So there's been a lot of talk about hipster - the super stealth startup that amassed a butt load of subscribers without revealing what it does. There's been a lot of talk about how "brilliant" a success it already is.
TOTAL BS IN MY OPINION
First of all, its just the good ol SV old boys club at work. How did the startup get prime coverage on TC their first few hours of splash page activation? guess the founding team has some great connections.
secondly, i believe only techies and irrelevant early adopters invite people to a site they have never used in return for "beta" access. 90% of the world doesn't even know what beta access is. 80% of these sign ups will never return.
What the F* does this validate?
I'll give it up for a great name and connects I would kill for, but these guys have done absolutely nothing yet as far as i am concerned. Get this shit off your homepage TMZ... i mean tech crunch.
Amazing. Are you going to blog about your experience building it? It'd be great to here some details. Plus it gives it a human story thats just might get some great press.
I think in slightly simpler times. Value isn't only about function, its about form and also timely availability. Some devices are required at a certain point in time and although an application could replace them it most certainly will not. For instance the simple mirror, you can use an app on a camera enabled tablet (which might even allow some cool things like virtually trying different looks etc) but the simplicity of our current solution is very comfortable.
The same argument can be applied to the scale example pg gives. Sometimes when you are dripping wet, in the privacy of your bathroom, a scale is just perfect. That doesn't mean your scale will never talk to an app that let's you track your weigh-ins, it just means a scale is a dedicated device that people will likely want to keep for the foreseeable future.
But pg is dead-on on many items, as are you. There will be, as has been, a migration of specialized devices to software solutions.
Where the line will be drawn (due to consumer preference i.e. value creation) is up for debate though!
I agree - Apple is a business, and it strives to make money - should it not??? The fact that they have realized that great user experience (which MS is also now making a priority-office 2007-10 is a perfect example)is a form of added value that consumers will pay heavily for is simply a testament to Apple's leadership (NOT just jobs!). Having an unbelievably talented marketing team doesn't hurt either.
My question is: what has Apple done to directly propel the world (particularly the 3+ billion people in the "third world" - impoverished and middle class) towards globalization? Microsoft (perhaps in their bid for control) has donated & sold (or subsidized) millions of products to this group of people. In some countries, apple hasn't even attempted to sell their products at reasonable prices despite the opportunity. Isn't ushering all parts of the world into the next decade as important as creating the next great iOS?