Tampilkan postingan dengan label Mark Henley. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Mark Henley. Tampilkan semua postingan

Kamis, 15 Maret 2012

Android: A digital camera operating system?

In a report by Engadget, it is speculated that Samsung may manufacture digital cameras with an Android OS. Currently, it is in the R&D stage--as most technologies are-- and would not come out for some time, if it all. The possibilities of Android in a high-powered camera sound intriguing, opening a new slew of applications to develop and use for digital cameras. Global Industry Analysts, Inc. speculates that digital camera demand will be at 155 million by 2017. For 2012, it is speculated demand will be 115.2 million units. That is significant growth in just five years in what some may consider a reeling industry.

Samsung wouldn’t be the first to develop cameras with Android. At CES in January of this year, Polaroid (of all companies) announced their "smart camera", which is slated to come out later this year. It has complete access to Android Marketplace, Wi-Fi capabilities, among other nifty little quirks. It sounds as though it’s a cell phone with a really good camera...until we see there’s no cellular connectivity.

Samsung has quite a bit to consider when researching an operating system for digital cameras. First of all, as I explained, they have to look at the market of selling physical units. If that sector doesn’t have a strong outlook, the OS will be nearly worthless and won’t be used by many. Second of all, would consumers be willing to pay a premium on digital cameras with a built-in operating system? They may need to wait and see based off of Polaroid’s success. The digital camera has been a generally defined "thing" and has had similar expectations from consumers for some time, whether it be point-and-shoot, or DSLR/SLR cameras.

As we talked in class about Kodak, some students suggested Kodak create the best digital camera. They said it might be achieved with advanced social media capabilities. With the Android OS as a base, this is one way to try and achieve that. However, the execution would have to be flawless. Imagine a mid-quality digital camera with an interactive operating system that had bugs or sacrificed the camera’s quality and usefulness. That’s exactly the opposite of what consumers want when it comes to point-and-shoot cameras. And it’d be one of the quickest ways to lose all credibility as a digital camera manufacturer.

For me, I don’t see how having any sort of involved operating system could do well in the digital camera market. Looking at the 2x2 matrix of product success, it’s low product change and low behavioral change. An easy sell. A me-too product. But ultimately, a swing and a miss. The advantages of such a device isn’t worth any selling price. Even though it’s useful to upload photos instantly and change/fix them on the device, that area has already been covered. Android and iOS have those capabilities, albeit not as specialized or high-quality as Samsung intends. The way I see it, it’s akin to buying an iPod after you purchase an iPhone. There’s just no reason unless you’re serious about photography/music, and even then it’s a marginal advantage at best.

Does anyone else have a different outlook on a new technology like this? It may be my cynical thoughts about phones taking over the digital camera market sooner than we all think. Would any of you purchase a device like this? Could you see how it would work?

Minggu, 12 Februari 2012

Yahoo! still looking for answers

Yahoo! has been a staple of the Internet sphere for years, becoming extremely popular even before a lot of people had access to the Internet. The search function was used by many, and their other services such as Mail, Calendar, News, and Fantasy sports were used by even more. The variety of services they provide is astounding (just take a look).

But Yahoo! has fallen on tough times relative to past years. Newly hired CEO Scott Thompson looks to revamp Yahoo's revenues in ways that former CEO Carol Bartz failed. This article documents the fact that Yahoo! has slipped tremendously to sites like Google and Facebook in selling advertisements on their sites and search engines. Thompson plans to focus on the fees and commissions (e-commerce and the like) side of Yahoo's business, not nearly as profitable as online ads. With 78% of Yahoo's revenue coming from online ads, it will take a long time for Yahoo to adjust themselves.

This approach makes sense considering Thompson worked at eBay and PayPal previous to his appointment at Yahoo in January of this year. Both of those companies rely on e-commerce and commissions on sales to drive their profits and business. Thompson is looking more long-term. He won't be able to turn around Yahoo! overnight, and I'm sure he knows that.

We talked about business model in class and how replaceable companies can be. When I think about how long it will take for someone to fill Yahoo's void if they were to disappear, I instantly think that Google has replaced it and does it much better. Of course Yahoo! is a player in that market, but the impact they make can be replaced fairly easily. Also, who will miss Yahoo? Personally, I wouldn't (let me know in the comments if you would). To me, Yahoo's services are uninspiring and slow. They offer nothing that I can't find elsewhere. The answers to these questions are the basis of my concerns for Yahoo! and its future.

In my mind, Yahoo! has reached its potential. Their service offerings are great...if we were in 2007. As we've seen, the Internet moves extremely fast, and Yahoo! was at the top for some time. But other sites (mainly Google) has upped the ante for free online services. The marketplace is as competitive as ever; Yahoo! might not have been ready for it. It seems as though Yahoo! has fallen in the trap of following the leader since Google and Yahoo! have a very similar revenue and service model. And when they are up against someone like Google, they will lose that battle every time.

Furthermore, Yahoo's chairman AND co-founder resigned from the board last week. That fact alone makes me extremely weary of the way this company is going.

I know that this post has bashed Yahoo!, but this is not to say it's a bad company. Their industry is extremely tough and they still stay profitable and have a rather large customer base (who hasn't used it?). Yahoo! expects more though, and I can't wait to see how Yahoo! looks in five or ten years.

Sources: WSJ