Mozilla Posts First Firefox Metro Screenshots

Given the success of Windows 7 with an initial October release date, it is unlikely that Microsoft will risk missing the Christmas shopping season as it did with Vista. It does not take much more than common sense to predict that Windows 8 will be released so Microsoft can take advantage of the busiest buying season of the year and hardware makers will be in tow to make sure there are enough hardware reasons to give Windows 8 the necessary support to get off the ground quickly. Software makers are making progress as well. Among the most notable ones: Mozilla.

Reading Brian Bondy’s blog, you could easily get the impression that Firefox Metro is already late. Q2 was the initial goal, but he says there is a ton of work left to do. The current release tracker points to a Firefox 14 release, which would be on or around July 17 (if you get confused about the speedy increase of version numbers, consider the fact that Google’s Chrome Nightly versions just hit version number 20.) If we expect Windows 8 to surface in the October time frame, Mozilla is on schedule and may even have time to work on possible bugs.

Bondy has posted some screenshots of the initial Firefox Metro builds, but there isn’t much to see yet. All we can conclude at this point is that there appears to be a working version with core functionality. What we also know is that the UI is more than likely to change as well as the browser does not yet incorporate Metro UI and Firefox UI guidelines.

The most interesting part is that Firefox Metro was not built using the current desktop Firefox version, but the Fennec XUL platform that is used for Firefox Mobile. The software cores of Firefox Mobile and desktop Firefox are pretty much the same, but Firefox Mobile recently transitioned to a native UI and replaced XUL to improve its startup performance. Bondy noted that the Metro XUL build does not exhibit the same problems as it does on Android and there may be some discussion whether there is a an urgent need to move the Metro build to the native UI or not. If the decision is made to use the native UI, Firefox Metro may be, in fact, delayed.

However, the user is unlikely to see any significant benefit from such a move at this time, but simply realize that Firefox Metro could look like and work like a grown-up version of Firefox Mobile for tablets – which makes sense as Metro caters to touch use and the tablet UI of Firefox has been working particularly well in such an environment. That said, we still have doubt that touch will work on a vertical screen as well as Microsoft predicts.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on April 02

Opera 11.62 Maintenance and Security Update Is Out

Norwegian browser maker Opera Software has just released version 11.62 of Opera to the general public. The release is an update to the current stable channel of the browser replacing Opera 11.61 in the process. The web browser update has been released for all supported operating systems, that is Microsoft Windows, Apple Mac OS X, and various Linux distributions. Existing Opera users can check internally for updates if the update has not been picked up yet by the browser. This is done with a click on the Opera button, and the selection of Help > Check for Updates.

It my take some time before the update may be recognized by the browser. In this case, a download from the official Opera website is an option.

Opera 11.62

Opera 11.62 is a security and stability update for the web browser, which makes it a recommended upgrade for all users of previous Opera versions. The changelog lists five security issues that have been fixed in the new version, including two that could trick users into executing downloads.

The remaining changes are mostly crash and bug fixes. The Windows changelog alone lists more than 20 fixes, including a fix for a WebM decoder freeze in the browser, a fix for scrolling problems in Facebook Chat, and a crash fix when navigating the message list in Opera Mail.

Outlook

When you look into the future, you will see Opera 12.00 looming at the horizon. This version will introduce major new features, including a upgrade to Opera’s core rendering engine Presto, support for HTML5 and CSS3 features that are not supported yet by the browser, and out of process plugins for 64-bit versions of the Internet browser.

Snapshot builds of Opera 12 are regularly posted on the Opera Desktop Team blog for all supported operating system. These snapshots are test versions that should not be installed in productive environments.

Reference: ghacks.net

Author: Martin Brinkmann

How Microsoft And Intel May Miss The Opportunity Of The Decade

Food for thought – If you ask Microsoft, Windows 8 is the idea how an aging operating system is modernizing itself and transitions into a new application and usage model for the next ten and possibly 20 years. On the hardware side, Intel appears to have dropped the tablet mantra a bit and is instead heavily pushing the ultrabook to support its core business, while fending off ARM on the lower end with its Medfield processor. While both Microsoft and Intel are succeeding in marketing new products, one could argue that they are merely technologies that already exist and, conceivably, ignore the true opportunity to change the way we interact with computers – despite the fact that such technologies are available today. Both Windows 8 and the ultrabook are stuck in the Now, rather than being guides to the future.

The Ultrabook: Subtle Innovation

There is an interesting dynamic surrounding the ultrabook. It seemingly came out of nowhere. A name that suggests something different than the product actually is, we are now seeing ultrabooks being displayed in local Best Buy stores where the public can get a first glance at a new, much thinner notebook that is supported by a $300 million marketing injection from Intel: For roughly $1000, you can buy a Macbook Air-like Wintel-notebook that promises much faster startup times. However, if you were very critical, then you could argue that the ultrabook is just a faster version of the failed netbook generation, or, depending on your view, a slimmer version of previous performance notebooks.

The thin&light notebook idea isn’t new and came forward first in the 2002 timeframe, when Intel heavily pushed its SpeedStep Pentium processors. If you were to go back in time, you could easily make the case that the ultrabook is simply another evolutionary step in notebooks and is closely related to the Compaq LTE, widely considered to be the original notebook. The LTE was released in 1989. Or, you could draw a line to the PowerBook 100, considered the first compact notebook released by Apple in 1991. Since 1989, the notebook has not changed: There is still a keyboard and there is still a fold-up screen. It has been an idea the industry has been warming up with different form factors and better processors, memory and storage devices for the past 23 years.

Since 1989, mobile computing has seen several inflection points that fragmented the market, but did not impact the Wintel notebook. For example, ultracompact computers began succeeding in 1996 with the original PalmPilot, enabled by a platform approach that focused on both hardware and software. In 2000, we met early versions of the web tablet and the first smartphone, the Handspring Treo, in 2001. Tablet PCs, predicted to replace the traditional notebook, were released in 2001, but failed to change our usage behavior, because they were outrageously expensive and featured software that did not specifically cater to the new hardware. The UMPC was first marketed in 2006, but faded because of high prices, confused hardware UIs and lack of dedicated software. In 2007, the netbook sparked, but eventually declined due to a lack of attention to detail and innovation. In the same time frame, Apple released the iPhone as a distant successor of the PalmPilot, replicated the idea of success with a cohesive hardware and software platform – and a focus that changed from technology behind the screen to technology that is directly facing the user’s eyes. The iPad followed the same idea in 2010 and it is the seamless fit of hardware and software as well as diligent focus on usability that allowed Apple to change the usage model successfully from physical keyboard input to touch. If we forget that the ultrabook already exists as a commercial success in the form of the Macbook Air, the innovation of the ultrabook as we seen it in 2012, is – in a best case – subtle.

Windows 8: Forced Innovation

The history of the notebook teaches us that only software can make hardware successful. The Compaq LTE succeeded, because it ran Windows and Windows applications at the time and changed user behavior. The PalmPilot succeeded because of PalmOS. The iPhone succeeded because of iOS and applications. Can the ultrabook succeed because of Windows 8? Unlikely, since Windows 8 is not built for PCs. It is built for tablets.

If you were to break out the key selling feature of Windows 8, it would be the Metro touch UI, whose huge tiles are reminiscent of the Windows Phone screen and work extremely well in touch scenarios. The problem is, however, that we are using touch on horizontal devices such as tablets and phones – devices we leisurely call “lean-back devices”. You can use them easily while sitting in a coffee shop, swipe screens and write emails while “leaning back”. Notebooks are not lean-back devices, but “lean-forward” devices by default. You need to lean forward to engage with notebooks. Touch is a challenging proposition for notebooks: While touch is convenient to use on a tablet, it is unlikely that we will find touch on a vertically aligned, back-and-forward bouncing screen to have advantages over a keyboard/mouse data input model. In 2010, Steve Jobs argued during a earnings conference call that touch would not work on a vertical screen and that Apple had therefore abandoned that idea.

Common sense suggests that Jobs was right: Touch never worked in the history of computing on any vertical computing device. It is unlikely to work now. Of course, Metro can be used with a mouse as well, but it is substantially more inconvenient and ineffective to use. You could remove Metro and and replace with a legacy interface, but then you would have to wonder where the appeal of Windows 8 will be. The mainstream consumer does not care about hidden benefits such as memory improvements.

Using touch on a vertical screen on notebooks because we got used to it on tablets, is not a conclusive thought. It is innovation that is not natural and appears to be rather forced. Naturally, Windows 8 will break the sales records of Windows 7, because more computers are likely to be sold and Windows 8 will expand to ARM PCs and tablets. However, the true success of Windows 8 will be on tablets where Metro can shine. On PCs, Windows 8 could turn out to me a major blunder beyond the proportions of Windows Vista. Metro will be fantastic on tablets, but it will be irrelevant on PCs.

Merging Windows 8 and the Ultrabook

Touch for software has somewhat become a requirement, because Apple has it and continues to build on it. The ultrabook may have been shown as a prototype first by Intel, but Apple has made it a commercial success, which will leave the ultrabook the role of being a copycat and never an original. The biggest problem of merging the idea of the ultrabook and Windows 8/touch may be that there is not enough interaction between Intel and Microsoft. It is not a secret that the two do not like each other very much and as long as there is a substantial gap that prevents the development of a cohesive hardware and software platform, we will always get devices such as the ultrabook that do not appear to be one unit, but as hardware that does not fit the purpose of the software – and vice versa. Once in a while, we see a product disasters such as the Origami UMPC or MID

The difference between Microsoft/Intel and Apple is the fact that Apple can control both hardware and software. Another difference is that Microsoft/Intel is focused on developing technology and building a user experience around it. Apple designs the user experience first and then builds the technology around it, which, in combination, is a significant disadvantage for Microsoft/Intel. The only way to be able to overcome this disadvantage would be for Microsoft/Intel to create a joint venture with much deeper collaboration to be able to compete with Apple.

Competing With Apple?

However, if that is the case, do we really want Microsoft/Intel to compete with Apple? In such a competitive scenario, don’t we get what we have been getting for the past decade? Macbook copies. iPhone copies. iPad copies. Why is it that Apple is creating successful trends and Microsoft/Intel as well as their ecosystem is following the trend with an approach that occasionally shifts from copying to evolving – and back?

A few months ago, I was in discussions with VCs about a notebook project and it was clear that the entire market is scared of what Apple might do next. Besides the fact that angel investment money for hardware is a tough one to attract, the question I most often heard was “How do you compete with Apple?” HP, Dell, Lenovo and Acer were not even mentioned. A few days ago, I had a discussion with a leading industry analyst about future notebooks and he focused notebook innovation on Apple has well. “You can’t ignore Apple when you are building a notebook.” Really? Does it always have to be Apple?

If you were to turn this argument around, you would have to ask the question whether Apple would have been able to evolve as it did, had it been focused on the market leader, instead of the opportunities the market leader may be missing. The lack of focus on competition is critical to Apple’s success. To a certain degree, Apple even ignores its competition. The same would be necessary for Microsoft/Intel: Only if they can ignore what Apple does now, they will be able to look beyond Apple and technologies such as touch to invent the next big thing. If they stay focused on Apple, we will see a continued era of an industry that is running behind Apple.

The GestureBook

Here is an idea for Microsoft and Intel to innovate. If we consider the market as it exists today, we know that the PC market has a difficult time to sustain existing sales numbers and consumers are focusing their attention on mobile devices such as phones and tablets. In September 2011, IDC published this quote:

“By 2015, more U.S. Internet users will access the Internet through mobile devices than through PCs or other wireline devices. As smartphones begin to outsell simpler feature phones, and as media tablet sales explode, the number of mobile Internet users will grow by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.6% between 2010 and 2015.”

PC sales were just 360 million in 2011, 200 million of which were notebooks. In 2012, that number is unlikely to change very much, as current forecasts simply point to an increase in more expensive notebook sales due to the ultrabook introduction. However, since it is an evolutionary device, the solution could be short-lived for PC makers: Let me quote Gartner’s Ranjit Atwal:

“More worrisome for the long term is that Generation Y has an altogether different view of client devices than older generations and are not buying PCs as their first, or necessarily main, device. For older buyers, today’s PCs are not a particularly compelling product, so they continue to extend lifetimes, as PC shops and IT departments repair rather than replace these systems.“

The takeaway clearly is that there are substantial PC sales that won’t go away anytime soon, but PC makers will have to dramatically innovate to sustain their market and possibly grow again. Supporting this claim is the fact that we are familiar with notebooks as productivity workhorses, but they have become boring in their usage model and are therefore easily replaceable with other technologies. On the other hand, tablets force the user into compromises, suggesting that these may be transitionary devices on the way to a much more capable product with fewer compromises. In the future, notebook models may receive touch keyboards, as soon as high-performance touch technologies without input delays are available, but that may not be the case until 2010 – 2025. So, what UI innovation is possible until then?

Given the possibly transitionary nature of tablets, one could argue that the notebook UI has to evolve, but not follow touch to avoid the comparison with the tablet and rather take advantage of its greater processing power. Option one would be audio input and voice control. However, even in a best case scenario with face recognition support, voice control is only 98% accurate and there is a big privacy issue. Would you want to talk to your notebook on a plane or in a coffee shop? Probably not. Voice control may be a supportive UI, but not the main UI. It may work best in telepresence situations. The other option are gestures.

We have been familiar with gestures for several years now and use the technology withd evices such as the Nintendo Wii and Microsoft Kinect. It enables natural interaction with content, there are no nasty fingerprints on the screen and would easily control the mindshare of a future OS UI. Imagine Google Earth being used with gestures while you are standing a few feet away from the screen. What makes this an even more compelling scenario is that Microsoft has the hardware and software IP, and could build a cohesive platform experience far beyond the Xbox. It could also protect the technology from Apple. What it needs is engineering talent to integrate Kinect into a notebook.

A Kinect-equipped notebook is what we would consider an ultrabook. It is, in our opinion, an opportunity that enables the Windows 8 Metro UI and would deliver the experience promised by the marketing of Intel and Microsoft.

Wolfgang Gruener in Business on March 28

Firefox 11 With Chrome Tools Is Prepped For Tuesday Release

Mozilla is ready to launch the 11th generation of its web browser on Tuesday – and it will bring the long awaited Chrome data migration toolset with it. It’s a first feature that goes much more directly after Chrome and is an attempt to regain users that were lost to Google’s browsers.

2011 was a tough year for Mozilla. Not just in the view that Firefox has dropped significantly in market share and that Chrome has surpassed it. Probably the most damage was done by a rather slow moving roll out of some features that were first created by Mozilla contributors, but were adopted by Google first, stealing the spotlight and leaving the impression that Mozilla is just not able to compete anymore. Mozilla appeared, at times, aggressive only in the choice of its words when it attacked Microsoft and Google, but seemed rather timid when the focus was on features. After a long road of delays, we are now getting a few features that are designed to recoup some of the convenience that is offered by Chrome, combined with claims that Firefox is, in fact, making some considerable improvements under the hood, for example in memory performance.

Firefox 11 is not going to be a milestone release that will attract lots of attention, but there is one feature of particular interest. A few weeks ago, the beta of the browser got a feature that now allows users to import Chrome bookmarks, cookies and browsing history. It’s not complete yet, as Mozilla has yet to add passwords, form data and settings as well. However, the basic import function is now available and should make Firefox more attractive to those users who switched to Chrome a while ago, but may have second thoughts about Chrome as Firefox is catching back up.

Surprisingly, the import feature is somewhat hidden and not prominently featured. Users will have to select the bookmark button next to the search field, click on Show All Bookmarks, choose Import and Backup, and Import Data from Another Browser. This could probably be implement in a much more transparent way and Mozilla clearly undersells this feature for its browser. Also, the imported bookmarks are imported in a folder called “From Google Chrome” and there is no option to automatically organize the existing bookmarks in Firefox. Users making the switch have at least some manual work to do to organize their Chrome bookmarks as they are available in Chrome. The good news, however, is that this feature worked flawlessly on four computers here and Mozilla successfully eliminated a hurdle that keeps Chrome users from using Firefox.

Of course, Mozilla is late with this feature and it has taken way too long to make it available, but it’s clearly a situation of better late than never. With a reasonable marketing push, Mozilla should be able to continue the stabilizing trend of its market share and create a foundation to gain back market share. By mid-2012, we should expect Mozilla to have made further improvements: So far, Firefox 12 is rather insignificant from the feature side, but Firefox 13, due on June 5, will get web apps integration, a new new tab page, the home tab application, smooth scrolling, inline URL autocomplete, automatic session restore and a new incremental garbage collector. At this point, Mozilla indicates that only the web apps integration might see a delay and if the current roadmap will actually translate into an actual roadmap, Firefox 13 could be a browser that Google should pay attention to.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on March 12

Nokia 808 PureView: A 41 Megapixel Milestone for Smartphones

Nokia calls it the next breakthrough in photography: A smartphone with a 41 megapixel camera – three times the resolution of current mainstream digital cameras. However, it comes with huge drawbacks that are tough to swallow and create a problem that, without the 808, you simply don’t have. Here is some food for thought why this phone matters, and why it is a technology demonstration that will end up as a commercial flop.

If Kazumi Saburi has read about the announcement of the Nokia 808 today, there is a good chance that he took a moment out of his busy day and reflected on his invention back in 1997. Saburi carries the unofficial title of the inventor of the camera phone. Back in 1997, he was able to convince his managers at Kyocera to lead a project group that created the Visual Phone VP-210, the world’s first camera phone that was released in May of 1999. It’s quite an astonishing story of a humble man who changed our life – I researched and recorded the material in 2005 for T-Mobile and Tom’s Hardware (you can find the text here). The VP-210 was, from today’s perspective, just as humble as its inventor. The image resolution was 220 x 254 pixels – in total 55,880 pixels – and there was enough memory to store 20 pictures in JPEG format on the phone. No flash memory expansions lots, just in case you are wondering. However, also keep in mind that, back then, flash memory cards were sold in 16 or 20 MB capacities and the typical resolution of a DSC was somewhere between 1 and 2 MP that generated pictures with a size of less than a megabyte.

If you used camera phones in the early 2000s, you know what kind of resolution I am talking about – the kind of resolution that isn’t enough to be even called snapshot-worthy. Those first camera phones, which flooded the Asian and European market beginning in 2003, made it difficult to imagine that we would want to look at such a picture on anything else other than a 2-inch cell phone screen. In fact, CMOS sensor chips makers maintained until recently that cameras in cell phones and smartphones are unlikely to ever escape their snapshot status and rival the picture quality of a decent, dedicated DSC. That may have changed today: Nokia has a smartphone with a 41 MP camera, roughly three times the resolution of mainstream DSCs and more than 730 times the resolution of the camera in the VP-210, resulting in 35 MB pictures. Engadget had some time with the device and already concluded that the pictures the 808 can deliver are simply stunning.

A milestone for compact photography

Nokia does not want the 808 to be recognized just because of its ridiculous image sensor. However, it is what is getting the camera headlines and it is what the camera will be remembered for, at least in the near future. While megapixels do not translate to better pictures necessarily, this is the first phone that potentially can take better pictures than your dedicated, average DSC. Also, remember, you can purchase up to 64 GB of microSD memory for less than $200 today and store more than 1800 35 MB pictures taken by the phone in full resolution. Conceivably, this may be the best camera you have ever bought. Keep in mind that regular 40+ MP cameras can cost tens of thousands of dollars today, if you care about resolution alone – which makes the 808 even more fascinating (even if the image qualities do not quite compare).

Innovation or not?

Social networks were, not unexpectedly, abuzz with the 41 MP camera and especially Microsoft employees seem to feel relieved that Nokia can deliver what Apple and others do not. In the end, Windows Phone has not won much in the market yet and Nokia still has to rise from the ashes, even if the Lumia 900 looks promising. For example, one executive told his network that Nokia does not get the credit it deserves and that true innovation solves problems that users don’t know they have.

Of course, that would be a bit short too describe the nature of innovation. Innovation would also have to accomplish a goal of solving a problem without creating new ones, which the 808 actually might do. Where the 808 also appears to fail is a cohesive user experience that Apple provides in such a consistent manner. As much the 808 is a milestone, it is, unfortunately, an unfinished product that won’t live very long, and disappear just as fast as it has surfaced. Here is why.

User Experience

A shocker is the fact that the 808 does not run Windows Phone, an operating system Nokia is betting its future on. And no, it does not run Android either. It runs Symbian Belle. This is one of those cases in which you scratch your head and wonder what they were thinking. A Symbian high-end phone. Really?

This phone is likely to cost at least $500 and more likely $600 when it hits American shores. We know that customers today prefer iOS and Android – and users thoroughly enjoy those apps they can get through app stores. Phones have become social multifunction devices that need to do more than look pretty and have a large (4-inch) screen display and a fast (1.3 GHz) processor. Without a supporting popular platform, a new smartphone is dead on arrival. With Windows Phone 7.5, the 808 would have been Microsoft’s/Nokia’s first true killer phone that has a feature no other phone can touch. If the Lumia 900 made you wonder whether you should consider a Windows Phone, the 808 would have pulled the customers into phone stores and delivered significant sales. With Symbian Belle, the 808 is DOA. A 41 MP is a nice-to-have feature, the app store is generally considered a must-have feature today.

Earlier today, we heard that Android has reached a milestone of 300 million activated devices, with 850,000 new devices joined the installed base every day.

Bandwidth Strapped

At 35 MB a picture, how long would it take you to burn through your bandwidth allowance when you are posting pictures to Facebook? Let’s just forget for a moment that it will also take minutes – not seconds – to upload such a picture as you would want to take advantage of the resolution of the camera: You could send 6 pictures per month on AT&T’s cheapest plan, and 57 pictures on the mainstream 2 GB plan (of course, you can’t do anything else if you send those pictures). If you exploit the 41 MP capability, you will end up with a bandwidth problem with today’s cellular subscription plans (unless you are using Sprint). The choice is to either scale down the resolution for online purposes, which is silly given the fact that you may buy this phone solely because of its resolution, or to get a more generous data plan, which is also silly given the fact that, in 2012, smartphones have become mainstream and you should really be able to send all the pictures you want. Unfortunately, the 808 creates a data volume with a mainstream application that other phones do not create. Sure, you can bust through any bandwidth limit if you follow Verizon’s advice to watch Netflix on a cellular network, but we are talking about simple still images in this case. In order to make the phone attractive to the user, Nokia would have to provide unique high-volume data plans with this phone, which is rather unlikely to happen as carriers happily cash in on data overages. Imagine using this phone abroad and sending a 35 MB picture to your family via AT&T data plan that charges $20 per MB outside the U.S. A single picture will cost you more than what you paid for the phone.

The Bottom Line: Nice

Welcome back, Nokia. The Lumia 900 established credibility, but it is out-of box thinking that will help the company gain traction again. The 808 is hardly the phone that will fly off the shelves, but it is an impressive demonstration of technology. The good news is that we now know what will be possible in phones in the not-too-distant future: Even if this is not the iPhone/Android/Windows Phone that has mass market appeal, we know that someone will get it right one day. With a popular platform behind it, I will be the first in line to buy a phone with such an image sensor.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on February 27

Chrome for Android: It’s Not Enough, Google

Chrome for Android was released with about 3 months delay (or more than 3 years, depending on your view) on Tuesday. Google hopes to replicate the runaway success of the desktop version of the browser, but the browser is less appealing and less accessible to the user than Chrome, which makes this mobile browser an inconclusive product that, in addition, lacks compelling features over rivals.

I have to admit that I had high hopes for this browser and felt that I was a let down by Google today. It is not (yet) the innovative Chrome browser that arrived with a revolutionary concept almost 4 years ago and recently surpassed Firefox as the world’s second most popular browser. Chrome for Android will succeed as Google can leverage its platform ownership top push it as a default browser, but it is, by far, not a slam dunk, which is good news for Mozilla and Opera.

Understanding Chrome

The value of Chrome to Google comes down to a very simple element: Advertising. Google’s business model is based on selling more advertising every month. The more ad viewers (users), the better. Chrome essentially locks users into using Google search and related services, which secures Google’s core business. If Chrome is successful, Google is successful. Every improvement in Chrome can be broken down to the purpose of making Chrome work extremely well with Google’s products and making it easy for users of other browsers to switch, while providing services that makes it look silly to switch back to something else: If Chrome is updated so frequently and automatically, why would you use another browser? The formula still works as Chrome will be breaking the 29% (desktop) market share hurdle this month in StatCounter’s charts.

Chrome for Android has the same purpose: Users of Chrome for Android are safe Google Search users and Adsense viewers. The more users browse with Chrome, the better for Google’s revenue base.

Chrome for Android: What Works

The new browser arrives with a pitch that promises greater speed, simplicity and sync. I will get to speed and simplicity below, and focus on sync first. Synchronization of browsing data is the single most important feature of Chrome for Android. You can take all your open bookmarks, saved bookmarks, browsing history and settings from your desktop and seamlessly use them in the same way on your smartphone and tablet. It is a feature we have been waiting for and it’s good to know that the wait is over (for some). Mozilla is still trying to figure out Sync for Firefox Mobile, but is still using a way too complicated process. Mozilla had an advantage for about half a year and an opportunity to fix its synchronization implementation, but it seems that Google is now taking the lead.

Unfortunately, for Google, that is the only good news.

Chrome for Android: What Needs Work

There are several problems with Chrome for Android. Lack of differentiators may be the least of them. Honestly, do we care about speed? Today, available 4G connection represent a much greater impact on browsing speed than JavaScript implementations or the availability of hardware acceleration. Simplicity is also a somewhat questionable benefit as I personally find Firefox’ swiping interface much more useful and its tab display much more user friendly than the implementation in Chrome for Android.

A more significant problem is availability of the browser (app). Chrome for Android only works on Ice Cream Sandwich and is compatible with only about 1% of Android devices out there. Google’s decision may be related to the fact that the developers have chosen to use a native GUI that requires Android 4.0 as supporting structure, but this limitation is clearly a letdown. And there is no hope for this situation to change: Chrome will only run on Android 4 and up. Period. Even if this is just a beta app as of now, the fragmentation of Android is a problem and will sooner or later become a serious pain in the neck for Google if it wants to roll out software that simply does not support potentially four or five older Android OS versions that are still popular.

Also, Chrome for Android will raise, once again, questions why there is a need for Chrome OS and Android. The Chrome browser will become the fabric that ties together Chrome OS cloud computers, desktop and notebook PCs as well as Android phones and tablets. However, these are two different platforms and it may have been a smarter move for Google to either develop Android as a desktop OS for entry level computers or use Chrome as an underlying HTML5 processing platform for its phones. Chrome for Android will somewhat help Chrome OS computers, tablets and smartphones grow together, but there will always be an awkward hurdle between Android and Chrome that simply does not exist with Apple’s iOS and Microsoft Windows platform (Windows Phone 8 will use the Windows 8 core). That problem may be more amplified if we remember how often we really use a browser on a tablet and a smartphone. Market research suggests that web browsing represents only 10% of the app usage time on a smartphone. It may be slightly higher on a tablet, but there is no denying that phones and tablets are app platforms and not suited to run a web browser in a way notebooks and desktop PCs do. In a way, Chrome for Android is just an app that you will use if you have to browse the web.

The bottom line: Room to grow

Sync is a killer feature for mobile browsers and Google is lucky that Mozilla wasted time and has not figured out how to make syncing bookmark data and other user information in a more convenient way. This feature alone will help the browser to become the standard browser on Android devices. However, the rollout will take quite a while as only Android 4 and up is supported. Mozilla and Opera still have an opportunity to play ball and compete.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on February 08

AMD Consumerizes: Tablet SoCs Ahead

In its first public presentation, AMD’s new leadership explained a new direction of the company to align itself with an evolving CPU and GPU market. In 2013, AMD will be releasing its first SoCs for desktop and tablet computers. Execution will be key for the company to succeed in a highly competitive market that is dominated by ARM vendors and challenged by Intel.

Rory Read, AMD’s new chief executive officer, did not waste any time changing AMD’s roadmap and realign the company in quickly shifting marketing environment for processor manufacturers. Its former GPU rival, Nvidia is more and more emerging as a leading ARM processor supplier for tablets, future subnotebooks and smartphones, Qualcomm and Freescale are additional vendors that are pushing into the computing market from the low-end and Intel is preparing its first serious attack to defend its core business and extend its traditional markets into the tablet and smartphone area in China in Q2 and in more areas of the world possibly sometime in H2 of this year.

Read and his new executives, many of them with a history at IBM, crafted the AMD’s new strategy with the bet that hardware will be consumerized, converged and heavily rely on cloud services. Consumerization, by the way, is a rather way to describe technologies that are first established in consumer markets and then extended to other areas, including enterprise segments. AMD’s client roadmap lists plenty of new products with enough code-names to confuse analysts and satisfy the thirst of enthusiasts. However, there are two products in particular that are interesting – products that AMD will have to keep pushing until their release.

For 2012, the company announced Hondo, a new Z-series APU that will integrate one or two Bobcat CPUs and a basic GPU. It is listed in the tablet and fanless category with a power consumption of 4.5 watts. This product feels a bit like Intel’s Oak Trail (Atom Z670), which failed to gain ground in the tablet game as it was a somewhat half-baked product that did not entirely play by the rules of the tablet requirements game. There is no information about Hondo, and we remain cautious about its potential impact, especially if it becomes available as a choice next to Intel’s potentially more attractive Medfield Atom Z2460 SoC.

Much more interesting is the 28 nm Tamesh, which will be, next to Kabini, AMD’s first SoC. While Hondo will use the aging Bobcat CPU core, Tamesh gets two new Jaguar cores as well as a new graphics engine. Kabini will get up to four cores, but will be reserved for desktop systems. No information has been provided about Jaguar yet, but AMD confirmed that it will be used in ultra-low power APUs.

So far, it appears as if AMD will be competing in the tablet space with x86 processors, which is a brave move as ARM owns the market at this time and is the de-facto core used by Android products, which has been accepted by the industry, including Intel, as the platform with the most promising future next to Apple’s iOS. When available, Tamesh will be a first-generation product that will have to prove its capabilities next to Intel’s ambitious SoCs as well as next to Nvidia, Qualcomm, Samsung and Freescale. It is too early to predict who will win this fight, but we know that x86 is the underdog today and that AMD will find itself in a battle against strong rivals that will not take prisoners.

Combining an ARM core with its GPU technology may have been not as risky as taking the x86 route, , but this is the area of its core expertise and may pay off in the end.

Wolfgang Gruener in Business Products

2012: The Year The Old Browser Died

January 2012 has been a remarkable month for the web browser as we know it. Those who closely follow the popularity of web browsers already know that Chrome has, according to StatCounter, surpassed Firefox in market share in November 2011, thus rearranging the rules of the browser game and turning it, for now, into a two-horse race. Now, Chrome is beginning to approach IE in most regions around the globe and has reduced its distance to IE, on one day, to less than four percentage points. If the current trend, which has lasted for more than 3 years, continues, then Google will surpass IE within 3 months.

We will get new browser market share numbers tonight, but since StatCounter is nice enough to provide daily market share numbers, it is not too difficult to figure what the result will be, less than 10 hours before the official publication. There is a truly historic trend in those numbers and their impact is largely unrecognized today. The conclusion can only be that the browser has grown up from being an application to a platform that will dominate more and more the way we will be using products and services in the future. A vision in which an Internet Explorer could, conceivably, replace much of Windows is not science-fiction anymore, but could soon turn into a scenario of necessity.

History

There are different ways how to break up the evolution of the browser. I prefer the following approach: Invented in 1992, we saw commercial organizations as well as a substantial number of consumers see interest in the (Spyglass) browser, at the time merely an add-on to online services such as Compuserve, in 1993. Beginning in 1995, Microsoft showed his interest in developing IE and started pushing the software into businesses with customization toolkits and an ability to run IE3 with a simple executable – without the need of installation.

While Microsoft trailed Netscape in browser market share, the game changed in 1997 with IE4, when Microsoft almost arrogantly deviated from the HTML standard path and integrated IE4 deeply into Windows and enabled the browser to run “dynamic” desktop applications. This integration wiped out market share for Netscape, which was acquired (and strangled) by AOL in 1998. Until 2004, innovation for the browser largely stood still, but Microsoft was able to establish IE5 and 6 as browser standards around the world. In 2004, Mozilla launched Firefox, which was developed with some assets of Netscape, and reintroduced competition for IE. Until 2008, Firefox gained about 20% market share and became especially popular with consumers, which led me to describe the browser frequently as a “weekend browser” with market share jumping especially on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays.

Chrome launched in late 2008, stirred discussions, but failed to attract market share until Q2 2009. In 2009, Chrome gained 4.5 points market share, in 2010 8.8 points and in 2011 11.6 points, according to StatCounter, while both IE and Firefox are suffering losses. Chrome’s initial success was mostly based on its promise of greater speed and later a reduced browsing interface, both features that were adopted by IE and Firefox in 2010 and 2011. Combined with its advertising leverage, Chrome has the momentum to keep gaining market share at a consistent pace until it reaches market leadership.

The present

January has been, as mentioned above, a remarkable month for Chrome. Its average market share will come in at about 28.4%, up from 27.3% in December. Firefox will fall about half a point to below 24.8%, its lowest level in 43 months, and IE will drop to about 37.5%, down from 38.7% in December. Over the past 12 months, IE lost 8.0 points market share and Firefox 5.6 lost points. Chrome has gained 11.8 points, a new record for Google. The difference of nearly 2 points went to Apple’s Safari, which is now at about 6.5%.

However, the interesting part of those numbers is in the details. Chrome for example, peaked last Sunday at 30.9%, according to StatCounter, the first time it exceeded 30% market share. By the way, one year ago, Firefox fell permanently below the 30% mark. IE dropped to 34.0% market share on Sunday. On a browser version level, Chrome 16 held more than 27.6% of the market, followed by IE8 with 18.5%, Firefox 9 with 15.8% and IE9 with 12.4%. If we consider the fact that Microsoft would like to get rid of IE8 immediately, then Chrome now has more than twice the (HTML5) market share than Microsoft does in the general HTML5 browser market. If we add the fact that Mozilla is closely following Chrome in browser features (including SPDY and the rejection of Microsoft’s H.264 video approach), Chrome and Firefox now own more than 43% of the HTML5 browser market with their most current browser versions, which gives especially Google unprecedented power to push and reject browser features for the mass market.

The immediate future

IE, Firefox and Chrome have been on very consistent curves of market share decline and growth for more than 3 years. If that trend continues, and there is no reason to believe that there will be substantial change even with the launch of Windows 8 and IE10, Chrome will begin to surpass IE market share on individual days within 60 to 75 days. By June or July, Chrome will permanently surpass IE market share, if we remain with StatCounter’s numbers. The meeting point of both curves will be at about 34% market share. Given Microsoft’s historic dominance of this market and the fact that there are now more Internet users who have no idea that Netscape ever existed than those who do, it will be an important sign for the web (if and) when Chrome passes IE in market share and ends an era that has lasted for more than 14 years – an eternity in tech.

So, what does that mean for the user?

Chrome’s gain is, of course, a result of a choice that is being made by the average user. Google is building user loyalty – in part the company is even forcing that loyalty by catering to our laziness to keep our browser updated and is sending those updates to us, silently and, let’s admit it, conveniently. That trend has some obvious implications, for example that Google is following a strategy to make sure that we are using Google Search as a search engine and not Bing, and secure Google’s core revenue base. Consider Chrome a wall that is being built around Google Search. However, there are more implications that are likely going to change the nature of the web browser.

We have been preaching here that the browser is not just a piece of software anymore. It’s the fabric that holds an entire platform together. Conceivably, the browser is evolving and has matured to become much more than a tool that enables the user to enter a URL and view the data stored and visualized at that destination. For Google, Chrome is just happening to visualize websites, but its JavaScript optimizations were intended from the very start to enable rich web applications and services to replace your local software. SPDY and revisions and protocols of TCP are further examples how Google is slowly lifting the browser’s capabilities to run what we may soon perceive as being an alternative to Windows. Then there is Chrome OS, which will be handicapped as long as there is no reliable and affordable always-on wireless Internet connection everywhere, but the vision is certainly there. Then there is Chrome for Android, which will play a much greater role on large-screen devices such as Google TV than it does on smartphones and tablets, which are primarily app-centric devices. For Mozilla, the browser is taking a similar turn with Boot2Gecko, the organization’s approach to provide a Firefox-like OS for phones and tablets, as well as Mozilla’s idea to open up web applications for Firefox. Microsoft is, similar to Windows 98, integrating a much more web-centric approach to Windows 8, with an App Store that will be heavily promoting HTML5 apps to run in IE10. IE is also turning into a platform tool for Microsoft with the essential software and backend that could tie phones, tablets, PCs and consumer electronics devices together. For certain devices, IE could actually turn into the only backend that is required.

The vision

2012 will be a transition year for the web browser and we predict that the browser, as we understand it today, and simply navigate from cnn.com to nytimes.com, will die. The technology and features that are enabling a platform-driven browser, including much more sophisticated home-page applications and interfaces such as the Gamepad API that connects browsers to any popular input device, or the browser communication feature WebRTC, will become much more apparent by the end of the year.

Much of the current momentum appears to be driven by Google and Chrome, even if a good portion of the features that Google has implemented in Chrome have their origins at Mozilla, such as the Gamepad API. Google obviously has a strong interest in growing market share for Chrome and finding a way to make Chrome OS and Google TV much more successful – it would be rather surprising and negligent if the company did not follow such a strategy. The aggressive agenda has forced Mozilla and Microsoft, particularly in 2010 and 2011, to rethink their browsers and they may be under greater pressure if Chrome assumes market leadership, according to StatCounter.

Right now, we are seeing the most competitive browser landscape in history and such scenarios tend to promote innovation and change.

Wolfgang Gruener in Business Products on January 31

“Stumpy” Could Be First To Get Google’s HW Accelerated Chrome OS UI

Chrome developer François Beaufort has posted a screenshot that apparently has been taken on Samsung’s upcoming Chrome OS desktop PC. The big news here is that the hardware-accelerated Aura UI that promises a much richer interface for the user while leveraging the horsepower of a graphics chip will be part of Stumpy. The Chromebox will also integrate more hardware horsepower with an Intel Sandy Bridge processor.

By now we know that the first two Chrome OS computers, offered by Samsung and Acer in a netbook form factor, pretty much flopped, while Google decided to shoot down a much more promising device on trademark violation claims. As Chrome is a cornerstone of Google’s product strategy, it is unlikely that Chrome OS PCs will simply fade and CES revealed that some new devices are on the way, even if the enthusiasm for Chrome OS is much more subdued than it was a year ago.

The one device we believe is waiting for is Samsung’s Stumpy, which is the code name for a desktop Chrome computer (that will be offered next to “Lumpy”, possibly a new Chrome OS netbook). Courtesy of François Beaufort, we learned that Stumpy will be much more powerful than the underpowered and overpriced first-generation products. The test platform of Stumpy uses Intel’s Core i5-2520M processor, which was part of the original Sandy Bridge launch in Q1 2011 and may be replaced with a more up-to-date processor in the production version. The dual-core 2520M runs at 2.5 GHz/3.2 GHz at a thermal design power of 35 watts.

Compared to the 1.6 GHz Atom in the first Chrome OS netbooks, there is substantially more horsepower on tap, there is an opportunity for powerful graphics cards (Intel HD Graphics 3000 at 650 MHz/1.3 GHz are integrated by default) and up to 16 GB of supported DDR3 memory suggest that this will be a much more capable cloud computing device. On the downside, the 2520M lists for a tray price of $225 and if Samsung can’t get a good deal from Intel, we should expect Stumpy to retail for more than $500 because of the processor alone.

The Stumpy surprise is the subtle hint that it is already running the Chrome Aura interface, which departs from the current legacy Chrome interface and features a new UI that leverages GPU acceleration capabilities of a computer. Along with the changes under the hood, we expect a few visual updates that moves the Chrome UI much closer to the capability of a local OS such as Windows. There was no information when Stumpy could be released, but it appears as if this is a much better planned product and not the rapid shot the initial Chrome OS devices were. If Google can contain the price of these new boxes, they should be much more appealing than their predecessors.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on January 17

Intel’s 1.6 GHz Smartphone SoC: Enough To Beat Snapdragon?

Intel unveiled at CES its much anticipated entry in the smartphone battle. Previously code-named Medfield, the Atom Z2460 lacks a snappy name, but it arrives with promising features. Intel has struck a partnership with Motorola as well as Lenovo to get the chip into a commercial devices as early as Q2, but only in China initially. There was also Clover Trail, Intel’s SoC for tablets and hybrids.

It has taken some time until Intel was ready to show off a production-ready Medfield and the result may not be entirely convincing at first sight. The Z2460 uses just a single-core CPU, albeit with hyperthreading support and a virtual second core, and there seem to be some limitations that may raise, at least in some places, eyebrows – such as the 1 GB LPDDR2 (400 MHz) memory limit.

For an entirely new product that is supposed to blow the competition out of the water, this appears to be somewhat underwhelming on the spec side. Also, at first sight, the integrated graphics engine, a 400 MHz version of Intel’s GMA with 240 megapixels per second throughput seems to be below the spec of the upcoming Adreno GPU unit in Qualcomm’s Snapdragon S4 SoC. The system is, of course powerful enough to run 1080p/30fps video for output, but only at 1280×1024 on the local display. Additionally, this is a 32 nm part, while Intel’s rivals are already moving toward 28 nm. It’s not going to kill Intel, and it won’t decide the smartphone race, but the manufacturing process is one of Intel’s key strengths and it will be important for the company to move its Atom SoCs to 22 nm for simple marketing reasons.

Intel has a beautiful spec phone as a Z2460 reference platform at its booth and the performance of the device appears to be doing well as far as the responsiveness of the display and app load times are concerned. At the very least, the phone appears to be very competitive with everything else that is one the market, but we have to wait and see how it performs in the real world. Intel engineers are confident that the Z2460 will deliver. Usually, their performance estimates are on the conservative side, so we are optimistic that the hardware will be, at the very least, on par with high-end ARM SoCs when the Z2460 is released.

The reference device has a 4.03-inch screen, a 1.3MP and an 8MP camera, 14 days of standby power and 45 hours of audio playback. The best argument for the Z2460 is Intel’s claim that the engine has been fine-tuned to work well with the Android software core and excel in Javascript and HTML5 code execution – in speed as well as battery efficiency disciplines.

Pretty hardware alone won’t allow Intel to push the chip into the market. So it is not surprising that Intel is partnering with Lenovo and took the shortcut to Motorola via Google, which some claim annoyed Microsoft, but could have simply been a small payback for Microsoft’s decision to stab Intel in the back by partnering with ARM and inviting more chip companies to equip compact Windows 8 notebooks. Intel isn’t exactly happy that there will be Nvidia-, Qualcomm- and Samsung-based Windows 8 notebooks and the move to work with Google on smartphones all the way is a conclusive move. To respond to the ARM threat in the tablet and low-end computing market, Intel showed off Clover Trail, a 32 nm SoC Intel will pitch for tablets as well as hybrid notebooks (Windows/Android), which will be its offering to compete with ARM in the compact computing space.

The Atom Z2460 will launch in a smartphone in China in Q2. Motorola confirmed that it will be shipping an Intel-based smartphone in the second half of this year.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on January 10

The Dark Horse Among Tablets In 2012

We are seeing plenty of new tablets emerge at the CES 2012, which opened earlier today with a record number of more than 3100 exhibitors that have prepared more than 25,000 product announcements that are available to about 150,000 visitors over the next few days. Among those tablets is a particularly noteworthy device that could have a huge impact on the tablet market, if it works as promised.

I am not talking about OLPC’s XO3, which is equally important for the developing world. My attention is wrapped up in the Wikipad that sparks the kind of innovative risk we so desperately need in the Android tablet segment. It’s a nicely designed 8-inch device that has three special touches. First, it can be purchased with an attachable game controller unit that creates a product that could be considered a Super WiiU and could turn into a problem for Nintendo, at least if the app growth for Android continues and more and more casual and high-end games will make their way onto the platform. Second, the manufacturer claims that the Wikipad as a 1080p screen, which would be rather stunning, if it was able to squeeze 1920×1080 pixels into 8 inches of display size. The icing on the cake is a naked-eye 3D touch screen that visualizes the Android 4.0 OS surface.

There aren’t any other details besides the fact that there is only 8 GB of flash storage (expandable via micro SD), HDMI and USB 2.0 as well as 1080p video playback. The simple screen data alone suggests that this device will need a powerful processor, even if we know that lower-end single-core 1080p SoCs can cope with 1080p, but we would think that at least a dual- and, better, a quad-core unit will be necessary to run 3D.

There is no information on price, but we don’t think that this is your typical $199 tablet that will compete with the Kindle Fire. The manufacturer notes that the Wikipad will be powerful enough to run the “latest high-end video games through new cloud gaming services,” which indicates that we are looking at a much more expensive product here. However, if the device can be offered for less than $500 including the game controller as well as a full Android experiences with unlimited access to Android Market while maintaining acceptable battery life, this could turn into a stunning product. We haven’t seen the device in action, but if it delivers the goods, this may be the dark horse to keep an eye on this year.

So far, it is one of the very few tablets that could match or even be ahead of Apple’s iPad 3, which is also believed to integrate a Retina display with a resolution of 2048×1536 pixels that creates a 3D surface effect via multiple display layers.

Kurt Bakke in Products on January 10

HP Spectre: A Better Dell Adamo

Earlier today, HP launched the HP Envy 14 Spectre and I was immediately reminded of the 2009 Dell Adamo, which was Dell’s halo product that year. Both are wrapped in glass, both look stunning in black and both would cause you to drool. But the Adamo was a bit ahead of its time, Intel hadn’t yet figured out how to package performance, we weren’t yet divorced from our optical drives (streaming was in its infancy), and Adamo had some nasty tradeoffs, not the least of which was a very high price.

With the Spectre, HP has launched a product with a similar look to the Adamo, but far fewer tradeoffs, some stronger wow factors and a much more attractive price. Viva Ultrabooks!

Adamo Memories

The thing about the glass version of the Adamo was that it would take your breath away. It really was that good looking – the combination of the Gorilla glass on the cover and edgeless display on the inside was true art and it remains one of the most beautiful laptops ever built. Few of them were sold, however, because at a $2000 starting price, the product represented too many tradeoffs for must users. It wasn’t helped by the fact this was launched during the Windows Vista issues and thermal problems back then meant you could only put a 1.4 GHz dual-core processor in it. It was one of the first products to ship with a 128 GB SSD, but those early large capacity SSDs were famous for issues and for being incredibly expensive.

One of the unique parts of this product was that it was heavy for its class coming in nearly a pound heavier than the MacBook Air, its closest competitor from Apple. Battery life was advertised at over 5 hours but you typically got close to 4 and it came packaged in a wonderful clear plastic box which was a bit of a problem and not, to my knowledge, repeated.

I was actually afraid to carry mine, not because it was fragile, but because I was convinced someone would take it from me.

HP Envy Spectre

There are a lot of similarities from an almost identical weight at 4 pounds to the heavy use of glass outside and inside the product. However, in features, the HP showcases that a lot has happened in the last three years. The operating system is Windows 7, which is both more reliable and faster than Windows Vista was. Streaming is common so we don’t miss the lack of an optical drive as much.   Intel has improved dramatically their mobile processors and this product is both faster and has over twice the battery life of the old Adamo. Price is around $600 less and while, like the Adamo, the Spectre has a lighted keyboard, the Spectre’s is proximity sensitive to it lights up in a wave as you approach the laptop.  This is probably one of the coolest looking features outside of the Alienware customizable lights on their laptops.

This piece of art has enough performance that HP actually packages Photoshop and Premier Elements on it which would typically require too much performance for a product in this class. Intel has been doing some impressive work here.

Carrying Art

Our technology increasingly defines us and both these products were and are designed to make as much a statement as they are to be a tool.   Both are stunning to look at and while the Dell anticipated coming trends the HP has taken advantage of those trends to build a far better product.   In the end, I applaud both companies, Dell for plowing the field, and HP continuing on with the idea.  I think there is room for beauty in laptops and both the old Adamo and new Spectre are stunningly beautiful products.

Rob Enderle in Business Products on January 09

Are Ultrabooks Just Keeping Up With Apple?

Intel has created and “speced” a new form factor for notebooks it is calling ultrabooks. Many have speculated that this is a direct response to the popularity of the MacBook Air. But if this effort is only focused on that narrow vision, it will fail. Ultrabooks represent a much bigger strategic vision (and investment) that could revolutionize the notebook market, if Intel is successful.

The general PC market, and especially the notebook market, has grown somewhat stale over the past few years. Indeed, most innovation in computing has been directed at the myriad of mobile devices. Some pundits are speculating that we have moved beyond the PC era and users are switching to smart phones and tablets as primary computing platforms.

We do not share this view, and believe the PC has real benefit for many use cases and will remain a predominant platform for many business and consumer users. But Intel and its ecosystem (e.g., Microsoft, notebook vendors, app vendors, user interface specialists) must stimulate and regenerate notebook interest based on the latest trends in thin, light, responsive and great user experience that users have grown accustomed to using tablets and smart phones. Intel plans to do so with its new ultrabooks, a term it owns and will only allow to be used by vendors that meet Intel-defined minimum specs, and only by Intel-powered machines (AMD/ARM powered devices won’t be able to use the ultrabook branding).

Can Intel and its ecosystem revitalize the notebook market and stimulate consumer demand (and a new buying cycle)? If ultrabooks are only thin light MacBook Air knockoffs, they won’t be very successful. They need to be more. Certainly thin and light are important. And price is always an issue – the first generation of devices now coming to market are typically premium priced at $700-$900+, and not very attractive to many consumers when compared to $300-$500 mainstream notebooks. But we believe ultrabooks will undergo some significant changes in successive generations of product over the next 1-2 years. First, with next gen Core chips from Intel (IvyBridge due later this year), ultrabooks should be able to achieve 8-10 hours of battery life even in a reduced form factor necessitating a smaller battery. They will also be optimized for instant on (less than 10 seconds from sleep mode) which will solve one of the biggest complaints of PC users and make ultrabooks much more like mobile devices. Ultrabooks will include enhanced security capabilities for protection from malware attacks, safer document/media control and web surfing. And they will include improved media creation and consumption capability to enhance the end user experience. Finally, touch interfaces and touch enhanced form factors will emerge that will allow users to interact with devices in a more natural way.

Of course, much of this functionality is dependent on the next generation of OS powering these systems. Microsoft has not yet fully specified Windows 8 availability and the functions it will allow. But we expect a version of Windows 8 that is optimized for this new form factor to be included in the general release of Windows 8 later this year, combining features of the Metro UI, enhanced boot and recover from standby capability, and specialized functions and drivers for the new ultrabooks. And success will also be dependent on the ultrabook OEMs creating differentiated product “fine tuned” for specific consumer classes (e.g., business users, portable gamers, media creating and consumption, social media centric, artists, etc.).

A number of first generation ultrabooks are being announced at CES. But we expect the “real” ultrabooks will emerge later this year with the new chips, new OS and new user functionality and performance. That is when the true value of the ultrabook devices will be judged. And we expect a number of lower end ultrabooks to come to market at $400-$500 (or less) by the end of 2012, making them more competitive with the mainstream notebook “bricks”. We further expect to see a variety of uniquely derived form factors (some with tablet-like flip over, extended screens, connectivity (media) options, etc.). It is at this point that the ultrabooks will move away from just being seen as a MacBook Air knock-off.

Jack Gold in Business Products on January 06

Google Tweaks Chrome’s Interface, Adds Prediction Details

Google is reworking the Options menu of its Chrome browser. The most recent nightly builds include an experimental menu that eliminates the “Basics”, “Personal Stuff” and “Under the Hood” clutter at the top level. There is also a new feature that visualizes the suggestions provided by the Omnibox.

Google is busy reworking the Options menu of its browser and remove complexity from the user interface. A still hidden Options menu now combines all preferences in one menu and combines the options previously separated in “Basics”, “Personal Stuff” and “Under the Hood” into just one “Options” menu. The menu also shows a revised management console for Chrome extensions.

It’s probably a matter of taste for most users which interface is easier to use, but the big deal is that the more in-depth features that control privacy, and proxy settings and manage security certificates are now out of direct view. The new options menu can be accessed via chrome://chrome.

Those users who enjoy a look behind the scenes of the browser’s features, should check out a new internal URL that has been added recently: chrome://network-action-predictor/. Google now provides details about the Omnibox suggestions by the browser. The Network Action Predictor evaluates the ratio of “hits” and “misses’ when a result was promised and calculates a level of confidence, which determines whether a suggestion will be displayed or not.

Wolfgang Gruener in Products on January 06

Mozilla Preps First Extended Support Version Of Firefox

Four months after publishing the proposal for an extended service release (ESR) for Firefox, Mozilla will be releasing the first Firefox version that responds to business concerns that the rapid release cycle has made Firefox difficult to maintain in corporate. Firefox 10.0 ESR will enable companies to move from Firefox 3.6 to 10.

Firefox 10.0 ESR is scheduled to be released together with the regular Firefox 10 on January 31. Mozilla will support its ESR versions for nine release cycles of 54 weeks. Two release cycles or 12 weeks are reserved as qualification period.

If everything goes according to plan, Mozilla will update its Firefox 10.0.x ESR in six-week rapid release cycles beginning with version 10.0.1 and phase it out with version 10.0.8 on February 12, 2013. However, the updates will be limited to high-risk security patches as well as off-schedule releases that address live security vulnerabilities during that timeframe. Mozilla will not apply stability fixes or new features during the 54-week lifecycle of a ESR generation. The next big transition following 10 ESR, Firefox 17.0 ESR, will be launched simultaneously with Firefox 17 and Firefox 10.0.7 ESR on November 20, 2012.

The first two ESR 17 releases, ESR 17.0 and ESR 17.0.1, serve as qualification version to give companies time to update and prepare their IT environments. The hard transition date will be from ESR 10.0.8 to ESR 17.0.2 on February 12, 2013.

Firefox ESR releases are the result of criticism that Mozilla would not care about businesses as Firefox users. Following Mozilla’s statement that it would reconsider its approach to keep businesses on board, the developer announced in September of last year its ESR idea. Since then, Mozilla has increased the maintenance cycle for an ESR release from 42 to 54 weeks, based on feedback from its users.

The advantage of the ESR release for business is that the update path is far easier to handle for large corporate environments and gives companies time to adjust their internal structure for a new browser, qualify it and update user manuals. However, the transition path for users will keep much more dramatic updates (from version 10 to 17, for example) and eliminates the software rapid release updates, which is one of the biggest advantages of short term updates. Another downside is the fact that the ESR releases will trail the adoption of HTML5 standards and features that will take advantage of enabling and managing web applications. In the long term, business environments that are focused on year-long support cycles will have to find ways to speed up their qualification process.

While Mozilla clearly stumbled initially with its rapid release cycle and has not ironed out all issues yet, the release of Firefox ESR is a sign that Mozilla is listening to its users and fixes problems relatively quickly. It is one of those characteristics that makes Mozilla unique and one of the features Mozilla will need to stay relevant.

Wolfgang Gruener in on January 05

Technorati Verfication Check

2S78QND7SGM5

Chrome Concludes 2011 With Record Growth, IE Dips Below 40%

Chrome ended 2011 with 42.50% market share gain for the year and the highest monthly market share growth in its history, according to data released by StatCounter. Microsoft’s Internet Explorer was the only browser to lose market share, but slightly slowed its losses over 2010. Firefox had a tough year with a loss that more than quadrupled over 2010.

Data: StatCounter versus Net Applications

Both analytics firms typically show the same trend in their charts, but publish substantially different market share estimates. Due to the greater data set and more substantial background how the data is collected, we use StatCounter’s data for our analysis. Please keep in mind that there are numerous browsers stats collection services, all of which publish different numbers. Take the exact numbers with a grain of salt, but the general trend is usually similar or the same across all those services.

Both StatCounter and Net Applications still list IE as the leading browser, with 38.65% and 51.87% share, respectively. In both cases, IE share declined substantially over November. Chrome now stands at 27.27% at StatCounter and at 19.11% at Net Applications, Both numbers reflect considerable gains. Firefox dropped to 21.83% in Net Applications’ charts, but was about flat in StatCounter’s estimate with 25.27%. Both Safari and Opera remain insignificant in the greater picture of the browser landscape and their impact on market penetration.

1. IE

IE market share fell from 40.63% to 38.65%, which was the first drop below 40% in more than 13 years for the browser as far as we are aware and the sharpest loss in absolute points in 24 months – and highest loss for IE on a percentage basis in the history of the browser, based on StatCounter data. Contributing to the stronger than average loss was the ending of an advertising campaign that pushed IE higher in November as well as a holiday season that generally favors Firefox and Chrome as the more popular browsers for home users. For the entire year, IE lost 7.35 points, which is an improvement over the 8.31 point loss for 2010. While Microsoft is far from halting IE’s decline, it appears as if the company may have gone through a valley and may be able to have an opportunity contain the drop in market share this year.

According to Net Applications, IE9 has a little over 25% market share on Windows 7 PCs worldwide and surpassed IE8 share on Windows 7 with almost 35% in December. However, IE9 does not play a leading role across all operating systems and has only 11.48% market share in Net Applications’ charts and 12.09% in StatCounter’s version. For Microsoft, however, adoption of IE9 in Windows 7 is critical globally and will enable the company to build a much stronger position with its browser when Windows 8 is released and a silent update process is rolled out for the browser in the coming months. For HTML5 developers, Chrome is the more significant browser at this time, as it trumps IE9 market share in both NetApplications’ and StatCounter’s charts, if all operating systems are considered.

2. Chrome

Chrome and Firefox user bases remind me somewhat of the rivalry between AMD and Intel or Nvidia and ATI a few years ago. There is quite a bit of dynamic going on and there is little doubt that the enthusiasm for these browsers drives the development in a similar way as it drove the passion for processors and graphics cards. With Chrome approaching Firefox share in NetApplications’ data and now being 2 points ahead of Firefox in StatCounter’s estimate, we are now clearly in the two-horse race we predicted one year ago. Chrome carries the mindshare, is supported by powerful advertising on the web and on the TV, and features a rock solid development process that delivers new browser versions like Toyota is cranking out new Corollas. It’s a perfect machine that can, conceivably, only fail if Google screws up. Chrome gained 11.59 points of market share in 2011, which is more than the 8.81 points it gained in 2010 and more the 4.07 points it gained in 2009, according to StatCounter. At this time, the market share gains are still accelerating, as Chrome gained 6.62 points in the second half of 2011 alone. That increase is likely to continue as Chrome is now trending toward 28% share in StatCounter’s charts.

3. Firefox

Firefox had a difficult year that began with a delayed rollout of Firefox 4, the introduction of a rapid release cycle that is not yet working as Mozilla imagined it and Google and Microsoft are playing a much rougher game that has caught Firefox in the center of the firing line. At 25.27% share, Firefox lost 5.41 points or 21.4% of its market share over the past 12 months. The released data indicates that all of that share went to Google’s Chrome, which is, at this time, a one-way street, as Firefox does not offer a simple way to import bookmarks and browsing data from Chrome. Firefox lost market share in 10 out of 12 months, but showed stabilization of market share in December. We don’t know if that was a blip, as Firefox dropped to as low as 24% over the past few days in StatCounter’s charts.

2012 Forecast

The browser landscape can change quickly, but we also know that substantially changes in the market trend are unlikely to incur immediately. Trends evolve and either worsen or improve for a particular developer over a period of 6 to 8 months. Based on the historic data as well as product roadmaps we currently have available we believe that browser presences will continue the 2011 trend.

1. IE will continue to drop and fall below Chrome in August or September 2012 in StatCounter’s charts. IE’s losses will soften an stabilize when the silent update process is rolled out and Windows 8 is introduced and achieves at least moderate success. If Windows 8 fails, IE is likely to enter another phase of decline and could fall near 30% market share by the end of 2012.

2. Chrome will continue to climb and meet IE at about 34% share. Chrome’s success will increasingly rely on advertising as well as a success of Chrome OS. If Windows 8 has a successful launch and Microsoft is able to market IE9 and IE10 along with it, Chrome could hit a limit for market share growth at about 36%. This estimate is based on a continued trend of 2011.

3. Firefox is the interesting variable in this game that could either impact Chrome or IE growth. In a best case scenario, Mozilla will be able to leverage its newfound wealth from Google, hire developers and streamline its rapid release process and avoid further feature delays and roll out Boot2Gecko on time. If that is the case, we believe that Mozilla has a good case to slow down the decline, stabilize at about 22 – 23%market share and grow from there. In a worst case, the delays will continue and accelerate as Microsoft and Google are going after more market share and Mozilla could find itself below 20% share by the end of this year.

Wolfgang Gruener in Business Products on January 01