href="https://techpinions.com/getting-smart-about-smart-speakers/50013">according to the survey results</a>) are using digital assistants significantly more than those with smartphones.</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="ozgEHN"><q>If you want to be relevant in these early stages of the digital assistant battle, you need to have a dedicated smart speaker offering.</q></aside></div>
<p id="uBsH9t">While it’s tempting to suggest that this may be due to the perceived accuracy of the different assistants, in a separate question about accuracy, the rankings for Alexa, Siri and Google’s Assistant were nearly identical, meaning there was no one clear favorite. Instead, these results suggest that a dedicated-function device placed in a central location within a home simply invites more usage. Translation: If you want to be relevant in these early stages of the digital assistant battle, you need to have a dedicated smart speaker offering.</p>
<p id="gZQ1yl">Of course, the other challenge is that most people are now increasingly exposed to and use multiple digital assistants from multiple players. In fact, 56 percent of the respondents acknowledged that they at least occasionally (and some frequently) used multiple assistants, with differing degrees of comfort in making the switch between them. The largest single group, 26 percent, said they were loyal to and consistently used one assistant and ignored the others, but as competition in this area heats up, those loyalties are likely to be tested.</p>
<p id="LdQFFU">Digital assistant technology has a long way to go, and their current usage patterns only provide some degree of insight into what their long-term capabilities will be. Nevertheless, it’s clear that the meta-platform battle for digital assistants is going to have a significantly broader and longer-lasting impact than the OS platform battles of yore. That, by itself, will make them essential to watch and understand.</p>
<p id="iftktN">(If you’re interested in learning more about the complete study, please feel free to contact me at <a href="mailto:bob@technalysisresearch.com">bob@technalysisresearch.com</a>.)</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="cOdSUB">
<p id="PRLT3I"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="pB4dWb">
<aside id="1XixeT"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/5/17/15655458/digital-assistants-voice-activated-operating-systems-alexa-siri-cortana-iosBob O'Donnell2017-05-09T14:45:34-04:002017-05-09T14:45:34-04:00Amazon’s new Echo Show proves that the smart home phenomenon is finally moving into the mainstream
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VZUBDKK4f4KpsdeSjQ5OfnTczBk=/25x0:633x456/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/54697983/Echo_Show1.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Amazon’s new voice-responsive Echo Show speaker features a touchscreen. | Amazon</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One-quarter of U.S. households now have at least one piece of smart home gear.</p> <p id="oE7Oqw"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/getting-smart-about-smart-speakers/50013"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="FL1YyI">
<p id="kEfMIe">Timing, they say, is everything. Particularly if you’ve got something to add to an already hot topic that’s reaching peak-fever levels this week.</p>
<p id="0utNmK">I’m talking, of course, about smart speakers, such as <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/4/26/15436228/amazon-echo-look-alexa-camera-video">Amazon’s expanding Echo line</a> of products, Google’s Home, the unusual C by GE Sol smart lamp and the new Microsoft-driven Invoke coming from Harmon Kardon, which is now a division of Samsung.</p>
<p id="fIOjXt">Having just fielded, a little more than a week ago, a brand new Technalysis Research study to 1,000 US consumers who own at least some smart home devices, I have some fresh data to inject into the conversation.</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="Z6UkC5"><q>One-quarter of U.S. households now have at least one piece of smart home gear.</q></aside></div>
<p id="Y6bJ0Q">To set the stage, it’s interesting to note that about one-quarter of U.S. households now have at least one piece of smart home gear in their possession, according to the study. From smart light bulbs and connected door locks to home security cameras and beyond, it appears that the smart home phenomenon is finally moving into the mainstream.</p>
<p id="ZrjjIn">Much of that reach, it turns out, is due to recent purchases of smart speakers. In fact, the category is by far the most popular smart home device now in use, with 56 percent of those households reporting that they own and use a smart speaker, and 60 percent of those purchases occurring in the last six months. (Smart thermostats were the second-most common device at 44 percent, with smart light bulbs third at 30 percent.)</p>
<p id="cTgCpX">And use them they do. One-half of the smart-speaker-owning respondent base said they use it at least daily (just under one quarter said they use it multiple times per day), and another 39 percent said they engage with it several times a week. As for what they ask their smart speaker, there are some fascinating differences between user ages, but the top five requests across the entire respondent base are (in order) to play music, for the weather, for news, for basic facts or trivia, and for calendar or scheduling information.</p>
<p id="aBen7Z">Interestingly, despite the increased usage, the reactions to these devices are decidedly mixed. Smart speakers managed to garner the top spot in both the list of favorite smart home products that respondents own, as well as the list of least favorite smart home products they own. Go figure.</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="CvDjA8"><q>The top applications users want with a device like Amazon’s new Echo Show were clocks or timers, calendar information, weather or news headlines, and media information, such as album art.</q></aside></div>
<p id="mNb42N">Actually, when you dig into the reasons why they felt that way, it’s clear that most consumers see smart speakers as an exciting and intriguing new product category, but one that still needs improvement. The top reasons for why it was their favorite include most useful, most practical and easiest to use. The top reasons for why it was their least favorite are least practical, least useful and hardest to use. Obviously, there’s potential there, but also a lot of work that needs to be done to improve many consumers’ experiences with these devices.</p>
<p id="bCAcRs">As for market share, the results from the Technalysis Research study were nearly identical to the recently reported eMarketer numbers, with Amazon capturing just under 71 percent of current users, Google Home at roughly 26 percent and 3 percent for Other. How those number shake out through the end of the year, however, remains to be seen.</p>
<p id="1kjzUh">One of the key expected developments in smart speakers is the addition of a screen, such as in the new <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/5/9/15592820/amazon-echo-show-alexa-video-conferencing-intercom-system">Amazon Echo Show</a>, potentially for video calls, but also for other applications. When asked about the potential interest in these other applications, respondents came back with some surprising results. Instead of a full-blown web browser, the top applications they wanted to see were clocks or timers, personal calendar information, weather or news headlines, and media information, such as album art. All of these preferences suggest interest in more of a visual reinforcement of the voice-based information they receive from a smart speaker, and not another visual display-focused device.</p>
<p id="GeSNqV">The smart speaker category is still in its earliest stages. There are bound to be many more companies, many more devices, many more enhancements and lots of interesting developments yet to come. It’s clear from this latest research, though, that the category has sparked tremendous consumer interest and will be an incredibly important one to watch for years to come.</p>
<p id="MCDHDW">(If you’re interested in learning more about the complete study, please feel free to contact me at <a href="http://bob@technalysisresearch.com">bob@technalysisresearch.com</a>.)</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="U9Iamw">
<p id="e2tbbd"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="rvDLQk">
<aside id="NbC7Wa"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/5/9/15594724/amazon-echo-show-connected-speaker-touchscreen-smart-homeBob O'Donnell2017-05-02T16:30:02-04:002017-05-02T16:30:02-04:00We’re living in a digital world, but analog is making a comeback
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/JyQ3RilL-LKlwVmv5RqoYHPVIvw=/67x0:4067x3000/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/54586567/turntable.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Matt Cardy / Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Older analog technologies provide the kind of tactile physical experience that a purely digital world has started to remove.</p> <p id="8SJ6bU"><em>A version of this essay was originally published at </em><a href="https://techpinions.com/the-hidden-value-of-analog/49923"><em>Tech.pinions</em></a><em>, a website dedicated to informed opinions, insight and perspective on the tech industry.</em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="Y7L0am">
<p id="RRBESr">Digital isn’t always better. Sure, there are enormous benefits to working with media, files and devices in the digital domain, but we are, after all, still living in an analog world. As human beings, we still touch things with our hands, hear things with our ears and see things with our eyes — all of which are decidedly (and beautifully) analog reception devices.</p>
<p id="5oi7uF">In fact, though an increasingly large percentage of our everyday experiences may start out or somehow exist in digital form, none of our interactions with these experiences actually occur in the digital domain. Instead — though it’s very easy to forget — every one of these experiences happen in an extraordinarily high-resolution analog domain (otherwise known as the real world).</p>
<div class="c-float-right"><aside id="c0odcF"><q>Many people are rediscovering and resurrecting older analog technologies — printed books, vinyl records, musical instruments — that provide some kind of tactile physical experience that a purely digital world has started to remove.</q></aside></div>
<p id="rwxYp9">While it may seem odd, and maybe even a bit silly, to point this out, as our world becomes increasingly digitized, it’s worth taking a step back to actually notice. It’s also worthwhile to recognize that not all technology-driven pendulums of change always point toward digital. As technology starts to advance, logically it should actually start to become more analog-like.</p>
<p id="RRLyQe">Indeed, if you look at the history of many innovations in everything from computing to media and beyond, the evolution has started out with analog efforts to create or recreate certain types of content or other information. Many of these early analog efforts had severe limitations, though, so for everything from computer files to audio and beyond, technologies were developed to create, edit and manipulate this kind of data in digital form.</p>
<p id="FpySx2">For the last few decades, we’ve seen the evolution of digital files and the enormous benefits in organization, analysis and creation that going digital has provided. Now, however, we’re starting to see the limits even that digital technologies can bring for areas such as entertainment content and certain types of information. It’s hard to really see how adding extra digital bits to audio, photo and video can provide much in the way of real-world benefits, for example.</p>
<p id="k7DeW1">Along this path of technological development, many people have also noticed — or more precisely, missed — the kind of physical interaction that human beings innately crave as part of their basic existence. The end result has been the rediscovery and/or rebirth of older analog technologies that provide some kind of tactile physical experience that a purely digital world has started to remove.</p>
<p id="XrcqXX">The best example is probably the case of vinyl records and turntables, which have seen a resurgence of interest even among Gen-Z teens and millennials over the last several years. As someone old enough to have an original collection of vinyl, I should be able to remember and appreciate the potential of an analog audio experience. With decades of digital onslaught, though, it’s easy to forget how good the audio quality on a decent turntable and sound system can be. It took a recent experience of someone spinning vinyl at an event I attended to remind me how good it could still sound.</p>
<p id="dL9YoM">There’s also been a turnaround in, of all things, printed books. Following years of prognostications about the death of print, just this week there was also news that e-book readers and e-book sales were on the decline, while printed books were actually starting to see increases again. Admittedly, an enormous amount of ground was lost here, but it’s fascinating to see that more and more people want to enjoy the analog physical experience that reading a paper book provides them.</p>
<div class="c-float-left"><aside id="0dR4y4"><q>Advancements in both virtual reality and augmented reality are going to become highly dependent on some type of tactile, touch-based feedback in order to improve the “reality” of the experience they offer.</q></aside></div>
<p id="rnkyUZ">Even beyond these examples, there’s still an enormous amount of value that people put into the touch, feel and experience of using digital devices. The way a device feels in your hand, how the keyboard touch on a laptop feels as you type, all still matter. Looking forward, advancements in both virtual reality and augmented reality are going to become highly dependent on some type of tactile, touch-based feedback in order to improve the “reality” of the experience they offer. Recently, we’ve also seen huge popularity toward some older “analog-style” vintage game consoles.</p>
<p id="iC8vFQ">Musicians have always obsessed over the feel and touch of particular instruments, and as our digital devices become the common instruments of our age, there’s something to be said for the quality of the tactile experience they can provide. Plus, in the case of musical instruments, one of the biggest trends over the last several years has been the tremendous refound popularity in knob-based, physically controlled analog synthesizers.</p>
<p id="a37il8">Of course, above and beyond devices, there’s the whole debate of returning more of our personal interactions back to analog form. After overdosing on purely digital interactions, there’s growing interest and enthusiasm for cutting back on our digital time and focusing more on person-to-person analog interactions among people of all ages.</p>
<p id="7P20gl">Obviously, we’re not going to be reentering an era of analog technology, as fun and nostalgic as that might be. But as digital technology evolves, it makes sense for technology-based products and experiences to try to recapture some of the uniquely tactile characteristics, feel and value that only comes from analog.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="6qB7gw">
<p id="ykA6qE"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobodonnell/"><em>Bob O’Donnell</em></a><em> is the founder and chief analyst of </em><a href="http://www.technalysisresearch.com/"><em>Technalysis Research LLC</em></a><em>, a technology consulting and market research firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. Reach him </em><a href="https://twitter.com/bobodtech"><em>@bobodtech</em></a>.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="zKLLne">
<aside id="g7lqHe"><div data-anthem-component="newsletter" data-anthem-component-data='{"slug":"recode_daily"}'></div></aside><p><small><em>This article originally appeared on Recode.net.</em></small></p>
https://www.vox.com/2017/5/2/15518900/digital-analog-rediscover-tactile-physical-experiences-vinyl-printBob O'Donnell