“Email has always been a great medium. It’s the content of most emails that’s problematic.”
Top Posts
Leica Sofort 2June 13, 2024
The Hype: Yoshida & Co’s Porter BagsAugust 26, 2025
Casio Duro MDV-106 Re-ReviewDecember 15, 2022
Recent Articles
-
Quote of the Day: Dave Pell
“Email has always been a great medium. It’s the content of most emails that’s problematic.” — Dave Pell
-
Archiving the Digital Bits
Jonathan Poritsky has a really interesting thought about Netflix, their original content, and the archival-less nature of streaming-only services: >But what happens when I fall out of love, or when they hike prices again? What happens when the company starts developing films and keeps them exclusive to streaming as well? And what if they fail…
Jonathan Poritsky has a really interesting thought about Netflix, their original content, and the archival-less nature of streaming-only services:
>But what happens when I fall out of love, or when they hike prices again? What happens when the company starts developing films and keeps them exclusive to streaming as well? And what if they fail and fall into obscurity? If released on disc, they could at the very least be preserved by fans and collectors.I’d argue that so long as services like The Pirate Bay exists, we won’t need to worry about not being able to archive streaming-only content. That said, this is a really good question.
Without original content, Netflix is just a distributor to production companies. With original content Netflix now has a role in creating works of art (if you believe films and TV shows are works of art, I do). This is an interesting problem for Netflix and film buffs alike as more and more companies like Netflix spring up to make works of art.
Likewise too with Instagram — how many historic photos may be in the grips of Instagram that will be lost when/if the service dies?
Ditto Mixel — what if there were truly great works of art on the service, never again to see the light of day.
With streaming, with cloud hosted, with digital itself — we have such a huge risk to lose really important stuff. Important, historically and more.
Same with this blog. If I stop paying the hosting bill, it all goes away. Not that there is anything that important, but there are websites that *are* that important.
-
Twitter Doesn’t Want You
Harry Marks in a beautifully written essay: >Twitter has devolved into just another place for commercials and we’re partly to blame Marks’ writing is fantastic on this post and he sneaks in so many little nuggets of truth that it’s hard not to nod your head along while reading it. He also makes a good…
Harry Marks in a beautifully written essay:
>Twitter has devolved into just another place for commercials and we’re partly to blameMarks’ writing is fantastic on this post and he sneaks in so many little nuggets of truth that it’s hard not to nod your head along while reading it.
He also makes a good point: the nerds that are now mad about Twitters direction, really had their heads in the sand about the direction that Twitter was headed in. We knew where the service was going, but ignored it — hoping instead that Twitter would do right by “us.” The time to push back and ask for change was not a few weeks ago, it was a couple of years ago.
We were late.
-
‘Apple Store Customer Arrested for Shoplifting Says He Was Trying to Use EasyPay Self-Checkout’
The headline says it all. The victim/alleged shoplifter says it was all a mistake and that he meant to buy the headphones. What’s amazing to me about this story is a few things: 1. He got a bag from an employee. 2. Even though he had a bag, he was stopped. (How/why?) 3. That this…
The headline says it all. The victim/alleged shoplifter says it was all a mistake and that he meant to buy the headphones.
What’s amazing to me about this story is a few things:
1. He got a bag from an employee.
2. Even though he had a bag, he was stopped. (How/why?)
3. That this hasn’t happened before, or at least not been blogged about before.The ‘EasyPay’ feature has always seemed like a PR nightmare waiting to happen since it’s launch. I think we would have seen the “old” Apple executive team quietly handle this — which is why we probably never heard about it — but now we heard about this. This is massively wild speculation: but could Browett be trying to rid this feature and therefore letting Apple take bad PR to prove his point? I’m blaming Browet because he [seems to be the only one in Apple’s ranks that doesn’t understand why the Apple Stores are successes](https://brooksreview.net/2012/08/snafu/).
-
Quote of the Day: Tim Edwards
“Windows 8 is a tax on your brain.” — Tim Edwards
“Windows 8 is a tax on your brain.” -
It Will Be Exhilarating
A new book from the guys at Studio Neat. I had a chance to read an advance copy (I also provided a quote on the site) and I really urge you, no I beg you, to read this book before you launch your next Kickstarter project. I cannot tell you how many Kickstarter projects I…
A new book from the guys at Studio Neat. I had a chance to read an advance copy (I also provided a quote on the site) and I really urge you, no I beg you, to read this book before you launch your next Kickstarter project.
I cannot tell you how many Kickstarter projects I have backed that months after the “expected ship date” still have not shipped, and after reading this book I have a feeling those products could have been shipped on time if the backers knew some of this knowledge.
I told Tom and Dan that after reading this book, I almost think it should be required before starting a project on Kickstarter. While I can’t make that happen, I am 50% more likely to back your project if I know you have read this.
Ok, is that enough reason to go check it out?
If not, get this: it’s $5.
Also: it’s a fast read for a slow reader like me.
-
A Private Facebook
I love how Gabe uses Glassboard as a sort of private-single-use Facebook, with privacy. I think this would be a great thing for my family too — and plan on setting it up. I called for suggestions on how others are using Glassboard, so I am glad I came across this post from Gabe. One…
I love how Gabe uses Glassboard as a sort of private-single-use Facebook, with privacy. I think this would be a great thing for my family too — and plan on setting it up.
I called for suggestions on how others are using Glassboard, so I am glad I came across this post from Gabe. One thing that I didn’t know was just how robust the website offering is. I’m in.
-
Quote of the Day: Garrett Murray
“I’m not a fan of software patents, but I am a fan of ethical and respectful business practice.” — Garrett Murray
“I’m not a fan of software patents, but I am a fan of ethical and respectful business practice.” -
‘What Neil Armstrong Could Have Said’
A great article from the Esquire archives that polled celebrities in the summer of 1969 and asked them what they would say if they were first on the moon. My favorite is Truman Capote’s: “So far so good.” Of course Neil Armstrong topped them all — may he rest in peace.
A great article from the Esquire archives that polled celebrities in the summer of 1969 and asked them what they would say if they were first on the moon. My favorite is Truman Capote’s: “So far so good.”
Of course Neil Armstrong topped them all — may he rest in peace.
-
Amazon Item of the Week: Mrs. Meyer’s Clean Day Liquid Hand Soap
Specifically the Lemon Verbena scented soap. I wish this was made in a foaming soap, but I like it so much that I don’t really care that it isn’t foaming. Actually what I really like about it is the clean scent it leaves behind — not over powering like other soaps, just enough that it…
Specifically the Lemon Verbena scented soap. I wish this was made in a foaming soap, but I like it so much that I don’t really care that it isn’t foaming. Actually what I really like about it is the clean scent it leaves behind — not over powering like other soaps, just enough that it is there for a bit.
[I buy mine by the 6-pack](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000E75ES2/ref=nosim&tag=brooksreview-20).
If I can’t get this hand soap, and/or I want a foaming soap, my back up is [this Method soap](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00660CVUA/ref=nosim&tag=brooksreview-20). It doesn’t smell as nice, but it’s a solid #2 offering.
-
Innovation, Patents, and Drugs (I Assume Samsung is on Drugs)
[Jim Dalrymple](http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/08/27/the-innovation-argument/): >What Apple’s win prohibits Samsung, and others, from doing is blatantly copying Apple’s design. There is nothing in the ruling that says Samsung can’t continue to innovate. Great post from Dalrymple that perfectly shows just how far “news” outlets are willing to stretch the truth to craft the perfect anti-Apple headline for their…
[Jim Dalrymple](http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/08/27/the-innovation-argument/):
>What Apple’s win prohibits Samsung, and others, from doing is blatantly copying Apple’s design. There is nothing in the ruling that says Samsung can’t continue to innovate.Great post from Dalrymple that perfectly shows just how far “news” outlets are willing to stretch the truth to craft the perfect anti-Apple headline for their stories.
As I’ve said, the most interesting part of this verdict is going to be to watch how Google and its “partners” react. So far, here are the reactions I have seen from Google and Samsung.
[Google](http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/26/3270837/google-responds-apple-samsung-verdict):
>The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don’t relate to the core Android operating system, and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office.
Roughly translated means: “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”
[Samsung’s internal memo on the case has several interesting points in it](http://9to5mac.com/2012/08/27/youve-seen-apples-internal-memo-to-employees-on-the-verdict-now-heres-samsungs/):
>We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers.
To me this opening salvo sounds massively important. “Had been” a customer? So is Samsung cutting off the supply of iOS device parts to Apple, or is Apple shifting to not use suppliers that also compete with them?
We’re not talking about a few small parts, we are talking about multi-billion dollar business deals. So is Samsung letting it out that not only do they owe Apple a billion dollars, but now they have effectively lost Apple’s business? That would be devastating news to Samsung’s stock.
>The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple’s designs. These courts also recognized our arguments concerning our standards patents.
“The U.S. is just being an ass.”
>History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.
Huh? This seems horribly made up. Further, what’s Samsung’s innovation: being lightening fast at copying the market leader?
>We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritize innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt.
To me I read this as: If Apple continues to succeed, then consumers clearly want innovative products, and we will prove this by starting to lose money and make products that are not innovative, and therefore are products no one wants.
Sometimes it’s just best to keep your mouth shut, or remain vague. Two things Samsung *should* have copied from Apple.
#### Update
[Just saw this piece from Seth Weintraub, which argues that this is about more than Samsung](http://9to5mac.com/2012/08/26/can-google-claim-apples-win-doesnt-relate-to-the-core-android-os-when-nexus-s-got-hit-hard/) — it reaches into Android too. As Weintraub notes with the findings against some Nexus phones:
>These are software patents and there is no Samsung in pure Android software.
Ouch, if I am an Android “partner”, I am calling Apple and then Microsoft today.
-
The Amazon Retail Domination Strategy
I have been thinking a lot about Amazon and the future impact that online retailers will have on commercial real estate — an industry that I work in for my “day job.” More specifically, I’ve been thinking about whether or not Amazon is going to hamper the ability to refill vacancies in commercial shopping centers.…
I have been thinking a lot about Amazon and the future impact that online retailers will have on commercial real estate — an industry that I work in for my “day job.” More specifically, I’ve been thinking about whether or not Amazon is going to hamper the ability to refill vacancies in commercial shopping centers.
With each passing month, I fall more on the pessimistic side that Amazon is indeed already slowing the commercial real estate recovery. We can see this not only with consumer electronics stores and bookstores, but I think we will begin to see this more and more with any type of store that you would normally “pop” into — meaning a store that you don’t seek out, but rather a store that you stop by because it was on your way. Amazon is the reason I have been shopping in stores less often, I mean the UPS driver knows me.
The funny thing is, Amazon isn’t really competing on price with traditional stores. If you look at the cost of goods on Amazon and then in a store, Amazon’s prices may look cheaper, but once shipping is added, (yes, a Prime membership changes this aspect) they usually wash out to be the same — often you barely save much buying on Amazon. ((Yes, there are always exceptions.))
Amazon is not trying to sell consumers on the idea of shopping with Amazon. Instead, Amazon is attempting to make shopping with them a better experience than in a store, and they are doing this by changing your habits.
Amazon has done this, as best I can tell, by focusing on three key areas:
1. Impossibly cheap shipping (no periods on a non-sentence list)
2. Impossibly fast shipping
3. Consumer trustThese three things are paramount to the success that Amazon is seeing right now, and that Amazon will see in the future.
### Cheap Shipping
If Amazon shipping wasn’t cheap, people wouldn’t buy from them; it’s that simple. By making shipping inexpensive, Amazon is showing value to consumers who have purchased from any other online retailer and paid for shipping that is either twice the cost, and four times slower.
By giving “pro” level users the ability to pay a cheap, annual fee for free two-day shipping, and low-priced one-day (and sometimes same-day) shipping, Amazon is compelling users to shop more on their site. Think of it this way: if I am a Prime member and see something cool for $10 on Amazon, there is a high probability I will just buy it right then and there. It is too easy and shipping is “free,” so why not? Whereas, if I don’t shop at Amazon and I see something (or hear about something) cool and I want to buy it, it is rare that I would get in my car and go straight to the store.
That’s a powerful change in habits: buying right away online because it is easy and fast, versus the hassle of going to a physical place to buy something. Amazon is saving users time, energy, and aggravation — and both Amazon and consumers know it. Of course this is not limited to Amazon, but we’ll get to why Amazon excels at this when others don’t in just a bit.
### Fast Shipping
Amazon doesn’t just use fast shipping services, they fulfill items lightening-fast, using the closest warehouse to ship the item to you. Add to all of this the fact that in certain areas (and Amazon is adding more warehouses in more locations) you can get same-day delivery if you order early enough in the day, and you can see that Amazon is removing any reason a person has to get in his car and hassle with going to a “real” store.
Again, powerful stuff. Amazon is making everything an easy, impulse purchase — a dangerous thing for everyone’s wallet.
### Consumer Trust
Of the three strengths that I listed for Amazon, I personally think that consumer trust is the most interesting aspect.
Remembering back to my early days on the Internet, I remember how I desperately wanted to sign up for AOL. My mom was actually OK with me doing so, and her paying for it, **but** she didn’t want to use a credit card. She didn’t trust AOL with her credit card information. I actually had to call my dad, who had an MSN account, and have him convince my mom that it was safe to give AOL her credit card information.
Fast forward to today and I have three credit cards stored with Amazon, all of my shipping addresses stored, and all that data can be used to purchase just about anything if you know my password.
I’ve never once felt insecure about that.
The sheer size and volume that Amazon sells everyday shows that I am not alone in blindly trusting Amazon — everyone I know does. And yet this is only one part of the trust that Amazon has earned with consumers.
The second facet of trust is ever more fascinating: I trust Amazon to do right by me. I know that I can return something to Amazon and it won’t be a hassle. I trust that the quality of the item is vaguely well-represented in the reviews by other users. But more than all of that, I trust that Amazon has a comparable price for that item, so I don’t need to comparison shop elsewhere.
As a consumer, as a geek, as a person, I just trust Amazon. How many other retailers can you say that about — physical or otherwise? I can only say that about a handful of other retailers, and that makes Amazon a powerful force — even more powerful than cheaper pricing would be.
### Amazon’s Death Blow
I think all of this trust and shipping Kung Fu is leading to a massive shift in retailing over the next ten years. I don’t think there will be much of a reason for most general purpose stores. Your Best Buy, Fry’s, Gamestop, Radio Shack, etc., aren’t going to make it. They can’t compete with the convenience of Amazon, and they can’t house the items Amazon can. Plus, in my opinion, their employees are annoying — which only further encourages people to avoid shopping in person.
I don’t think it is all doom and gloom for retailing though — I think we are about to see significant shift to two types of retail stores:
1. “I need it right now” stores (7Eleven)
2. “I need to touch it, or be educated about it” stores (Apple Stores)Essentially, I think Amazon is going to wipe out everyone that isn’t a niche player, or a store that sells goods that are of the need-it-now variety. What’s interesting is that I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing on the surface for retailers, but I worry about consumers if Amazon is allotted this kind of power.
If Amazon is successful in killing retailing, as we know it today (and they are hell-bent on doing so), who is to keep them in check when they are the *only* big online retailer?
What we need is an Amazon competitor. If for nothing else, so that we can keep Amazon as awesome as it is today.
-
Oh, Well If We Can Claim Apple Is Evil…
Interesting read from Jean-Louis Gassée that refutes the notion that Samsung (and other Android devices) will now need to assess an Apple Tax on consumers for settling licensing and lawsuits. As Gassée points out, this is nothing new: > Last year, Apple and Nokia settled an IP “misunderstanding” that also resulted in a “Tax”…but it…
Interesting read from Jean-Louis Gassée that refutes the notion that Samsung (and other Android devices) will now need to assess an Apple Tax on consumers for settling licensing and lawsuits. As Gassée points out, this is nothing new:
> Last year, Apple and Nokia settled an IP “misunderstanding” that also resulted in a “Tax”…but it was Nokia that played the T-Man role: Apple paid Nokia more than $600M plus an estimated $11.50 per iPhone sold. Where were the handwringers who now accuse Apple of abusing the patent system when the Nokia settlement took place?
He goes on to point out that Samsung is already paying huge sums per phone and tablet to Microsoft, yet no talk on a “Microsoft Tax” in the media.
Of course Nokia and Microsoft are not nearly as page-view-link-bait driven as bad mouthing Apple is, so there’s that.
I think the most interesting to thing to find out, right now, is what Google is saying (if they are saying anything) to their hardware “partners”. I mean think about it very carefully: Google owns Motorola and just watched Samsung be effectively bitch-slapped by a Jury. Is Google telling hardware partners to “keep calm and carry on”? Not likely.
And if Samsung is already paying Microsoft $10-15 per Android device, how much would it cost to just license Windows 8? It cannot be that big of a gap.
-
Why I Think This Win for Apple Is Good for Everyone
I was watching Twitter yesterday when the Apple vs. Samsung jury came back and announced its findings. The overall sentiment on Twitter was one of worry — mostly about the reaffirmation that this gives to litigation and the patent system itself. The worry is that with such sweeping victory, Apple now has massive power over…
I was watching Twitter yesterday when the Apple vs. Samsung jury came back and announced its findings. The overall sentiment on Twitter was one of worry — mostly about the reaffirmation that this gives to litigation and the patent system itself. The worry is that with such sweeping victory, Apple now has massive power over the patents they have and thus everyone should cower if cornered by Apple.
I think this assumption is dead wrong.
In order to believe this, you also have to believe that Apple wants to take you to court — they don’t. In fact, all Apple really seems to care about is not being ripped off — and really don’t we all care about this. It doesn’t appear to me that Apple is looking at every obscure patent they have and finding someone to sue, rather they are looking into products that they feel copy theirs.
[From Nilay Patel at *The Verge*, on the verdict](http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3266571/apple-decisively-wins-samsung-trial-what-it-means):
>Perhaps most importantly, the jury ruled that many of Samsung’s infringements were “willful” — that is, the company deliberately copied Apple’s patents. That’s how they got to that $1.051 billion damage award; they punished Samsung for doing it on purpose.
In my opinion, from what I have read, this case was not about patents for Apple *or* the jury (it was for Samsung) — for both Apple and the jury this case was about copying an idea. The question that the jury answered for Apple, and for me, was: did Samsung copy Apple products, [or did they Remix Apple products](http://www.ted.com/talks/kirby_ferguson_embrace_the_remix.html)?
The jury came back and said: Samsung copied.
Furthermore, the jury came back and said that said copying *is* wrong. But we all knew it to be wrong the entire time.
Yes, the patent system is a fucked up mess to say the least, but I still very much believe that what Samsung has done is wrong no matter how you slice it.
So yes, I would like patent reform, but I am also very happy that *this* jury simplified the matter and handed out the correct verdicts. ((Though, the verdict sounds unlikely to stand, the judgment has more or less gotten the point across in the court of public opinion — something Apple really wanted.))