on the day that the iPad lands in the UK Apple has overtaken Microsoft to become the largest technology company by market value, crowning a stunning corporate comeback.
After more than three decades of rivalry between Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, the founder of the iPad maker saw his company take the lead on Nasdaq.
When the New York markets closed on Wednesday, Apple was worth $222bn – short only of ExxonMobil. Microsoft was valued at $219bn.
The moment says much about how technology and business strategies are changing. But it is above all a triumph for Mr Jobs who has consistently defied conventional wisdom and taken big risks in new industries with entrenched powers, overthrowing the establishment in the music and mobile phone businesses and staking out new ground.
This clearly says alot about Apple but what does it say about Microsoft? After 3 decades on top and once so powerful it was viewed as anti-competitive and many thought it should be broken up its stumbling.
Beaten in mobile, beaten in games consoles and with software moving to a pay-as-you-use service in the cloud its truly a gloomy moment for them.
Thursday, 27 May 2010
Wednesday, 19 May 2010
Vanity Fair comes to iPad
Conde Nast continues its promised roll-out of print titles for the iPad. Vanity Fair was released late last week for both the iPhone and iPad at $4.99 an issue.
The mobile iterations follow closely the model used in GQ. The full contents of the magazine can be thumbed in facsimile format when the iPad is in landscape mode.
Apparently recognizing recent complaints by iPad users that the single issue pricing of these apps is multiples higher than a subscription rate, Vanity Fair is giving a price break to customers. Once one buys the first iPad edition for $4.99, subsequent months will cost only $3.99. This is still extremely expensive if you consider their current 20 week (2 year) print copy subscription offer is $20.
Having given their content away online for years for free are publishers in danger of now over charging for it!
Maybe? Maybe not?
I suggest that they are pricing high to capture those who will pay a premuim for digital access whilst using high price to illustrate the value of their print subscription offers.
Remember that however well the iPad sells its penetration will never give enough coverage to sustain a digital only model so publishers have to grapple with subscription versus digital price comparision fro years to come.
I dont mind premium prices for the digital format and low prices for the print subscription model particularily for magazines not least because magazine print subscription prices have been historically extremely low and now is certainly not the time to raise subs prices
The mobile iterations follow closely the model used in GQ. The full contents of the magazine can be thumbed in facsimile format when the iPad is in landscape mode.
Apparently recognizing recent complaints by iPad users that the single issue pricing of these apps is multiples higher than a subscription rate, Vanity Fair is giving a price break to customers. Once one buys the first iPad edition for $4.99, subsequent months will cost only $3.99. This is still extremely expensive if you consider their current 20 week (2 year) print copy subscription offer is $20.
Having given their content away online for years for free are publishers in danger of now over charging for it!
Maybe? Maybe not?
I suggest that they are pricing high to capture those who will pay a premuim for digital access whilst using high price to illustrate the value of their print subscription offers.
Remember that however well the iPad sells its penetration will never give enough coverage to sustain a digital only model so publishers have to grapple with subscription versus digital price comparision fro years to come.
I dont mind premium prices for the digital format and low prices for the print subscription model particularily for magazines not least because magazine print subscription prices have been historically extremely low and now is certainly not the time to raise subs prices
Tuesday, 18 May 2010
Happy Birthday YouTube
YouTube turned 5 years old yesterday.
Its proud parent, Google announced that its video-sharing site now has more than 2 billion views -- a day. Amazing
What's more, YouTube, is the third most visited Web site in the world according to Alexa and offers local versions in 23 countries across 24 different languages (70% of its traffic is from outside the United States), receives 24 hours of uploaded video every minute, and garners 45 million home page impressions every day.
Whilst it yet to turn a profit its future looks very bright indeed.
Happy Birthday
Its proud parent, Google announced that its video-sharing site now has more than 2 billion views -- a day. Amazing
What's more, YouTube, is the third most visited Web site in the world according to Alexa and offers local versions in 23 countries across 24 different languages (70% of its traffic is from outside the United States), receives 24 hours of uploaded video every minute, and garners 45 million home page impressions every day.
Whilst it yet to turn a profit its future looks very bright indeed.
Happy Birthday
Monday, 17 May 2010
FreeIndyStandard?
Interesting to see that while the rest of the media industry stresses about digital strategy, convergence and up and coming technology driven consumer trends, the Lebedev's are focusing very much on the nuts and bolts of the "old" media world.
We've been suggesting for a while that the Independent and Standard would end up sharing editorial resource, though in our view, it may go further than the reports this morning that the process may be starting. Currently this looks likely to extend to a shared foreign reporting presence at the World Cup, cutting the cost of content generation for both loss making titles.
Well, it makes sense, and would be a good start in combining the newsroom. Rolling forwards, would Standard readers mind if their content was written with an Independent hat on? Probably not, but vice versa?
Reports also that the Indy will be going free within the M25 - presumably piggybacking the existing Standard distribution network. Lebedev is saying that the Standard should be profitable in 2011 as the new ad reveneues gained since the Standard went free are starting to beat previous combined ad+circ rev. If so, well done, a brave move that has paid back, and one that I doubted would work out. But, and it's a big but, the Independent spent the best part of 20 years "breaking even next year" without ever quite making it.
We've been suggesting for a while that the Independent and Standard would end up sharing editorial resource, though in our view, it may go further than the reports this morning that the process may be starting. Currently this looks likely to extend to a shared foreign reporting presence at the World Cup, cutting the cost of content generation for both loss making titles.
Well, it makes sense, and would be a good start in combining the newsroom. Rolling forwards, would Standard readers mind if their content was written with an Independent hat on? Probably not, but vice versa?
Reports also that the Indy will be going free within the M25 - presumably piggybacking the existing Standard distribution network. Lebedev is saying that the Standard should be profitable in 2011 as the new ad reveneues gained since the Standard went free are starting to beat previous combined ad+circ rev. If so, well done, a brave move that has paid back, and one that I doubted would work out. But, and it's a big but, the Independent spent the best part of 20 years "breaking even next year" without ever quite making it.
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
So long iPlayer
We've just taken delivery of our first Apple iPad and it is as lovely in the flesh as we've been told.
I dont intend here to add to the rave reviews but rather point out something that startled me.
As you've read elsewhere Apple and Adobe don't like each other and as a result there is no Flash on the iPad (nor the iphone). You know what this means - no BBC iplayer! and what that means is the millions and millions of users who now use hugely popular iPlayer weekly will not ne able to so on their shiny new iPad.
In many ways this is a shame. The iPad is a device that might as well have been made for the iPlayer. It's absolutely perfect for it.
So whats the BBC to do? Two choices:
They could create a non flash version of iPlayer for the soon to be millions of iPad customers or as is more likely stick with Adobe and lose the custom of the iPad crowd.
So long iPlayer my loyalty is with the iPad.
I dont intend here to add to the rave reviews but rather point out something that startled me.
As you've read elsewhere Apple and Adobe don't like each other and as a result there is no Flash on the iPad (nor the iphone). You know what this means - no BBC iplayer! and what that means is the millions and millions of users who now use hugely popular iPlayer weekly will not ne able to so on their shiny new iPad.
In many ways this is a shame. The iPad is a device that might as well have been made for the iPlayer. It's absolutely perfect for it.
So whats the BBC to do? Two choices:
They could create a non flash version of iPlayer for the soon to be millions of iPad customers or as is more likely stick with Adobe and lose the custom of the iPad crowd.
So long iPlayer my loyalty is with the iPad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)