Is Netflix Trying to Commit Corporate Suicide or Just Bore Us to Death?

I used to love Netflix, back in the DVD era.  Eventually, I happily made the move to a streaming-only subscription.  I didn’t even care about the Qwikster thing.

netflix-streaming

But over time, my love began to fade a little every time I read the weekly new releases post at Hacking Netflix.

new releases

(see Hacking Netflix for a weekly listing of new Netflix content)

It has become a rarity for me to see something on the streaming new release list that I would watch if Netflix paid me, and almost nothing I would pay to watch. I find that I’ve already watched anything worth a hoot via iTunes and my AppleTV.  Yet another example of how Apple is beating everyone at everything.

Still, $7.99 a month is low enough to stay off of my cancellation list.  As long as Netflix doesn’t run off a gigantic cliff of stupidity.

The first time I read that Netflix wanted to become- wait for it- a cable TV station, I honestly thought it was a joke.  Someone writing a satirical headline in the name of outraged traffic.  I’m way too smart to fall for that old trick.

But, as it turns out, that is exactly what Netflix wants to do.

Really, Netflix?

If you’d  asked me three months ago how Netflix could ensure its demise, I would probably have said to partner up with some cable television outfit (who, ironically, used to be your arch enemy) and go from super-cool, useful service to yet another dying medium trying to eek out a few years of life while technology- and maybe even Apple– renders it completely obsolete.

Seriously, I understand that the empty bag holding, long-gone cat searching dinosaurs like the MPAA and the RIAA are thrashing around trying to harm the inevitable forces of their demise.  But why go from a threatened business plan to a dead one?

I’m not going to bail just yet, but it looks like Netflix may soon join Tivo in my shrine to wonderful things that were killed before their time.

I Love Me Some Apple, But About this iCloud Business

icloud

I can’t decide which inflated statistic is more meaningless: that Google+ has 90 million users or that 100 million people use iCloud.  What I do know is that it comes down to how you define the verb use.  Here’s how I define it:

1. To put into service or apply for a purpose; employ.

2. To avail oneself of; practice.

That implies a commitment on the user’s part and a reliable satisfactory result.  If merely having an account means using then I am a user of probably a hundred Web 2.0 apps that I can’t even remember.  If the devil isn’t in the definition of user, it’s in the definition of active user.

315346-google-logo

Let’s get Google+ out of the way first.  It is a beautifully designed platform.    With no one in it.  It’s like this mansion some cat built in my hometown, where there are no mansions, right before he went to jail.  It’s pretty, but it’s empty.  Sure, Scoble can get a zillion followers.  But Scoble would have a zillion followers if he jumped off a cliff.  Which he will only do if some nitwit builds a cliff jumping app and convinces Scoble that it’s the new big thing.  For the rest of us, there’s simply nothing to be had at Google+.  I’m pretty active on the internets, and I have been added to exactly 21 circles.  And at least some of those are spammers.  I had four times that many friend requests a day or two after I signed up for Facebook.  Why?  Because the non-geeks are on Facebook.   And, I suspect, because the desire for two-way communication on Facebook is geometrically higher than on Google+.  It doesn’t matter that Google+ is designed better.  Unless you are a celebrity (of one sort or another) or happy to be merely a one-way consumer of content, Google+ is an empty experience.

So while there may be 90 million people with Google+ accounts, if you net out those who signed up but aren’t truly active, the broadcasters who only want another billboard to self-promote with, those who are there only to try to sell you something and the spammers/scammers, I bet the number is a small fraction of that.

Then today, the newly crowned King of my beloved says 100 million people are using iCloud.  Maybe, if by use you mean signed up.   But upgrading your iOS and clicking Yes on the iCloud button that gets tossed in your face does not make you a user.  I guess I use iCloud to update my apps automatically and without that scourge that is iTunes.  But do I really use it?  Nope.  For one thing, it doesn’t do what I need it to do.  Apple should have nutted up and bought Dropbox, which does.  For another, no sync program is going to be truly useful until and unless it supports Word documents.  Even if you’re one of the two people in Enterprise lucky enough to have a Mac, literally every corporate document is created in Word.  Pages? Ha!  That’s funny.  I love my iMac, but I still slog away on a bloated 5 year old XP box at work. With Word.  Oh yeah, and Outlook.  Sucks, but that’s life.

I could go on and talk about how iCloud doesn’t work (easily) with Google Calendar or Contacts, but you get the point.

So keep tossing those numbers out there guys.  But those of us in the non-geek, real world know better.

And don’t even get me started on Match.  It is a honking mess.  The only thing keeping Match in the game is Google’s boneheaded decision to limit Google Music to 20,000 songs.

Hopefully there is a silver lining somewhere in this Cloud business.  But right now, it’s so unfinished people have to inflate the numbers to make us believe it’s as good as it should be.

Apptic Storm: Video Camera (the App) Gives You One Stop Video Production- on Your iPhone

appticstorm

I’m about to save you some time, and make your mobile videos a lot more interesting.

vcam

If you have any interest whatsoever in filming anything at all on your iPhone, you need to buy Video Camera from i4software.  All the creativity they did not use when thinking up that name was spent making an amazingly simple but powerful app that lets you edit video while you film it, compile clips, create transitions, add music and credits and then share it with a single click.  All from your iPhone.

Here’s a test video I made within the first 5 minutes after I bought the app.

The point is not that this is a great film.  It’s not.  The point is that the film is 2 minutes long and took about three minutes, total, to make.  Then I uploaded it to YouTube, right from the app.

You can even use multiple iOS devices and combine the clips into a single project.  There are some helpful tutorials to get you started here.

Video Camera (I’m guessing the developer’s dog’s name is Dog) costs $8.00, which is a lot in app dollars.  But it’s a screaming bargain when you see how easy it is to make and share videos.

The experience is not perfect.  I had some crashes, especially when re-editing a saved project.  The audio import function doesn’t play well with iCloud (the iCloud based songs show up on the list but cannot be imported).

Video Camera will record in 1080- be sure to go to the settings and increase the quality right away.  But my video exported to YouTube in 360p.  That’s not good enough.  I could probably import the less compressed video via my iMac, but that sort of defeats the purpose.

There’s some work to be done, but for quick and easy video projects, Video Camera is just about perfect.

Hey Scott Thompson, If You Really Want to Fix Yahoo, Here’s an Easy Place to Start

When I heard Scott Thompson was the new CEO of Yahoo, I thought we had this.

ctop

Not this.

scottt

I hope trying to fix Yahoo doesn’t turn the latter into the former.  So I’m going to help.  You want to fix Yahoo, here’s an easy place to start.

News.  Stay with me here, Scott.  I’m serious.

I’m neither a Yahoo lover nor a Yahoo hater.  I don’t and won’t use it for email or web searches.  I do like (and pay for) Flickr, but that’s not a big enough application to be a flagship product.

What I like best about Yahoo is its news.  For whatever reason, I find myself reading current news at or via Yahoo more than any other source.  Either via My Yahoo or the news headlines I have programmed onto my start page.  I just like the way Yahoo news stories are presented and formatted.

Much of my news was, for many years, consumed via My Yahoo, until I capitulated  to iGoogle (and specifically the Google News widget there) sometime last year.  But still, My Yahoo is much more user-friendly.  Among other reasons, because it doesn’t put your stock portfolio in micro, barely readable fonts.  But like many Yahoo products, it seems like it’s being ignored into oblivion.  In fact, much of Yahoo news is being ignored.

myyahoo

For example, at the bottom of many Yahoo news pages are so-called “Editor’s Picks” articles.  I noticed these hard to miss British flag boots months ago.

boots

The problem is that the same story has been an “Editor’s Pick” since June 23, 2011.  Those are some lazy editors.

It doesn’t give me much incentive to click through to those picks.  Not very sticky.

I think Yahoo could be a real player in the personalized news aggregation space, if it would devote some time and resources to My Yahoo and its news offerings.  Microsoft can’t market its way out of a wet paper bag when it comes to online offerings.  Apple doesn’t care about being an online news source.  Neither does Amazon.  The Huffington Post isn’t very appealing, presentation wise.  iGoogle is butt-ugly. Google News is nice, but not very customizable.  Contrary to what some people would like you to believe,  Twitter (follow me via that link) sucks for news (actually in general, including for news).   There seems to be an opportunity here.

So, c’mon Scott, go for it.

And as my payment for putting you on the right track, please don’t kill off Yahoo Pipes.  Still the most under-appreciated thing on the internets.

Is Microsoft Trying to Turn Mobile Phone Shopping into a Carnival Game?

In last nights’ debunking of the ridiculous shop local business, one of my gripes was that far too often retail sales people think the point is to convince, cajole and/or trick you into buying what they want to sell, as opposed to helping you find what you want to buy.

Today comes a mind-boggling- at least to me- related development.

Microsoft is allegedly thinking about paying retail sales people a bounty on each Windows 7 phone they sell:

According to Paul Thurrott, Microsoft has put together a $200MM war chest of cash to help promote Windows Phone 7, and is willing to pay store staff between $10 and $15 bounty for each Windows Phone 7 handset they sell, depending on how many units each person sells.

barker

Maybe this sort of thing happens all the time (which is a position taken by some commenters in the Cult of Mac post linked above).  Maybe the hidden agenda is everywhere.  Maybe every retail store is a just a  giant carnival with con artists barking out snake oil offers to unsuspecting marks.  But, damn, I hope not.  Whether this is happening everywhere or just in the case of struggling smart phones manufactured by companies with lots of cash to burn, it stinks.

It completely invalidates the entire concept of the in-store recommendation, at least from the customer’s point of view.

There is simply no way you can compensate someone for making a specific decision and expect that person to be unbiased.  Even if you’re the most honest person in the mall (the whole wide mall), your recommendations will be impacted by a bounty.  Your level of honestly only affects the degree of the resulting bias.  Shoot, if someone recommends a Windows 7 phone because he thinks it is the best handset on the market, even that recommendation is tainted by the bounty.

Let me put it this way.  If this sort of thing is truly widespread, then shoppers need to treat retail stores with the same skepticism they treat carnival games.  It may look like a simple game of shooting a ball through the hoop to win a giant teddy bear for your girl, but the hoop, the ball and the entire setup is designed to put you at a disguised disadvantage.

At a bare minimum, sales people should have to disclose up front that they will get a bounty if you choose a certain item over another one.  Even that is wrong.  But at least then you’d know to stop wasting your time in search of an unbiased recommendation.

Rather than try to circumvent the buying process, why doesn’t Microsoft give a bunch of phones to sales people, so they can see for themselves how good they are?  Maybe come up with a better advertising campaign (I’m sure there are Windows 7 phone ads, but I can’t remember seeing any of them).  Win the game on the field, so to speak.  The craziest thing is that, by most accounts, Windows 7 phones are very well designed.  As a committed iPhone user,  nothing would make me happier than some competition to keep Apple on its game.  Someone needs to take up the role of contender, with the demise of the Blackberry.  In fact, it seems to me that Windows 7 phones could take a huge bite out of Blackberry’s market share based on Microsoft’s Enterprise penetration alone.

I wonder how the owners of these stores will react to this?  Will they stop this madness in its tracks?  Will they require disclosure?  Will they demand a cut?  Are the hardware manufacturers buying their cooperation by subsidizing salaries?  What a confusing web of cross-purposes.

At the end of the day, it’s just one more reason to shop online.  One more problem for bricks and mortar stores to deal with, which is the last thing they need.  Whether they know it or not.

Why I Don’t Do Bricks & Mortar

One of the internet canards that drives me crazy is the much overplayed and misused idea that you should avoid buying things online simply because it’s somehow more noble to trade with bricks & mortar stores.

shop_local.indd

That is bullshit.  Period.

If someone wants my business, whether it’s an online store, an allegedly mom and pop operation or a gigantic retail chain, there are only four things that matter:

1. Give me a decent price.

2. Give me good customer service, before and after the sale.

3. Don’t waste my time.

4. Sell me what I want to buy, not what you want to sell me.

Of these four things, having the absolute lowest price is probably the least important.  My time is, figuratively and literally, worth more than the few bucks I might save by pricing every possible source.  For the same reason, numbers 3 and 4 are very important.

Amazon is the undisputed leader in all four.  The Apple Store is the best of the bricks & mortar crowd.  Home Depot is pretty good at it, particularly when it comes to getting me in and out quickly.

Show me a needlessly long line, and I’ll show you a place I’ll never be again.  Make more than a nominal effort to upsell me and you’ll never see me again.

When someone is more focused on what they want to sell than what I want to buy, things are about to get ugly.

Forbes has a must-read article that puts much of this in perspective, using Best Buy as an example.  I shop at Best Buy now and then (on the rare occasion when I need something immediately), and have not personally experienced these issues.  But if I did, I’d likely never go back.

Among the store-killers in that article:

But my friend decided to buy some other blu-ray discs.  Or at least he tried to, until we were “assisted” by a young, poorly groomed sales clerk from the TV department, who wandered over to interrogate us.  What kind of TV do you have?  Do you have a cable service, or a satellite service?  Do you have a triple play service plan?

This would drive me completely bonkers.  Or more directly, to Amazon.Com.

More gospel:

But this is hardly customer service.  It’s actually getting in the way of a customer who’s trying to self-service because there’s no one around who can answer a basic question about the store’s confusing layout.  It’s anti-service.

There’s only one rule retailers need to impress on their employees: If customers can more easily get what they want elsewhere, they will.

Sure, “easy” includes price, but it includes a lot of other things too.

Who Cares About TechCrunch, HuffPo is Ruining TV Squad!

OK, it’s a little sad that the Huffington Post’s assault on AOL (or more accurately, AOL’s assault on its own future) got everyone’s collective panties all atangle and led to just about everyone at TechCrunch quitting (Sarah Perez, one of my favorite bloggers, is apparently hanging in there).  But once Mike Arrington split, all the best blogospats were fought elsewhere anyway.

I can handle the demise of TechCrunch.

What really gets in my craw is the systematic dismantling of my one-time favorite television blog- TV Squad.

At some point, I noticed that AOL, who acquired TV Squad as part of its Weblogs acquisition, had rebranded TV Squad as AOL TV.  That was certainly an omen of bad things to come.  But for a short while, business seemed to go on more or less as usual.

Lately, however, I have noticed an onslaught of Huffpo branding and vibe, as TV Squad-cum-AOL TV is once again rebranded as Huffpost TV.  A name is a name, but the vibe is a buzz kill.  Lots of quantity.  Less quality.

And now this.

tvs

An article about the upcoming TV mid-season shows.  Only not an article really- more like an exercise in needless clicking.  You could offer to tell me all about the secret to eternal life and infinite wealth, and I would not click 39 times to read it.  Really.

I don’t want this.  I want the old TV Squad.  I’ll settle for the old AOL TV.  I’m not going to get it.  But I’m not going to read Huffpost TV either.

Anyone have a recommendation for a good TV news and episode review blog?

Google’s Music Store Looks Nice, But Thinks My Cash Ain’t Nothin’ But Trash.

This post has a soundtrack.  Sadly, not one from Google Music.

I was all excited to read today that Google’s music store is open for business.  Though I love me some Apple, I do not love iTunes and do not buy my music there.  Historically, I have bought almost all my music from Amazon.  Those purchases get downloaded into a folder that is monitored by Google’s Music Manager, and then uploaded to Google Music, my current clear favorite in the musical cloud.

At least as it relates to managing and accessing your existing music.  Most of my actual music listening is done via Spotify.

So, I ran over to Google Music and started surfing the Music Store.  Other than a general dislike of the omnipotent Android name and logo (don’t own an Android device; tried one and found it underwhelming), it looks OK.  I decided to give it a try, and buy a great old record by Tandy.

image

And things went horribly wrong.  I had a major problem logging into the Google Music Store.  Clicking the Purchase button takes you to the following screen.

image

Clicking the Continue Button takes you to the following screen.

image

Clicking the Sign In Button takes you to the Google account sign in page.  Once you sign in, you end up back at the Continue screen.  Clicking the Continue Button takes you right back to the screen above.

Over and Over.  See how easy it is to access and link to Spotify?  But I digress.

Maybe this is some sort of a cookie-related thing.  Or maybe, but surely not, it’s another Google Apps thing.

So I logged out of my Google Apps account and tried the same thing with my old regular Google Account.  Thankfully for my karma, the same thing happened.  So I tried on another computer.  Same thing.

Maybe these are just opening day kinks.  I hope so.

If not, there’s always Amazon.