Scott Berry

The Downside to iPhone Success

Well, for my idea to be impossible, it seems at least one of the following have to be true:

1. Apple is perfect and never allows anything *that could be susceptible to* a virus get through its store.

2. No iPhone ever accesses any content from any other iPhone or the Internet that might be used to infect a susceptible app or phone.

So which one is it? My point was simply that more phones + more apps + more connectivity = more viruses. It also means the virus is likely to be more widespread.

The Downside to iPhone Success

Wow, I haven't made so many friends since I suggested maybe WiMax wasn't the savior of mankind after all...

Good feedback from a few here. Others maybe ought to more carefully read what I read, and take off your AAPL-tinted shades. I'm not attacking the brilliance of Jobs or his engineers. Though I'm continually dismayed at the thin skins on some of his fans.

Frankly, I have nothing but respect for Apple's design and usability. In fact I said that. The point remains that no matter how good it is, they are now a MUCH bigger target (the iPhone, not Macs). And hackers aren't only interested in kudos or in attacking "affluent" markets. Just ask any of the many whose PCs have been co-opted to become spam generators.

Nowhere did I say hacking iPhones would be as easy as Windows, nor did I say it would be easy at all. Only that it would happen.

I also didn't state that anyone would be attacking the App store directly (though I suppose I did imply it, and am happy to be educated here) . There could be other entry points, particularly as people start using "non-certified" apps on unlocked phones. Regardless, there *will* be viruses striking iPhones. How frequent, how damaging, and how easy all remain to be seen. To suggest otherwise just isn't sensible.

And last, I'm not "pro-RIM" or "pro-Android" and "anti-Apple". Reread what I said. I expect Android to be much more vulnerable to viruses for the exact reason many commenters said--lack of central control of the market. However, there is no scale in either RIM or Android (yet).

I do believe strongly that there are disadvantages to Apple's closed ecosystem(s), but most of them accrue to users and to the device market, not so much to Apple's business. If the iPhone continues on the growth track that is making my thesis more likely, that can't help but improve AAPL's stock price, despite fallout from any virus issues.

Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery?

Everyone is missing the obvious, here. Akamai's Marketing department has clearly failed in their messaging.

Akamai is not selling streaming delivery for *more*, they are offering a *discount on HTTP*. That would make the question "why is Akamai the only CDN that discounts downloads?" :-)

Real Networks New DVD Ripper: Are You for Real?

Excuse me, "rocket surgery"? :-)

Otherwise a nice piece, Mathew. I agree totally, this is one of the most lame-grained schemes I've ever seen. Yet another reason my computers have all remained "unReal" for years.

DivX Breaks Ground in Supporting Flash Video

Yes, this is correct. The Connected box is functionally not much more than a DivX codec paired with a WiFi card.

The server software on the PC converts everything (including photos and music, plus your stored video) into a DivX encoded stream which is sent to the client box. Because the PC does the heavy lifting, it's infinitely flexible and evolvable.

Brilliant idea, really, especially if they're successful in getting Connected embedded directly into TVs and DVRs.

Comcast Limits User Downloads: Wrong Solution

@Julio -- That's true in the abstract, though most offer mainly consumer and business (the latter little more than bribery to run a server).

What I'd like to see is much more granularity, and in particular some incentives to "trade up". If I have a base 2 Mb/s service, where's the sales pitch to go to 5 or 10 or 20 or 50 Mb/s? If they're truly in the access business that's the model I'd expect.

Does Apple's iPhone Increase Browsing?

Actually, the title is what set me off: "Does the iPhone Increase Browsing?" That sure implies causality to me.

After re-reading, I agree that the article itself is neutral. Mea culpa for being too quick on the trigger.

@jimmx, no, that's not what I meant. I believe that people who already did a lot of browsing (on any platform) were more likely to be early adopter types, which is the same type who would naturally be attracted to the iPhone in the first place.

I believe this is likely to be a much stronger contributor to increased browsing than people who bought an iPhone, all of a sudden "discovered" they could surf the internet better, and then decided to do it more.

Fiber To the Home: Will They Ever Learn?

When our local telecableco cabal is ready to offer the services that require that kinds of bandwidth, they'll be more than happy to provide the bandwidth. They want to sell us the pipe and every bit that goes over it as well.

If they give us the bandwidth first, they're afraid we'll find a way to use it that cuts them out of any additional revenue stream. And they're right.

Monopolies suck.

Comcast Limits User Downloads: Wrong Solution

Careful. QoS is nothing more than a way to control what content you can receive, masquerading as "improved performance".

Higher bandwidth/speed is cheaper to provide (I'm talking infrastructure, here) than QoS. Always has been.

7 Reasons I Switched to Google's Chrome

You should have spent as much time researching Firefox as you did Chrome, since basically all of the functionality (and way more) has been available via extensions for some time.

And I echo others about the browser vs. OS. When Chrome can manage all my peripherals and print jobs, then we'll talk.

Does Apple's iPhone Increase Browsing?

This post, like so many others, suffers from the 3 C's: Confusing Correlation with Causality. It is equally possible (and a simpler explanation) that people who browse the internet a lot are drawn to the iPhone, not that the iPhone causes additional browsing.

In fact, given the sales ramp of the iPhone, it would be amazing NOT to see a rapid rise in mobile internet browsing. For a fuller explanation, see scottjberry.com/2008/0.../ .

Happy Customers Don't Change Their Web Browsers

I agree with you, and violently disagree with Maney. People *do* customize and personalize their browsers. My Firefox contains login and password info in the cache for dozens of sites, and I also have a favorite theme/skin and 10-12 extentions that I refuse to live without--many of which perform functions only now being touted in Chrome or IE8. Changing would be a big hassle and would thus require a compelling reason. Chrome doesn't qualify.

Kindle + College Textbooks = A Huge Opportunity for Amazon

@five, read my comment again. Are you saying kids will pay $35 more per book (net) using a Kindle, but that's OK because they'll make it up on volume?

Advice for Amazon on How to Get Serious About the Kindle

Bzzzt! Wrong answer, Michael.

Kindle's problem isn't the business model, it's the product concept, which just isn't compelling enough. Once it begins to fundamentally change the reading experience (instead of simply replacing paper), it'll catch on.

In any case, you're assuming Amazon's making its money on the ebooks. If that business is so good, then they could simply give away the Kindles.

Can you imagine how unprofitable Apple would be if it made no margin on iPods but counted on iTunes sales to make money?

Back to square one.

'Buy, But Sell' - What Are Analysts Thinking?

Pretty clear to me. Stock has come down, so it has long-term appreciation potential. But short term it's more likely to fall some more than rise, so don't pull the trigger yet.

Note also the way fund managers think: Having money in a stock you think will be flat for some period of time is the same as losing money, when there are other opportunities out there for upside.