Wait, So 20 Phones On 4 Carriers Outsold 1 Phone On 1 Carrier? Shocking.

I love MG Siegler's style of writing. A little snippy with a large dose of fanboy mixed in. Don't get me wrong, I like Apple products probably as much as he does. The only difference is that I'm looking at the numbers that were released today regarding smartphone market share not with disdain but with a general sense of dread and optimism mixed in.

Make no mistake, Android is on the rise. Though I think they make an inferior phone, they are successfully encroaching on Apple's market share. Remember what happened when a supposedly inferior product started encroaching on Apple's market share back in the early 90's? Apple can't turn a blind eye to this and I don't think they are (though I think the fanboys are). My hope is that Apple sees this as a huge threat and decides to do something about it - like say release the iPhone on other carriers. That's why I feel some optimism about the news. If it pushes Apple to make a better product or more carrier relationships then it only benefits me, the consumer.

So this was announced today...

Over the weekend, I saw a bunch of ads for the Droid phone from Verizon. It seems their main selling point was how more powerful the phone was and they are correct. It will always be the case that Android phones will always have the latest and greatest hardware, just like with most Windows laptops. Apple will never make devices with the fastest processors, the most RAM, the hardware latest innovations. What Apple has made a very calculated decision on is they would rather have a more polished product than one with the best specs. They weren't the first with a front facing camera but I bet mobile video chat will explode because of their implementation and not any one else's that came first. Same thing with multi-tasking. Not the first, but a more smooth integration.

For a long time there was this pseudo arms race in the tech industry of who could cram the most transistors on a chip or the most pixels on a screen or crank up a few more Mhz from a CPU. I think we've gotten to a point where the vast majority of us have way too much horsepower in our devices. Now the question is who will use that horsepower in a way that appeals to us. Apple seems to be leading in that sense... for the time being.

Google Acquires Teracent To Apply Machine Smarts To Display Ads

A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, I had a little start-up that was doing Netflix style delivery but for video games. Vikas Jha, currently CEO and founder of Teracent, was kind enough to join our board of advisors. He had no obligation to do so and was just interested in helping out a fellow entrepreneur. Fast forward to today and I'm ecstatic to hear that Google has bought Teracent. Hope you made out well Vikas!

"Who knows what this thing is? To me, the Chrome OS thing is highly interesting," said Ballmer, choosing his words carefully and drawing more amusement from the largely pro-Microsoft crowd.

I don't think much of Google's Chrome OS and I guess Steve Ballmer shares my sentiment. Even still, he should be a little bit more humble/respectful when speaking about competition nowadays. Though I believe that behind closed doors, Microsoft takes any and all threats to its OS monopoly very seriously, it doesn't hurt to publicly show a little humility given their stumbles lately.

I picked this post up from TechCrunch and though it definitely is a major step forward, let's not make it more than what it really is. Google Chrome, in its proposed incarnation, will never replace Windows (or Mac OS) as a legitimate desktop OS; just like Linux never replaced Windows as a consumer desktop OS. The web has become a major APPLICATION that we all use on a daily basis but there are many other applications that we use that don't require us to connect online. And before anyone starts talking about ZOHO or Google Apps, has anyone really tried using any of these online office applications? Frankly, they're not that useful beyond the bare basics of what a spreadsheet or word processing application should do. Can they get better, of course. Just not today or in my opinion the foreseeable future (next 1-3 years).

But lest I seem like I am in Microsoft's corner, this is a significant announcement. The real point is not for Google to overtake Microsoft in the OS world. It just needs to make a dent and I think it will. Microsoft's empire is one based on total domination. If it ceased to own more than the roughly 90% of the OS market it does today, that will be a major hit to its bottom line. Microsoft is a bloated organization with lots of people making lots of money (roughly 91K+). If Google was able to either take 5%-10% market share OR force Microsoft to significantly lower the price of a Windows license, it could make things difficult for them. In the end, that's all Google is aiming for. Make life difficult for Microsoft in its core product (desktop) so it doesn't concentrate on Google's core product (web).