Disqus - Latest Comments for ginswizzle

Re: Panic’s Creative Comment Form

ginswizzle — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:08:55 -0000

looks great, but the usability could be improved... why is the Web field placed so it appears related to the To: field and not the From: field.

Re: What Apple should have announced at today’s announcement of iPhone OS 3.0

ginswizzle — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:50:42 -0000

I didn't do the math so you may be right, but just to be clear I consider the iPhone ecosystem to consist of all Mac + iPhone developers since the API set and programming model is substantially the same. that's a lot more than 10,000 developers, no?

oh, and porting the iPhone tools/SDK to Windows doesn't make Cocoa Touch and Objective-C any more approachable to Windows developers. and creating different Windows-friendly tools doesn't seem like a useful strategy. Nokia sells more than 100M S60 phones a year and supports an astounding number of desktop platforms, IDEs and programming languages - but certainly hasn't achieved the economies of scale that investment might suggest.

agree good discussion and props for raising this idea which has gotten almost no coverage elsewhere.

Re: What Apple should have announced at today’s announcement of iPhone OS 3.0

ginswizzle — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:46:26 -0000

Apple didn't break the economics. cream will always rise. your argument seems to be based on the common but fallacious assertion that Apple's store is the only way people can discover great apps. it isn't. spend some marketing dollars outside Apple's store - or get lucky enough for Apple to hype you on primetime TV - and you should have no problem making money on compelling $5+ apps. just because you don't think you can make a million bucks in a month doesn't mean it isn't worth trying at all.

Re: What Apple should have announced at today’s announcement of iPhone OS 3.0

ginswizzle — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:38:32 -0000

based on what data can you argue that Mac and peripheral sales to developers is a drop in the bucket? maybe not a top-line driver for AAPL, but it's got to be several tens of millions of dollars in revenue.

thinking about this more, the cost of a couple Macs isn't enough to dissuade anyone except the absolute poorest hobby-only developer from creating apps for iPhone. as long as the market is large and profitable (check) and the tools/process is relatively friction-free (check).

also, I didn't read your original argument to have anything to do with persuading Microsoft, Google, Yahoo!, Oracle - who btw have all already created their own iPhone apps.

Re: What Apple should have announced at today’s announcement of iPhone OS 3.0

ginswizzle — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:54:29 -0000

very unlikely to happen. too many deep-pocketed platform vendors and OEMs that don't want to play in anyone else's sandbox.

but if something like this were to happen, it would be driven by operators vs. some quasi-objective standards body. and I'm not sure that's a good thing for developers or consumers.

also, see J2ME.

Re: What Apple should have announced at today’s announcement of iPhone OS 3.0

ginswizzle — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:45:31 -0000

interesting idea and agree it's surprising this hasn't gotten wider coverage, but keeping the IDE Mac only sells more Macs, displays, peripherals, etc. end of story.

also, getting more developers isn't as important as catering to the best developers. <insert favorite="" macs="" rule,="" windows="" sucks="" truism="">.

Re: Why Hulu Should Embrace Boxee

ginswizzle — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:09:20 -0000

really? I find it totally acceptable (when the stream doesn't constantly hiccup) given the availability of current content at significantly lower cost vs. paying for cable/satellite TV service or subscribing to Netflix or buying from iTunes. that said, for action movies I prefer to pay for the higher quality/reliability of iTunes or DVD.

Re: Why Hulu Should Embrace Boxee

ginswizzle — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 07:54:02 -0000

I think one of your prognostications is pretty likely to happen, although might be closer to 24 months.

ESPN360 model seems obnoxious at first blush, but makes a lot of sense given the higher infrastructure/bandwidth costs associated with "high quality" streaming video. and as you point out, it follows the traditional revenue model (cable fees) that the TV industry already understands.

I think I might even be willing to pay a small monthly fee to get ESPN360 + Hulu + any other high quality pro video streaming "channel" on top of my cable Internet bill. as long as it was substantially less than the cost of cable Internet + TV since the selection, quality, reliability would be so much less.

wrt "Comcast/another ISP will buy Boxee" - see EchoStar acquiring Slingmedia and how that has played out in stagnated innovation from the latter.

having had another day to think about this... while I agree boxee is just a "video browser for the TV" and thus effectively no different than visiting Hulu.com in a traditional Web browser, I think boxee should offer money or consumer usage data to appease content owners / networks who surely will lose more and more cable TV customers if boxee really takes off. if that happens w/o such compenstation I fear the quantity and quality of great content will decline... vicious cycle.

Re: Why Hulu Should Embrace Boxee

ginswizzle — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:43:10 -0000

to be fair, boxee's interface has a long way to go to be truly user-friendly. still very, very rough around the edges, it takes way too many clicks to play content and it exposes too much of the file system and link structure (left to menu > Video > Internet > Hulu > Damages > I Agree, It Wasn't Funny > Play).

boxee certainly better than the other Home Theater PCs, but Apple TV interface a bit better than all of them. now if Apple just had an ad-supported biz model...

Re: Why Hulu Should Embrace Boxee

ginswizzle — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:31:15 -0000

don't forget that NBC and News Corp (Fox) own Hulu, so basically they've created the "monster" with which they're fighting.

Re: Why Hulu Should Embrace Boxee

ginswizzle — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:27:48 -0000

maybe - Apple TV is a great living room device/interface - but I don't see how Hulu on Apple TV makes sense for Apple. many Hulu shows (free) are also on iTunes ($1.99 an episode). typically in higher quality.

also, Hulu is already accessible via PS3 and Xbox 360, albeit through more traditional non-optimized browser or PC extender:
http://www.whattheyplay.com...
http://www.themediamall.com...

Re: Why Hulu Should Embrace Boxee

ginswizzle — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:19:00 -0000

nice summary of why boxee is good for Hulu and its content partners. you nailed it with "Boxee is a browser optimized for the 10 ft experience." it lets me watch current and classic (relatively) high-quality TV programs and films from my couch whenever I want, funded by advertisements.

I hope this isn't the fork in the road where the TV/film companies follow in the misguided path of the music industry...

Re: the Hulu situation

ginswizzle — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:33:19 -0000

Hulu may be free to you, but it still earns money because advertisers pay
for your eyeballs and ears.
I don't have cable or satellite or even an analog ota signal, and rely
(almost) solely on legal services like Hulu and iTunes for TV and movies in
my living room. only thing I miss is live sports.

Re: the Hulu situation

ginswizzle — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:01:58 -0000

this is really disappointing, because boxee really isn't much different from a normal Web browser when it comes to navigating and watching shows on the Hulu site. but the difference is important to viewers - and the content owners / networks that co-own Hulu.

I think the real reason for this cease and desist is the networks fear for the loss of broadcast TV viewership and related ad dollars. it really has very little to do with the Hulu service specifically. the content owners / networks fear boxee because it gives Hulu a TV-ready experience that's usable from across the room with a remote. which is, of course, why we like it so much. but if lots of people start watching most shows this way TV ad dollars will plummet. with a DVR we're at least briefly exposed to most TV commercials during shows.

resolution: instead of blocking new viewership habits, content owners need to work harder t develop new ways to generate revenue from services like Hulu that benefit from the more more personal, social and measurable nature of the Web. I'd personally pay $10-20 a month for the pleasure of watching unlimited content on a TV-ready version of Hulu.