Tweet

Features of the iTV
The iPhone, iPod, and iPad will be the remote for the iTV
Siri will be instrumental in simplifying the iTV experience. Consumers will be able to say “Watch Breaking Bad” and Siri will look up your cable provider based on your geolocation to get the time and date of the next episode or it will bring up a list of shows available for purchase on iTunes. Similarly, consumers will be able to say “Record Breaking Bad” and it would record the next episode for later consumption.

Sling Box Like Media Shifting
iOS is becoming pervasive in the consumption of media and the iTV will only further the adoption. Consumers will multiple iProducts will be able to watch, schedule, and control the iTV from any iOS device. Additionally, once they have iRecorded media, it can be consumed on any iOS device.

Deep Twitter integration for personalized channel guide and commentary
The iPhone 4S already has deep integration with Twitter which will only get stronger when the iProducts replace the typical TV remote. Consumers will be presented with an interface that leverages the sentiment from Twitter to create a personalized TV guide in real-time and empower consumers to contribute to the ongoing entertainment chatter.

Form Factor Alone Will Amaze
With TVs becoming thinner and thinner, the iTV will probably be the thinnest TV on the market; probably resembling the thickness of the iPad. This will bring a modern equivalent of Bauhaus to every living room that can afford this piece of art. The surface will probably retain the touch screen capability.

Impact of the iTV
- iTunes will displace cable, netflix and other VOD services
- iRecord will displace DVRs by enabling iTV users to record anything
- Twitter will gain more entertainment clout by enabling conversations as media is consumedTweet

Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do. – Apple Inc.

Tweet

Hackers found access to hack the Kinect via an open USB port. Initially Microsoft frowned on this and sought legal action but later rescinded and started to praise the innovation. Microsoft needs to leverage the momentum that they have received thus far and go full speed forward. Microsoft should immediately setup a site that is an open application platform for Kinect related innovations. Already some programmers have setup blogs related solely to Kinect and the examples that are being created.

Kinect obviously has implications far beyond games. Since Microsoft already has made in-roads into the automotive industry, they should start to incorporate Kinect functionality. So instead of touching a screen, drivers can make gestures to control the audio, temperature and volume within the car. Compared to Apple that has only offered usb ports and auxillary access to the various devices, Microsoft has an advantage but only if they act quickly.

“iTunes Live Stream URL” = “URL iTunes Live Stream”

This could mean a couple of things such as potentially a music streaming service, video streaming service, or some sort of combination.

Tweet

Last week, Steve Jobs’ iPad launch highlighted perhaps the greatest manifestation of the company’s legendary reality-distortion field that we have seen to date. Apple and Steve went into the iPad launch with a negative trifecta of no domain name, no issued trademark, and no FCC approval. Despite these deficiencies we all saw the Emperor resplendent in a decadent outfit projected from the incandescent glow of a 10 inch tablet.

I say this while being fully aware of the initial criticisms that have surrounded Apple’s last few paradigm-shattering product launches. There is no doubt in my mind that they have and will overcome all that is in front of them, but like previous product launches, the iPad illustrates yet again Apple’s aggressive corporate practices and their belief in the power of their ability to bend reality to fit their needs. The moniker “Jesus Tablet” has been aptly used to describe the messianic nature of the iPad and perhaps it is well deserved not only for the creation of a compelling consumer-oriented computing device, but also because their corporate maneuverings assume that they really can walk on water. Considering the obstacles that still stand before them, bringing this product to market without a few controversial moves will require a leap of faith.

Do they even own the domain name?

Let’s first consider the domain name, iPad.com, which was issued in 1997 to Martine Bejasa of New Jersey. On January 28th, 2010 – the day after the unveiling of the iPad – there was a change in the WHOIS record. Could Apple be the new owner and Martine the newest Apple millionaire? I hope so, as this domain name predates all trademark filings and would have no problem showing up on page one in Google searches for the rest of its natural life if left independent. The new owner is cryptically named “Enero 6”, or January 6th, which might refer to the date that Steve Jobs and his crew decided that they would begin the fight to call this device the iPad.

Three’s company, especially in Trademark disputes

Next, calling their device the iPad was an interesting choice for Apple considering that the Trademark is disputed by not one, but by two other parties and logic would dictate that there is a high likelihood that they will not be issued the trademark. Since when has logic mattered to Apple? A company called Mag-Tek has been selling keypads in commerce with the iPad name for several years now, but Fujitsu has made progress in splitting the iPad trademark for the use in tablet computing for themselves and convinced the USPTO to reopen the trademark for their use in February of 2003. Their application is pending and they have had a Windows CE tablet available for purchase under that name since 2002.

Fujitsu's iPAD device, which is sold in the United States and other areas.

As a recent story on this subject quips, “….Mag-Tek is selling the IPAD under a valid trademark, Fujitsu is selling its iPad with a pending trademark application and Apple has announced (and plans to sell) its own iPad with no trademark at all.” (another story on this here)

Apple needs to convince the USPTO that their iPad is similar to its iPod franchise and that its use of the name iPad will not confuse Mag-Tek’s keypad customers. This is if it can first convince them that Fujitsu is not the rightful owner despite having a pending trademark application on and off since 2003. For skeptics who believe Apple is doomed to failure, one need only take a look at what happened when Apple went up against the rightful trademark owner of the iPhone in 2007. Cisco caved in and agreed to a settlement with Apple that must have been pretty lucrative for them. Apple gets what Apple wants.

And then there’s the FCC

Finally, there is the issue of not having a valid FCC clearance to market or sell the iPad device. This was also the case when Apple introduced the iPhone several years back, but the FCC gave them what they wanted within 30 days and they were good to go. Pundits believe that Apple’s recent moves to allow VOIP services on the iPhone may be a sacrifice to regain the FCC’s good graces after the controversy surrounding their decision to keep Google Talk off the iPhone. Based upon historical precedent- the FCC should rubber stamp their application well before the expected launch date of April 27th.

We shall see how events unfold, but Apple has been here before and Steve Jobs has never been caught naked between the announcement of a new product and its actual launch.

Follow Sanjay on Twitter @crowdgatherTweet

Dieter Ram is a 1970′s-era designer who is often credited, among other things, with influencing Apple Computer’s products.

His 10 design principles are a great reminder of how to create useful products that stand the test of time. Bonus video footage below as well!

01. Good design is innovative.
It does not copy existing product forms, nor does it produce any kind of novelty just for the sake of it. The essence of innovation must be clearly seen in all of a product’s functions. Current technological development keeps offering new chances for innovative solutions.

02. Good design makes a product useful.
The product is bought or used in order to be used. It must serve a defined purpose — in both primary and additional functions. The most important task of design is to optimize the utility of a product’s usability.

03. Good design is aesthetic.
The aesthetic quality of a product is integral to its usefulness because products we use every day affect our well-being. But only well-executed objects can be beautiful.

04. Good design helps us to understand a product.
It clarifies the product’s structure. Better still, it can make the product talk. At best, it is self-explanatory.

05. Good design is unobtrusive.
Products fulfilling a purpose are like tools. They are neither decorative objects nor works of art. Their design should therefore be both neutral and restrained, to leave room for the user’s self-expression.

06. Good design is honest.
It does not make a product more innovative, powerful or valuable than it normally is. It does not attempt to manipulate the consumer with promises that cannot be kept.

07. Good design has longevity.
It does not follow trends that become outdated after a short time. Well designed products differ significantly from short-lived trivial products in today’s throwaway society.

08. Good design is consequent to the last detail.
Nothing must be arbitrary. Thoroughness and accuracy in the design process shows respect toward the user.

09. Good design is concerned with the environment.
Design must make contributions toward a stable environment and sensible raw material situation. This does not only include actual pollution, but also visual pollution and destruction of our environment.

10. Good design is as little design as possible.
Less is better — because it concentrates on the essential aspects and the products are not burdened with non-essentials. Back to purity, back to simplicity!

[Photo: Vitsoe.com]