all micro contact rss

Angry Birds Maker to seek IPO—how about a new game, Rovio?

> The company behind the Angry Birds mobile phone game sensation has said it wants to list on the stock market. > > Rovio said in the statement: “The plan is to seek an initial public offering (IPO) in New York, but the specific timing and details are still open.” > > The Finnish firm has recently raised $42m to fund expansion from backers that include the founder of Skype and Accel, an early investor in Facebook.
via [bbc.co.uk](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12788515)
Talk about milking your fifteen minutes for all it’s worth.

Don’t get me wrong. I love Angry Birds as much as anyone else, and I think they are completely deserving of all their success. But I’m waiting for their NEXT great game. I couldn’t care less about Angry Birds: the Movie. Angry Birds: the Lunchbox. Angry Birds: the Cartoon series. Angry Birds: the Birthday Cake.

I still think they wouldn’t need to raise money via an IPO and via lame marketing tie-ins if they had just charged $2 or $3 for their iPhone app instead of $.99. As a game creator, I give them full props. As astute business people, not so much.

You want to be the next Nintendo, Rovio, you’re going to have to come up with more than one hit. Otherwise, the next Angry Birds-level success will come from another startup.

If your test is flawed, it's not up to the victim of your flawed test to correct the error

> Podjarny said Blaze would be “more than willing” to create a new report if Apple decides to apply the Web performance optimization to the embedded Web browser.
via [macworld.com](http://www.macworld.com/article/158628/2011/03/apple_blaze_browsing.html#lsrc.rss_main)
How about you test the ACTUAL Safari browser, rather than ask Apple to change its embedded browser, Blaze? You know, if you perform a study, and it gets revealed that your methods are getting erroneous data, it’s usually then up to the administrator of the test to redo the test properly. Not tell the subjects that they should conform to the test.

Talk about a desperate plea to keep an obviously bogus statistic floating around the Internet. This is as bad as the Consumer Reports nonsense.

I’ll ask again, at what point is Android going to be better at iOS at something without lying about the numbers? Details like browser speed are not even important to REAL WORLD USERS, anyway. A second here, a second there—it doesn’t matter to most people. But if you’re going to claim you’re faster, then you have to ACTUALLY BE FASTER.

AT&T capping desktop Internet access. Cable companies will follow.

> How does AT&T defend the move? The company explains it will only impact two percent of consumers who use “a disproportionate amount of bandwidth,” and poses the caps as an alternative to throttling transfer speeds or disconnecting excessive users from the service completely. Customers will be able to check their usage with an online tool, and get notifications when they reach 65 percent, 90 percent and 100 percent of their monthly rates.
via [engadget.com](http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/13/atandt-will-cap-dsl-u-verse-internet-and-impose-overage-fees/)
This impacts two percent of customers today. What about five years from now? Once we all start streaming all of our television and movies through the Internet at 2160p, how many gigabytes will the average user be downloading a month?

Any sort of bandwidth cap is a huge step backwards for the Internet. It’s a step towards limiting access to only those who have the means to keep paying a premium. It creates, at best, a divided highway; one wide open five-lane autobahn with no speed limit for the rich, and one congested, two-lane, pot-holed mess for everyone else.

But our useless government won’t do anything to stop it.

After, therefore Because

I’m happy that Apple seems to have had a very successful iPad 2 launch. I’m writing this on my shiny new white 32 GB WiFi-only model, and I’m loving it, so the success is much deserved.

And yes, the lines yesterday were indeed long. Which, of course, means we’ll be spending the next two weeks listening to pundits congratulating themselves for having been right about their theory that Apple didn’t allow preorders in order to be sure there would be long lines.

It’s a classic example of “Post hoc, ergo Propter hoc,” which all you West Wing fans will recall means “after, therefore because.” People often make the mistake of assuming that because one event followed the other—Apple didn’t allow preorders/long lines formed—that means that’d the first CAUSED the second—There were long lines BECAUSE Apple didn’t allow preorders.

This is faulty logic, of course. We have no way of knowing exactly what the lines would have been like if preorders had been allowed. We have some idea, based on past evidence, though. The best event to compare this launch to would be last year’s iPad 1 launch. Similar product. Similar time of year. For that launch, Apple did allow preorders, and while the lines weren’t record-breaking, they were significant enough to gather a lot of positive press for Apple.

Furthermore, the differences between that launch and yesterday’s actually would suggest longer lines for yesterday’s launch than last year’s, had preorders been allowed. iPad 1 was an unproven product. No one had spent a year using it, preaching it to his or her friends. A year of rave reviews and talk of Apple’s tablet being THE tablet to get hadn’t happened yet. All the people who wait until the second generation of hardware before buying anything didn’t buy it. There was no availability on Verizon. All of these factors suggest that most likely, Apple has already sold far more iPad 2s than they had iPad 1s last year on opening weekend. Which means it’s likely that lines would have been ample yesterday if preorders had been allowed. If not quite as big as they actually turned out yesterday, at least bigger than last year, which is plenty good enough for positive press.

Rather than making this comparison to the most similar launch, however, most people are choosing to compare yesterday’s launch to Apple’s most recent launch, the launch of the iPhone 4 on Verizon. This comparison is poor due to a number of differences, not the least of which the fact that the iPhone 4 wasn’t really a new product at the time of its launch. In fact, those two launches had very little in common, if you think about it.

And, on top of all these poor comparisons and evidence that is circumstantial, we still can’t deduce Apple’s INTENT regardless. Just because there were lines, that doesn’t mean Apple wanted to guarantee that. I would and have argued that lines were already guaranteed.

Next, consider these facts:

  • Apple appears have sold out the iPad 2 in most stores, and most partner stores are sold out as well.
  • Apple started allowing iPad 2 online orders earlier than expected yesterday, and almost immediately, the wait time jumped from 2-5 days to 2-3 weeks.
  • Apple is launching iPad 2 in several more countries in two weeks.

Given this, I’d say it’s likely that Apple is having trouble meeting demand for this product, and will continue having this problem for a while.

Given that Apple chose to launch in more physical store locations than ever before, coupled with the fact that they chose to launch on a Friday night, both choices that SHRUNK lines, rather than added to them, I’d venture a guess that limited supply was a far more likely reason for choosing not to allow web preorders. After all, if hundreds of thousands of people ordered via the web, and then a lot of people showed up to wait in line, and there weren’t a lot of iPads to go around, that means a lot of angry people would go home empty handed after a long day of waiting. Better to manage expectations and let the web orderers know upfront they would have to wait than to send store goers home empty handed. They chose the lesser of two evils.

Remember a few weeks ago, when John Gruber suggested never betting against Apple doing what’s best for itself and its users over all else? This philosophy most definitely applies to the retail strategy. I know, because I worked there a long time ago.

I guess what I’m saying is that it’s more likely that Apple knew lines would be long, and therefore didn’t allow preorders to ensure it had enough stock to meet demand in the most locations. As opposed to Apple fearing short lines, and therefore limiting buying options. It’s a rule in retail that you always favor the customers who make the most effort to show up and try and buy your product. That’s why you serve the customer in front of you instead of answering the phone. Same goes here. Serve the people who are impatient enough to show up in line. They are the most likely to sing your praises to others. People who wanted to sit at home and order from their couch can wait a few extra days or weeks.

But, as our Latin phrase above reminds us, we’ll never know any of this for sure. Ron Johnson and Tim Cook aren’t about to send out a press release.

Friday at 5pm to MAXIMIZE lines? Are people thinking this through at all?

> There have been lines for every iPhone release. In April 2010 there were lines for the original iPad. February 2011 Verizon did there biggest sales day in history of Verizon iPhone pre-sales. But, when the the Verizon iPhone went on sale there were no lines. > > I think the choice to offer online orders at the same time as the sale date, and to have a Friday at 5:00 pm sale time is all to help ensure that there will be lines. Because those lines are the best marketing Apple has. Nothing breeds success like success. And nothing says success more than lots of stores with long lines of happy customers. > > During the iPad 2 announcement Steve Jobs dubbed 2011 as the year of the iPad 2. Apple wants to tell the story that the iPad 2 is just as amazing as the iPad 1. Even though it’s the second version, and in spite of all these new tablets and iPad competitors coming out, people are still lining up for this new iPad.
via [shawnblanc.net](http://shawnblanc.net/2011/03/pre-launch-ipad-2-miscellany/)
I continue to be baffled by the number of smart people who repeat the logical fallacy that Apple is not having preorders on the iPad 2 in order to maximize lines. It’s utter nonsense, and Andy Ihnatko seems to be the only person who understands this as well as I do.

How exactly would a Friday 5pm sale time maximize lines? Most people work until at least 5, if not until 6, on Friday nights. And then they go out to the movies or to have drinks to celebrate the end of the week, etc. At the very least, they go out for a nice dinner.

So from a retail perspective, 5pm Friday is the WORST possible time to try and drum up media attention at a retail store. LITERALLY NO ONE IS WATCHING THE NEWS ON FRIDAY NIGHT. Friday night is the most likely time that people have more enticing activities planned.

So in order to generate a line of people outside of an Apple store for a 5 pm launch, Apple is asking people to 1) take off work that day or else leave early. And 2) forgo their usual end of the week revelry in order to stand outside on a March evening and buy a gadget that they could easily buy the next afternoon when they wake up from their hangover.

Furthermore, Andy Ihnatko brought up an even better point on MacBreak Weekly. The notion that Apple “needs” the media attention for this iPad launch so badly that it would have to inconvenience users just to catch a few extra minutes on Friday night’s newscast is ludicrous. Apple always gets good press, and this year’s iPad 2 launch will be no exception. The only thing Apple needs to do with this launch is make sure that it goes as smoothly as possible. In a nutshell, Apple wants the maximum number of people to go home happy that night with an iPad in hand.

That’s how you get people to show up next time.

So whatever the real reason for the no-preorder policy, I’m 100% certain that IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LINES. There will be lines. There would have been lines, no matter what Apple did. The lines are irrelevant to Apple.

Just because some people would have preordered instead of waiting in line does not mean that EVERYONE would have preordered instead of waiting in line. A lot of us LIKE standing in line. We’re weird that way. The launch of the iPhone 4 on AT&T and the first iPad proved that.

The Verizon launch was a fluke. A fluke that was aided by numerous factors that led to fewer sales. It’s not that Apple sold millions of iPhone 4s to Verizon customers, but they all preordered. It’s that Apple simply sold fewer phones for that launch.

How do I know this? Because Apple hasn’t told us how many Verizon phones were sold. That’s your sure-fire indication that sales weren’t enormous. Of course, they could well have been better than Apple’s expectations, but perhaps the expectations were low for a nine-month old phone that is sure to be replaced in a few months. Who knows? What I do know is that iPad 2’s launch will be a lot more like the iPad 1 launch than the Verizon iPhone launch.

Let’s face it: day 1 buyers are nerds like me. They enjoy the social aspect of hanging around with a bunch of like-minded people in giddy anticipation. There’s an energy to a line that’s undeniable. That isn’t going to change for this product.

My guess is that either my original theory is correct, that Apple wants in-person shoppers because they are more likely to be up-sold to a Smart Cover and other accessories, OR that the increase in locations selling the iPad this time around (Best Buy, Target, Verizon Stores, etc.) made keeping the appropriate amount of stock in each store too difficult to manage ALONG WITH fulfilling preorder shipments. We’ll never know for sure, but I trust that smart guys like Ron Johnson and Tim Cook made an assessment based on available resources and decided that this was the way to go. This was the way to maximize USER SATISFACTION.

So if it sounds inconvenient to some people who prefer to stay home on launch day, that’s unfortunate. But rest assured, Apple didn’t sell you out in order to make a cheap grab for media attention. That’s the sort of thing Microsoft, or Samsung would do.