Tech Bits & Pieces

by Kris_Tuttle on February 8, 2010

RIMM too sexy to be single?

We wrote about it back in this Jan­u­ary post but now big­ger, more con­nected sources like Kara Swisher are writ­ing about the release of Microsoft Win­dows Mobile 7 and how they might need to do some­thing big. The scut­tle­butt is that Ballmer would love to buy RIM at the same time it sounds like they real­ize that buy­ing PALM, while it is much cheaper, won’t really get them any­where. We stick to our guns on RIMM both as a fun­da­men­tal story and a too-sexy-to-be-left-alone tech­nol­ogy player.

Is Adobe FLASH an endan­gered species?

We’re not going to get into the tech­nol­ogy piss­ing con­test of HTML 5 ver­sus FLASH here. There are dozens of sites that will numb your brain going over it all. The point how­ever is that lots of things are pop­ping up that devel­op­ers are get­ting excited about — the iPhone, Android, the Cloud, Face­book, Twit­ter and now the iPad. So much oppor­tu­nity, so few incre­men­tal buy­ers of CS5?

Part of the prob­lem is there is a sim­mer­ing resent­ment out there for how fat Adobe has been get­ting off of $1500 soft­ware “suites” and $500 upgrade fees. It’s all great stuff but while tech­nol­ogy pric­ing always feels like it’s com­ing down Adobe feels like a high tax and it reminds peo­ple how pro­pri­etary FLASH.

Even if FLASH con­tin­ues to dom­i­nate and Adobe does “just fine” with CS5 and future releases if investors per­ceive it more like Microsoft which “does just fine” with Win­dows and all that jazz they will be trad­ing at a mul­ti­ple closer to the old guard.

The con­ven­tional con­tent model implo­sion picks up steam.

Again we’ve penned on this topic before but over here on the Cre­ative Destruc­tion blog. Thanks to the Amazon/Apple dust up with Macmil­lan the crowds are gath­er­ing around the con­tent pric­ing ring to watch the fight.

There were some sto­ries out today that cable com­pa­nies should sim­ply focus back on the broad­band and stop try­ing to be in the media busi­ness by pack­ag­ing and charg­ing for enter­tain­ment con­tent. It’s cer­tainly some­thing to worry about for them but given their cul­ture it’s hard to see how they work around that part of their core business.

The issue of “what’s the right price” for an online book is fas­ci­nat­ing. Part of the prob­lem the entire indus­try faces is the “casual user” fac­tor. The pic­ture of one set of peo­ple pound­ing the table that “it has to be $14.99″ and another say­ing “it has to be $9.99″ is absurd. What about lend­ing books? Right now what­ever I pay online I can’t lend it to any­one. Why shouldn’t an online book be $5? Nobody knows. Maybe it should be priced by the chap­ter? That could work for non-fiction any­way, I’d like that model.

As usual most of the dis­cus­sion we see appears to ignore the con­sumer, the typ­i­cal or newly pos­si­ble use cases. Instead it focuses on some futile preser­va­tion of the old model in an entirely new era.

[Dis­clo­sure: The Research 2.0 model port­fo­lio con­tains shares of Apple and RIM at the time of this writing.]

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: