It’s beyond time for an Internet Computer.

Steve Jobs wanted the original iMac to be an internet computer, that is without a built in Hard Drive. Jon Rubinstein said, in 1998, the network computer just didn’t work…there wasn’t enough bandwidth.

In many ways, and for most of our usage, that restriction is no longer the case.

Perhaps the iPad + iCloud is that vision come to light (or the Google Chromebook).

But what if you don’t want to use an iPad a Chromebook or have your data in iCloud or with Google? And what if you use multiple devices to access your information, and they aren’t all on the same platform?

Personally I’m over trying to keep up with all my data – local, on hard drives and in multiple cloud locations.

I thought Dropbox and related entitles might be the solution. But as with anything backward focused, they end up trying to replicate current experiences – i.e. Backup and Sync. Or like with Google Drive, iCloud and Microsoft One Drive, they buttress the backup/sync mistake by trying to lock you into their existing software and/or platforms.

I want a solution which I can be certain to be permanent (within reason). I want to be able to access all my data from any device. I want to be able to manage my data just as I would only desktop or laptop computer. And I want it not to be simply a backup or sync solution for my local content – in fact, If I want backups, I want to make them locally from the content in the cloud..

In short I want a personal hard drive which I can use from any platform anywhere. It’s beyond time for the Internet Computer.



Think about it this way: if you save yourself the replacement cost of three lost adapters, you’ve paid for an AppleTV

Great piece from Fraser Speirs on Apple’s WWDC Announcements. Including a description of the impacts on schools of the exclusion of the iPad 1 from iOS 6 upgrades.

The iPhone 4S: No Surprises


Having Worked at and watched Apple for some time, it has always been pretty clear to me they almost always* retain hardware form factors for at least two revisions. At Apple, I read somewhere once, the first version needs to pay off the cost of R&D in the first revision and if profit is to be made, it will be on the second.

With the epic success of the iPhone and iPad in comparison to Apple’s past experiences with Product Development, perhaps it is a mantra they no longer need to follow. However, as good habits often die hard, this might be one worth retaining.

For those in the technology media and others who have developed some sort of failed Nostradamus principle over the past few months, I’ll leave you with Jason Yip’s question today on Twitter:

I’m waiting for you to show you’ve learned.

* The notable exception is the iPad. I suggest that with the iPad 1 having been in development for so long, they probably amortised the costs of Hardware R&D over the lengthy lifecycle instead


“…one can understand the intense fear Apple appears to be demonstrating towards Samsung. It doesn’t want a repeat of the Galaxy S smartphone saga. It doesn’t want to sit quietly by and watch as its customers are seduced away while its products are blatantly copied in front of its eyes.”

From: A little context, for our big Apple crybaby

I need to see evidence of this “seducing away”. As far as I can tell the only customers the Android platform is “seducing away” are from Nokia and the global dumbphone market.

Though I’m happy to be proved wrong.

As for the rest of the article: Lawyers exaggerate a threat to get a result, the blinkered see that as core product strategy.

A bit like pointing to the marketing as evidence of product success.


The Next Web are reporting that when HP tested webOS on an iPad. It ran over twice as fast as on the Touchpad:

before the HP’s TouchPad tablet and Pre smartphones were even released, everyone within the webOS team “wanted them gone”…when webOS was loaded on to Apple’s iPad device and found to run significantly faster than the device for which it was originally developed.

If the WebOS people knew this was going to be a dog, why wasn’t the product delayed until they had hardware they felt was worthy of their efforts? I can only imagines the Product Owners were cornered into meeting the rest of the businesses demands and these issues were sidelined in order to meet the forecast marketing and supplier plans.

I’ve written before about deciding fast and understanding sooner, but this is ridiculous.

If they made the decision one quarter sooner, HP could’ve dropped a couple of million in penalties from pulling out of Marketing and other agreements and saved themselves a whole lot of embarrasment.

And perhaps still had to opportunity to create a third platform in the iPad segment of the Mobile Computing market.

Stealing from the market, one Apple at a time

When the iPad was released I wrote a post which turned on it likely cannibalising iPhone sales. To date this hasn’t been shown to be true. With the upgrade of the MacBook Air this week, many are considering the same with regards to that product versus the iPad. For example, over on Asymco, Horace Dediu has written another interesting article on this topic today.

While Continue reading