I’m bullish on Redmond again.
Don’t call me a Microsoft fanboy, though. If anything, it would be easier to accuse me of Apple fanboy-ism. I own an iPhone, an iPad, an iPod, and a second iPad for family use. I even have a company-issued iPad for mobile-related projects at work. I just want the best technology products available, and right now — at least in my opinion — those all come from Apple. Though, to be fair, Android-based smartphones — across of a variety of hardware manufacturers — have a larger share of the smartphone market.
Regardless of your preference for Apple or Android, however, it’s clear that Microsoft — along with Research in Motion (RIM) — has a lot to lose as consumer preferences influence enterprise buying decisions. A Cisco study, in fact, reported that 88% of IT leaders are seeing increased growth of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD ) policies, which allow employees to choose their own work-related computer hardware. A lot of this is driven by intense consumer demand for Apple products, and to some extent higher-end Android smartphones from Samsung and other manufacturers.
Standard-issue BlackBerrys and cheap laptops are under attack. This situation is problematic for organizations concerned with cost containment and data security, however, as IT begins to lose oversight of the devices that employees connect to company networks.
Enter the Microsoft Surface tablet.
It runs Windows, with all the familiar Office applications (at least the Pro version does). It has a keyboard. It’s secure. Essentially, the device is a touch-screen laptop in a tablet’s clothing. Some commentators have gone so far as to say that the Surface isn’t even truly competing with the iPad.
From a perception standpoint, then, the Surface tablet is poised to solve a huge issue that CIOs and other executives have with BYOD, and more specifically, with the invasion of iPads into their previously tightly-controlled environments.
The problem: CIOs are deeply concerned with controlling their device footprints.
As companies deploy mobile devices (especially tablets) to mobile workers in sales, event management, on-site tech support and other functions, the number of devices that require IT oversight begins to creep uncomfortably upward. Each incremental device on a company network increases the cost to serve an employee base, and the last time I checked, CIOs weren’t complaining about budget surpluses.
CIOs want to keep the ratio of devices per employee at 2:1, or lower, in order to control costs. Consequently, the refrain that I’ve started to hear from IT leadership, then, goes (facetiously) something like this, “Sure, I’ll grant your request for an iPad. Just let me know which device you’ll give up in return — your laptop, or your phone.”
The tablet-for-a-laptop trade-off just isn’t a legitimate option for most employees. Let’s face it: the iPad is better-suited for consuming information, rather than creating it. For browsing the web, checking email, watching videos and using apps, the iPad is a great device. It just works. However, specialized apps and hardware (e.g. keywords) are often needed for content creation, data security, enterprise email access, and integration with Office applications. Microsoft’s Surface tablet won’t come with these issues, thereby enabling IT leaders to meet the increasing mobility needs of workers while simultaneously controlling costs (by replacing laptops).
Microsoft has an enormous opportunity to disrupt tablet use within enterprises.
While many analysts are focused on comparing the Microsoft Surface to the iPad as a consumer device, Microsoft’s best opportunity to gain early traction with the Surface is likely the enterprise market, a segment in which 80% of the Fortune 100 have deployed iPads for productivity purposes.
RIMM's beaten-down stock (click to enlarge)
But Microsoft has to nail this opportunity out of the gate. A good comparison is RIM, which rushed its highly-anticipated BlackBerry PlayBook tablet to market out of desperation. The PlayBook has been an unmitigated disaster, and has contributed to RIM’s stock price free fall since its release (see chart).
Here’s how Microsoft can get the Surface right, the first time:
1. Make it easy for application developers to build apps that run on one operating system, across smartphones, tablets and laptops/desktops. This is key, and Microsoft is already taking this step.
2. Continue paying app developers to build top apps for Windows devices. Microsoft has been footing the bill for companies such as foursquare to bring versions of popular apps to Windows phone. While this is a highly unusual and expensive approach, it’s strategically brilliant. If Windows devices support most of the top mobile apps, this reduces switching costs for iPhone, iPad, and Android users. Microsoft needs to continue financing app development for makers of popular apps, and sell their accessibility across devices.
3. Get the messaging right. Is the Windows RT model a toy for consumers who want to play with apps? Is the Surface for Windows 8 Pro model aimed toward making workers more productive? There is already confusion regarding the two devices. Microsoft’s Marketing Communications team will need to work hard to market the RT and Pro tablets differently, especially given that many business executives still scoff at iPhones and iPads as “toys.”
4. Leverage its best assets, such as Xbox and Skype. This is a no-brainer. The Surface must — and undoubtedly will — come with seamless Skype integration at launch. What is less clear, however, is how the Surface will connect to the Xbox ecosystem (e.g. Will the Surface eventually double as an Xbox controller?). The Xbox is a unique competitive advantage among players in the tablet space, and Microsoft should play up future connectivity between the two systems.
5. Beat competing devices on price. Microsoft didn’t announce pricing for its two Surface models during its much-ballyhooed launch event. But make no mistake: pricing is critical for the Surface. The Windows RT model should be priced well below the iPad, and the Windows 8 Pro Surface should be priced somewhere between an iPad and a mid-tier laptop. These price points will position the Surface to siphon away market share from iPads and laptops. Pricing is especially important for the Surface’s Pro model, as Microsoft will seek to familiarize business users with its tablets in order to change consumer preferences.
In summary, Microsoft has a better chance at tablet success than many are predicting.
Granted, Microsoft has to get a lot of steps right in order to make a dent in Apple’s dominance of the market for tablets. And there is very little room for error. The first generation of the product has to be amazing in order to convince a skeptical public:
Here’s the how the story ends with the Microsoft Surface: “Zune.”
— Joseph Manna (Joe) (@JoeManna) June 19, 2012
Remember the Microsoft Kin? lol… Remember the Microsoft Zune? lol… Remember the Microsoft Surface? #exactly
— Skylor (@skylor) June 23, 2012
Hey, wasn’t the Atari 400 also a pressure-sensitive keyboard? zd.net/LiKAAJ #surface #microsoft
— Eric Y Lai (@ericylai) June 19, 2012
But it’s because of this skepticism that there’s reason to believe that Microsoft will be successful with the Surface. Unlike RIM’s rushed attempt to build a tablet for enterprise buyers, Microsoft has taken a slow, almost plodding, approach. And now the business case for its resulting product is clear. With a device that enables mobile workers while controlling costs, there is evident ROI for IT departments to justify investing in the Surface.
And I believe they will. So despite what you might think, it’s time to be bullish on Microsoft again. Are you bullish or bearish? Let me know with a comment below.
Smartphone + Beer = Problems
There’s a well-known remedy for saving smartphones that have been damaged after being submerged in water. As detailed in this thread on Quora, the solution involves filling a plastic bag with rice, sliding your phone in, sealing the bag up, and letting the rice wring the moisture out of the phone.
For a whole week. Seven. Whole. Days.
So there I was yesterday, holding my iPhone in one hand and a bag of rice in the other, all the while regretting my choice to read Twitter while holding my phone over a pint of beer (yep, it fell in).
As I prepared to slide my phone into the bag of rice, I stopped for a moment and pondered whether the actions that I were about to take were realistic. I was moments away from a week without Instagram. No foursquare or Path. No texting. None of the magic of Siri. And perhaps most frightening, time apart from mobile Twitter.
Slowly, I put the bag down. I decided to spend an afternoon field testing life without my smartphone, and make a decision based on the experience.
I could go into the whole afternoon and evening, step-by-step. But here’s the short it: Waiting in lines without the ability to kill time by reading Twitter was painful. I couldn’t check in anywhere — and this has become as reflexive as breathing. I wanted to Oink, but couldn’t, and had no idea what was going on within Facebook. And to top it off, some dude was wearing a huge furry hat with horns and I couldn’t even Instagram it.
Thank you, sir. May I please have another?
So what did I do? I went home, cooked the rice, and made an appointment with the Genius Bar at my local Apple Store to trade in my phone for a replacement unit.
It’s going to cost me $199. But get this: there are 168 hours over a seven-day period. For $199, I don’t have to go without my iPhone for those 168 hours. That’s a cost of $1.18 per hour.
Think of it another way. If someone offered to pay you $1.18/hour to go without your smartphone (whether it’s an iPhone, Android device, or Windows phone), how long would you be willing to take the deal? Could you go a whole week?
And what if you had to rub salt in the wound by using a BlackBerry in the meantime?
I couldn’t do it. And no, I’m not made of money. The $199 replacement fee is going to hurt, especially after I’ve just finished buying Christmas presents. But my smartphone has become an integral part of nearly every waking hour of my day — so I just couldn’t.
Could you? Let me know with a comment below!
Note: This article originally appeared on Social Media Today
Change is constant, and trends related to social media and technology are no exception. In this edition of the social media “virtual roundtable,” a handful of strategic thinkers cover topics pertaining to Google, Quora, mobile applications and social media planning. The featured participants for this edition are:
- Lauren Conner, a social media analyst for the automotive industry specializing in online community strategy and management.
- Annie Janssen, the co-creator of Story of My Life Cards and social media girl for a snack foods company.
- Clark Dever, a national speaker on social media for small business owners and the web strategist for Vuzix Corporation.
- Shane Barnhill, a digital strategist, blogger, and founder of the Uptick Sports prediction market.
- Heather Herr, a social media strategist, recovering architecture student, and occasional runner with a bad (or maybe it’s good) habit of signing up for the latest beta release social site whenever she has too much free time on her hands.
Left to right: Conner, Janssen, Dever, Barnhill, Herr
Note: if you would like to be part of a future roundtable discussion, send a reply on Twitter @shanebarnhill.
Let’s start with Google, which recently announced +1, the search giant’s answer to the increasingly ubiquitous Facebook Like button. Do you think +1 will be part of a successful social strategy for Google, or do you think it is doomed to fail just as past social initiatives from Google (Buzz, Wave) have failed?
Conner: Similar to Facebook’s ‘Like’ button, the Google +1 feature is designed to allow you to highlight the search results you found most useful or relevant. The question is ‘Will the Google +1 have as much success as the Facebook ‘Like’ button?’ The Facebook ‘Like’ button is successful mainly because it reaches out to the large network of people we have connected with on Facebook. The average Google user is probably unlikely to have such a significant social network through Google’s Gmail service and the network built with Gmail is likely to be much different than that of a Facebook network. My Gmail network is made up of the people I email on occasion (ie. my insurance broker, my grandma in New Jersey, my accountant, my dog trainer, etc.) whereas my Facebook consists of friends, family and acquaintances I interact with fairly frequently. I don’t need my accountant to know that my search on local organic grocers resulted in a great link to a neighborhood co-op. Beyond that, I don’t want my search affected by my insurance broker’s preferences. I appreciate Google’s attempt to stick to what they know and what they are good at, search results, but this feature looks like a desperate attempt to be more like Facebook.
Janssen: I think overall Google will see more success since Larry Page took over as CEO earlier this year. However, I’m still unsure of how he’ll help their social initiatives as a guy who doesn’t even have a Facebook or Twitter account. In a recent article in Fast Company, Jason Shellen, who spent four years as a business-development exec at Google and now works at AOL, said “There’s an EQ – an emotional intelligence – around social software, and it just might be out of Google’s reach.” However, I think this is a safe step for Google in their attempt to be more social. They’re not creating a network, just building off of consumers’ existing networks. With “likes” perhaps soon replacing links, I think this is a great idea that has a lot of potential to catch on.
Dever: There’s two ways to success in markets, be first or be the best. Google has tried several times to come late and be the best, but have failed. I don’t think that +1 will suffer that same fate, but I don’t foresee it rising to be the market leader. I think that its integration with search will add enough value to users’ lives that the project wont be killed, but I don’t believe it will become the de facto “like” button. It will end up being just another piece of social debris that aggregates at the bottom of blog posts.
Barnhill: From a strategic standpoint, I see enormous potential for Google +1 for several reasons (which I’ve detailed previously). First, +1 is a lead generation vehicle, because in order to endorse links, a searcher must first create an account with Google, which provide leads to whom Google can market its products and services. Second, +1 will provide a new data source to protect Google’s flagship search asset. The quality of Google’s search results have recently come under fire, and +1 feedback will undoubtedly be used to improve search quality by serving up results that your respected contacts have previously vetted. Third, +1 clicks will help Google serve more relevant advertisements, both through explicit feedback (as users +1 ads that they find useful) and implicit means (as Google’s inventory of +1 data on individual web searchers allows them to deliver more personalized ads). Fourth, the +1 system will almost certainly expand beyond search and into Google’s other digital assets (YouTube videos, Android apps, Google Places and as buttons embedded across websites), thereby its utility for web surfers and also helping Google draw more complete profiles of the consumers who are being targeted for advertisements. In summary, +1 will augment Google’s core competencies in search and advertising.
Herr: Assuming it is adopted by users, I think the strength in +1 lies in it’s potential to improve search results quality, not in true social influence. +1 scores are cumulative. It may provide a general rating of social proof, but it’s weakness is that it does not identify if any up-votes came from people you know and trust. Google’s prior move of integrating their “results from your social circle” into results, displaying the avatar and name of the person who has shared that link is more effective at influencing click-through. Searchers make an immediate assumption about the quality of the link based on who shared it.
Next topic: What’s the most overlooked component of social/digital media success that you’d advise newcomers to focus on?
Conner: I’ve had the opportunity to speak with a good number of people trying to break into the social media field of business. Upon diving into their experience with social media in their personal life and where they see opportunities for businesses to use it to their advantage one thing always stumps them. Twitter. It surprises me the number of people who think they know social media but haven’t gone beyond the profile setup and customary “I joined Twitter!” tweet. For companies, Twitter isn’t a platform to announce what’s for lunch or that you have a fever. Twitter is a great way to break away from the confines of branding (to a certain extent) and share a human side of the company. Companies should use Twitter to interact with its customers one-on-one, share community involvement, conduct market research, augment customer service, etc. As of March 2011, an average of 460,000 are set up each day. Some of those people are bound to be your customers, or future customers. Get out there and tweet with them!
Janssen: There are a lot of very important aspects, but honestly, I believe that this exact type of roundtable forum is often one of the most overlooked – but most important – for newcomers. I notice a lot of new companies and brands making the mistake of talking only about themselves – what they think, what they know, and what’s new with them. While it’s crucial to be an expert in your field, no one likes to talk to someone who only talks about themselves the whole time. This sounds very simple, but it’s the basis of good social interaction. I would encourage companies to reach out to their existing fans for their opinions whether it’s through polls, surveys, roundtables or guest blog posts. Everyone who participates will want to share it with their network and all of a sudden there’s much more potential for the information to go viral.
Dever: Building relationships, that’s the key to the kingdom. You have to personify your brand and make people feel that you are their friend. It doesn’t matter how many people you have following you if they aren’t engaged. Speak to them, answer their questions, introduce them to one another, play games with them. It’s simultaneously the easiest and hardest part of SMM.
Barnhill: It’s important to start small by piloting social media projects and then basing larger initiatives on the results of those efforts. This is especially true in larger, complex organizations. It’s very tempting to aim for a comprehensive strategy when you’re just getting started, without allowing for sufficient experimentation. Of course, early lessons learned need to augment business goals and be consistent with your brand message. Just be certain to document them while testing the waters so that you have data to show which tactics are driving results, and which are not.
Herr: Reciprocity. It sounds so soft, but think about it this way – our social networks have become so congested with brands, business, and professionals that plug their messaging, that we’re forced to ask ourselves “what am I getting out of this relationship” with each new follow. We’ve all become takers or pushers or both. People who genuinely like you (or your brand), and whom you genuinely like in return will be your best allies. Relationships aren’t net zero – their net sum, with people on both sides finding value.
Now for a fun one: What is your favorite mobile application that most people probably either don’t know about or haven’t tried yet?
Conner: Look at your keys… or perhaps your wallet… feeling overwhelmed by the number of grocery store club cards, reward key cards, shoe store membership cards? My wallet and my keychain looked like a rolodex of my brand preferences and they were starting to get unmanageable. The Key Ring app, available on your iPhone, Android or Windows phone, helps organize all of those membership cards on your mobile device. No need to carry the cards, just scan and store them in your phone. Sounds pretty basic but recent updates to this app have upgraded the use of the virtual rewards cards by including coupons, offers and discounts. It seems they even have a partnership with CellFire, “the premier destination for valuable savings on groceries, shopping, restaurants, and entertainment.” On a recent trip to the beauty store I presented my iPhone with the barcode for that store to the cashier and received the card’s standard discount along with a $5.00 off coupon available only through the Key Ring app.
Janssen: I haven’t seen many people using Google Voice, but I decided to start using it when I recently lost my phone and wanted to text my friends while I was waiting for my new phone. Now I’m hooked. All you have to do is set up a Google Voice phone number, and you can text from your computer for free. I use the Google Voice app on my Droid so that I can have my voicemails transcribed to text. And if you haven’t used cab4me to call a cab, I would recommend it. It makes calling a cab ten times easier.
Dever: LayAR – Augmented Reality applications are going to be huge in the mobile marketplace. Layar is the current front runner in this marketplace and gives developers the ability to build their own “layars” on the framework.
Barnhill: I have been playing around with Viddy over the past few days, and I really enjoy it. Viddy — like Socialcam — does for video what Instagram does for photos. It provides a method for adding a mood element to short video clips through filtering effects. Each video can then be shared to Facebook, Twitter and YouTube (with Foursquare and Tumblr listed as “coming soon” by the app). The business case for Viddy is still unclear to me at this point, but given that brands have adopted Instagram and PicPlz for curating photo streams, Viddy represents a similar use case. But for personal purposes, the app is a lot of fun.
Herr: Instagram, without question! Rather than photo sharing, I’d call it more of a photo journalism or photo storytelling application. The filters are exceptional, and lend an oldness and nostalgia to pictures. The story that each person is documenting is different – it might be family, food, signage, or urban decay – but I feel the pictures that people share with Instagram are different than what they tend to share elsewhere. Also, it’s fascinating to watch how businesses who adopted early are using it to share content. I’d recommend checking out NPR, Red Bull (client) and Dan Rubin.
World of Quora
Lastly, let’s turn to Quora. Much has been made about whether Quora, the fast-growing Q&A website, can sustain its fast rate of growth without losing its reputation as a quality source of information; and in fact, this infographic from KISSmetrics shows a recent decline in unique visitors. What do you think: Can Quora continue to grow and maintain its quality? If so, how?
Janssen: I haven’t used Quora much but I have noticed a decline in the chatter about it in my own Twitter feed. My suggestion for Quora would definitely be to integrate video into the answers. With YouTube having around 180 million unique visitors a day, I don’t see any reason why they wouldn’t integrate video into their answers.
Dever: Unfortunately, Quora runs the risk of becoming just another “experts exchange.” Its original appeal was its tight knit community that was built around the start-up, VC, tech evangelists social networks. I’ve already seen a marked decrease in quality of answers over the past months, which is when it appeared to hit “the tipping point” and expanded beyond it’s original exclusivity. I believe that y-combinator’s “hacker news” will probably regain some market share as the portal of choice for that community.
Barnhill: I do think Quora can grow while maintaining quality, despite the challenges associated with mainstream adoption. But I think there are two primary threats. First, there is clear demand for tighter, more-focused communities that revolve around niche interests and problems. LawPivot, for example, is making a name for itself (and drawing investment) by focusing exclusively on providing legal advice to tech companies and startups. Stack Overflow, meanwhile, continues to provide value to programmers as a collaborative platform. Second, Quora requires a lot more commitment than users of many social platforms may be willing to invest. By comparison, services like Twitter and Facebook – which admittedly serve a very different purpose than Quora – thrive partially due to expectations of simplicity and brevity. For example, while I still browse through Quora, the focus on longer, in-depth answers to questions requires more time than I’m willing to commit on a regular basis. So yes, while I expect Quora to grow, I think it faces some challenges that will likely lead to a flatter growth curve.
Herr: The answer to that question really depends on user’s root motivation and Quora’s own intentions. As an application grows, change is inevitable. Founders are faced with a choice: adapt to usage behaviors or stick to their core vision. These aren’t mutually exclusive, but they can be. As Quora grows, they will see a shift in their user base from web-based professionals and aficionados, to a larger population that’s harder to wrap up in a pretty package. The content on Quora will change accordingly. Look at Yahoo! Questions now – it’s a place to get your question answered by other users, but it’s not where you go to have an intelligent discussion on how technology is shaping our lives. For these types of questions, look to the Q&A platform being launched by TED. They’ve built a brand around the caliber of content that makes up a TED Talk that will serve as both launchpad and quality control for their Q&A feature.
Thanks for reading! If you would like to be part of a future roundtable discussion, send a reply on Twitter @shanebarnhill.
Last week, Starbucks unveiled Starbucks Card Mobile, the company’s proprietary mobile payment solution. Available as an app for iPhone, iPod touch and BlackBerry devices, Starbucks’ mobile payment application will now be accepted at over 7800 locations within the United States.
Starbucks Card Mobile: A Confusing First Impression
First Impressions
Most mobile application users have become accustomed to the simplicity and intuitive nature of apps, such as those from foursquare, GetGlue and Seesmic. By contrast, the Starbucks app will likely leave many people wondering, “Well, what do I do now?” upon download. There are options to add a Starbucks card number to the application, create a new Starbucks account and enter in credit card information. The latter two features alone will not produce any kind of a prompt for making a payment. Furthermore, the “Payments” section — which many new users are likely to visit hoping to pay for goods — instead provides both a video overview of Starbucks Card Mobile and an option to search for participating Starbucks locations.
The correct process for enabling Starbucks Card Mobile involves buying a plastic Starbucks card, registering it online at starbucks.com and then linking the physical card to the application through the “Cards” section. Current cardholders can link existing cards.
The Interface and Payment Process
Once a plastic card has been linked to the app, the Starbucks mobile payment application is ready to use. Other than the aforementioned ”Payments” section — which is poorly-named — the Starbucks Card Mobile application is easy to navigate and use. Within the “Cards” section, a “Touch to Pay” button appears once a link has been established to a physical card. Other sections within the application allow customers to track any rewards they’ve earned, search for nearby Starbucks stores and manage account details such as billing information, passwords, etc.
Likewise, the process of paying for coffee is intuitive, quick and easy. After placing an order, simply press the “Touch to Pay” button — which produces a bar code — and position your device in front of the cashier’s scanner. The payment process takes less than 10 seconds.
Starbucks Mobile: Touch to Pay
One Small Step for Mobile, One Giant Leap for Mobile Commerce
Despite the ease-of-use associated with Starbucks Card Mobile, the technology behind the application is not the future of mobile commerce. The next generation of smartphones from Apple and Google will employ Near Field Communication (NFC), which allows for wireless data transmission between two NFC-enabled devices. In the very near future, most consumers will have phones that are pre-loaded with the capability to pay for groceries, coffee and nearly all other transactions without ever reaching for their wallets (see also: NFC: 6 Ways It Could Change Our Daily Lives)
Starbucks, however, should be commended for helping to bring mobile payments into the mainstream. Undoubtedly, by exposing its millions of customers to the new world of fast, easy mobile payments, Starbucks will expedite the adoption of wallet-less commerce.
While the efforts of companies such as Square, Bling Nation and Venmo have all helped push mobile commerce forward, none of them have the brand recognition, daily foot traffic and marketing might of Starbucks. The release of Starbucks Card Mobile builds upon the small steps of these pioneering predecessors.
Thus, by the time NFC arrives as an option for the masses, a large, highly-caffeinated segment of the American public will already be prepared to take the giant leap of leaving their wallets behind. Someday, debit cards, physical signatures and checks are likely to be but mere secondary payment options. When that day arrives, we’ll have this offering from Starbucks to look back upon, as Dennis Stevenson notes, “as the beginning” of a new era of commerce.
Have you tried Starbucks Card Mobile? If so, I’d love to hear your thoughts about the application. Let me know what you think!
