Interesting article: http://daringfireball.net/2010/11/apples_pricing_advantage

http://comics.com/speed_bump/2010-10-11/

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/what-were-driving-at.html

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/google/googles-self-driving-car-whats-in-it-for-google/2529

(and yes, I’m aware that it will be a long time before anything like this actually goes into production…)

Google Android closes gap with Apple iPhone in consumer interest

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/09/30/google_android_closes_gap_with_apple_iphone_in_consumer_interest.html

Two thoughts:

1. 38% to 37%? I find this report surprising, and I’m actually a bit skeptical. Sure, there have been several months of reports that Android phones have been outselling iPhones, but those seemed to be from people walking into a store to buy *a* phone and walking out with an Android. This report seems to suggest that people are now walking into phone stores intending to buy an Android phone from the get go. I wouldn’t have thought that many people would know what Android is at this point.

2. Regardless of whether it is true at this point or not, it did/does seem inevitable.

3. Apple is still going to sell more iPhones this year than last year, and next year than this year — and will still make a boatload of money even if iPhone market share retracts. But it looks like other sources besides iPhone (i.e. iPad) will need to be the primary source if Apple’s monster revenue growth is to continue.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20017417-37.html

For the fourth consecutive year, J.D. Power and Associates has ranked Apple highest in customer satisfaction among smartphone manufacturers.

[rastard: Cool. Not particularly surprising though.]

Apple scored 800 out of a possible 1,000 points, according to the J.D. Power study that asked over 6,800 smartphone owners to rank their experiences between January and June 2010. The study, released today, showed that Apple scored particularly well in ease of operation, operating system, features, and physical design.

Motorola, at 791 points, and HTC, at 781 points, grabbed the second and third spots, respectively.

[rastard: wait, what? Out of 1000 possible points, Moto is only 9 points behind and HTC is only 19 behind?

Ends up that JD Powers calling this a "1000-point scale" may be a bit misleading through, since all of their smartphone satisfaction ratings fall in the range between 711 and 800. http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2010185.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/apples_ping_overrun_with_spam.php

Only 24 hours after the launch of Apple’s new social network, Ping, the service has been overrun by spammers. The fraudsters have created iTunes profiles and are posting links to a number of online scams, including ones that promises “free iPhones” or “free iPads” in exchange for filling out online surveys. For the most part, these suspicious links are being posted in the comments sections of the most popular artists on Ping, like Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, U2 and others, all of whom are among the recommended accounts linked to from the Ping homepage.

As security expert Chester Wisniewski points out, Apple doesn’t require a credit card or any other positive identification in order to establish an account on Ping, which itself is a part of newly launched iTunes 10. Doing so wouldn’t be advisable, either, as it would lock out a lot of “credit card-less” kids, teens and young adults from using iTunes. There’s actually quite a bit of free content available from the iTunes Store, from apps to music to video, allowing parents to feel comfortable in letting their children manage their own iTunes accounts without close supervision.

Given those lax sign-up requirements, however, it’s somewhat surprising that Apple didn’t build in a good spam filtration system into its social network, too. The types of links being posted now are what any halfway decent blog commenting system like Disqus or Echo would pick up automatically, or at least flag for review, especially since the posts contain links.

[From yesterday's print edition of the San Jose Mercury News. You can search for this post's title here: http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx#

Deal would mandate FM in phones

Compromise in dispute between radio, recording industry would require congressional action

By JOELLE TESSLER

WASHINGTON—A long-running dispute between radio broadcasters and the recording industry over music royalties has taken an unexpected turn with a proposed settlement that threatens to drag the mobile phone industry into the ring.

The compromise under discussion by radio broadcasters, recording labels and recording artists could include a federal mandate that all new cell phones come with a built-in FM radio chip. While a deal is far from final, the prospect that the government could dictate a key design decision for such a ubiquitous consumer device has alarmed electronics manufacturers and wireless providers.

“This is two old-media industries attacking the new wireless broadband industry,” said Gary Shapiro, head of the Consumers Electronics Association. “This is a battle that doesn’t involve us.”

Building FM radio into cell phones requires an additional antenna, which could add weight and bulk to devices prized for their sleekness, Shapiro said. It could also drain battery life more quickly, which could lead manufacturers to remove other features from their devices, he added.

“We don’t think Congress should accept a back-room deal on how an iPhone should be designed,” Shapiro said. “We think consumers should choose and companies should choose.”

For years, the National Association of Broadcasters has been fighting a music industry proposal that would require radio stations to pay music royalties to recording labels and performers for the right to play their songs on the air.

Current law requires broadcast radio stations to pay royalties to songwriters, but not recording labels or artists. Broadcasters argue that the existing arrangement makes sense because radio airplay provides free promotion and drives music purchases and concert ticket sales.

But compact disc sales have dropped off, and sales of digital albums haven’t made up the difference, prompting labels and artists‚Äîrepresented by a group called musicFirst‚Äîto step up their push to start collecting royalties, too.

Successors to over-the-air radio, such as satellite radio, Internet radio and cable TV music channels, are required to pay performance royalties, noted Marty Machowsky, a spokesman for musicFirst, which is backed by the Recording Industry Association of America and the Recording Academy. Broadcast radio stations, he said, get a “free ride”‚Äîpaying nothing for “musical performance which is the foundation of their business.”

Both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees have passed bills that would give recording labels and artists a cut of advertising revenue that radio stations generate by playing their songs, but neither contains an FM chip mandate. Both bills have stalled due to fierce broadcaster resistance. Faced with a stalemate, lawmakers have asked NAB and musicFirst to try to negotiate a compromise.

The proposed settlement would establish a tiered system of royalty payments that would bring in a total of roughly $100 million for the music industry. Commercial radio stations with more than $1.25 million in annual revenue would pay royalties totaling 1 percent of revenue. The smallest commercial and nonprofit stations would pay either 1 percent of revenue or $100 annually, whichever is less.

As this battle has dragged on, new rivals to broadcast radio have grown stronger and drawn more listeners as digital music players and streaming Internet radio have flourished. If Congress approves the compromise with the FM radio mandate, it would be a victory for NAB, which is seeking to expand radio station audiences.

Both the recording industry and the broadcasters trumpet the clause as a win for consumers. Machowsky said FM radio on cell phones “would give consumers more ways to listen to and enjoy music.”

And Dennis Wharton, executive vice president of the National Association of Broadcasters, which represents over-the-air radio stations, said such a requirement would provide a valuable public service—particularly in emergencies, when consumers often tune into local stations seeking critical public safety information.

But Jot Carpenter, vice president of government affairs for CTIA-The Wireless Association, which represents wireless carriers, insists that while consumers do like to listen to streaming Internet radio and music downloads on their wireless devices, there is “not a huge desire to listen to over-the-air, ad-laden radio” on mobile handsets. Phones with FM radio chips are not in high demand, he noted.

At this point, NAB and musicFirst are pushing ahead. They are taking the potential agreement back to their members to try to get buy-in on a deal that they can take to lawmakers after the summer recess. And they hope that Congress will act in the fall.

I’m seeing this on a couple of my posts — but not on others.

Is it because of their length? Objectionable content? Am I on a blacklist?

http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/Mobile_Exec/T-Mobile_to_begin_selling_the_iPhone_4_on_Friday.aspx

Got all excited by this news headline (not that I care about T-Mobile at all, but it is another carrier besides AT&T), but upon not finding the story posted anywhere else, realized it’s a UK site I was reading.

http://www.thisisbrandx.com/2010/07/iphone-has-apple-in-a-fix.html

Ignore the bottom half of the article (it’s just a rehash of the alleged iPhone4 bugs that have already been in the news ad nauseum).

The top half of the article (the numerological focus on “4″) is actually pretty funny though…