BT to Launch Own "Tablet," But Isn't Aiming at iPad

BT plans to launch its own touch-screen, tablet style computer, which inevitably will be seen as a way to compete with the Apple iPad, though BT apparently is not positioning the device in that way, and the comparison likely is misplaced.

The Telegraph reports that although no official details have been released by BT, the new device will have a screen larger than the 3.5-inch display found on the iPhone, but smaller than the 9.7-inch screen on the iPad.

In principle, the device could resemble the existing "OpenTablet 7," which is more an "advanced telephone" than a mobile device.

The BT device appears something more along the lines of the "Internet appliance" several telecom carriers have attempted to popularize in the past, though building on mobility rather than the fixed-line network. Previous attempts have focused on an easy-to-use device connected perhaps in a kitchen that allows light web browsing.

OpenPeak's "OpenTablet 7" can be used as a wireless, detachable tablet and features 3G HSDPA connections. It isn't yet clear what connectivity options BT will offer, but up to this point similar devices have been viewed as ways to enhance the value of a fixed-line connection by enabling use of new appliances and devices on those networks.

BT positions the new device as a cross between "a mini PC" and "the telephone of the future," which is roughly how the earlier attempts have been framed.

In a sense, that positions the new device as the latest attempt to build a "smart" fixed-line telephone, not a mobile tablet computer.

That will be the big issue. Prior attempts to create such an appliance have not gotten traction.

Shift to Prepaid Wireless Continues

I doubt this is news to anybody who follows subscriber trends in wireless, but prepaid accounts continue to grow, accelerating through all of 2009 and 2010 so far.

Up to a point that might be considered a good thing for  service providers who have made a business of prepaid, especially some of the regional providers.

But it never is too helpful when the "big guys," or at least some of them, decide they have to play in the prepaid segment, as Sprint now is doing.


The new "Common Cents" service is the fourth prepaid brand Sprint supports, after Boost Mobile, Virgin Mobile and Assurance Wireless, which is a government-subsidized cell phone program for people who are under or close to the poverty line.

Under the new plan, customers will pay seven cents per minute for phone calls and they will be charge seven cents per text message.

Wal-Mart is planning to sell phones, costing $20 to $70, in more than 700 stores.

Sprint will also give customers a break by rounding down on the minutes used in order to aattract more subscribers. Sprint says that "with minutes that round down after the first minute, not up, consumers get more minutes for their money."

In the first quarter of 2010, Sprint lost 578,000 postpaid subscribers. But it gained 348,000 prepaid customers.

Sprint also positions each of the prepaid brands in different segments. While Common Cents is geared toward value customers, who aren't looking for much beyond basic cell phone and texting service, Virgin Mobile's and Boost Mobile's services offer more data-centric plans that target the youth market.

TheVirgin Mobile and Boost brands have been offering flat-rate pricing for all-you-can-eat plans for $50 a month. Soon Virgin Mobile will also offer a $25 plan that comes with unlimited texting, e-mail, and Web surfing, plus 300 minutes a month of voice service. For $40 a month, customers can get 1,200 voice minutes.

Channel Conflict Develops in Mobile App Store Ecosystem

Channel conflict is an almost-inevitable by-product of complex ecosystems. A recent survey suggests channel conflict already is rising in the mobile application store ecosystem. A survey of 400 developers by Evans Data Corp. recently found that 80 percent of developers in North America think they should receive more than 70 percent of the revenue generated by their apps in an app store.

Of course, when Google launched its Android Market, the company pointed out that  "developers will get 70 percent of the revenue from each purchase; the remaining amount goes to carriers and billing settlement fees."

"Google does not take a percentage," the company said. "We believe this revenue model creates a fair and positive experience for users, developers, and carriers." But what is fair from Google's point of view might not be viewed the same way by developers or carriers.

That's channel conflict.

link

Facebook To Create Ad Network?

It is widely believed that Facebook will soon follow the AdSense playbook by introducing an off-property ad network. They’ll try to use their strong base of advertisers to dominate intent-generating ads the way AdSense dominated intent harvesting ads.

Facebook Is About To Try To Dominate Display Ads The Way Google Dominates Text Ads

Apple Offers "Curated Computing," Not "Open"

The conventional wisdom is that open and standardized platforms are better than closed platforms, for any number of practical reasons, ranging from cost speed and speedier innovation to applications richness. For some, that is the importance of the "network neutrality" debate, though oddly, innovation arguments can be made on both sides, or all sides, of the argument.

But Apple always has been the salient exception to the "open and standards based" rule. In the past world, where Apple as a PC manufacturer and had three percent to four percent market share, that might not have mattered much. In today's world, where Apple emerged from nowhere to dominate the MP3 player market, then reshaped the mobile handset market and seems to be on the cusp of validating a new market for tablet devices, Apple's approach will be more important.

The iPad might be a new kind of PC, or might reshape existing devices; it is hard to tell at this point which future is more likely. But either way, Apple is creating what might be called "curated computing," where choice is deliberately limited to improve end user experience, says Forrester Research analyst  Sarah Rotman Epps.

Curated computing is perhaps a new mode of computing in which choice is constrained to deliver more relevant, less complex experiences, says Rotman Epps, in some ways resembling the old AOL approach, or even mobile service provider "walled garden" portals. You might argue that those approaches do not seem to have worked too well, but Apple always seems to be the exception to the rule.

It might be a bit of a stretch, but the analogy might be that a PC is a general-purpose computing platform, while an iPad is something more like an iPod. That is not to say iPad users cannot send and receive email and surf the Web, but simply that the principle is that "general purpose" computing is not the point.

Rather, users default to curated applications as the primary use mode, with Web surfing, email and other experiences being somewhat secondary. Put another way, where the Web is the default mode for most Internet-connected computing devices, the application is more the default mode for iPhones and iPads.

The broader question always seems to come back to the issue of how much choice users really want, and how much experience is enhanced when choices are limited. Apple always has delivered an enhanced end user experience precisely because its hardware choices were limited to "my way or the highway."

In all likelihood, should the tablet trend establish that there is a discrete new class of devices and behaviors suitable to less "general purpose" computing and more "content consumption," then curated experiences might be viable in a way that would defy the historical failures of walled garden approaches.

Should that prove to be the case, at least some in the mobile ecosystem might have to rethink the historic preference for open and standards-based development and "run time" environments.

Is Internet Access a Common Carrier Service?

On May 6th America’s Federal Communications Commission announced a plan to classify the last mile of Internet access as a “telecommunications service”; it is currently classified as an “information service."

That raises a thorny question: is Internet access really a utility, rather than an information service? In other words, is broadband access more like electricity than television or radio or publishing? It matters how the question is answered.

Since the 1930s providers of telecommunications services in America have been obliged to agree on rates with the FCC. They cannot discriminate among customers or traffic, and they have to contribute to a fund that subsidises rural connections. The new plan promises to refrain from any price regulation; the FCC wants to ensure primarily that packets pass from point to point without preferential treatment."

Economics focus: From ships to bits | The Economist

Cellphones Now Used Mostly for Data

Liza Colburn uses her cellphone constantly. She taps out her grocery lists, records voice memos, listens to music at the gym, tracks her caloric intake and posts frequent updates to her Twitter and Facebook accounts.

The one thing she doesn’t use her cellphone for? Making calls.

Cellphones Now Used More for Data Than for Calls - NYTimes.com: