Sanketh Katta http://sankethkatta.posterous.com A blog for College Writing 108 at U.C. Berkeley posterous.com Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:54:00 -0800 Why Innovation Means Less http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/why-innovation-means-less http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/why-innovation-means-less

Innovation

On innovation: “saying no to 1,000 things to make sure we don’t get on the wrong track or try to do too much. We’re always thinking about new markets we could enter, but it’s only by saying no that you can concentrate on the things that are really important.”

-Steve Jobs, CEO, Apple

For years it bugged me that Apple products were so limited in features compared to their competitors. Their iPods had tremendous storage, but always has a fraction of the compatibility in file formats, a lack expandable memory, no FM radio, and forced you to use a proprietary connector instead of the industry standard. The same went with their laptops that added on over $200 for an equivalent Dell. Yet they sold so well. While some of this can be attributed to the company’s brilliant marketing, a lot has to do with their philosophy toward innovation.  After reading this quote, it all made sense to me. It explains everything Apple does, they do not sacrifice features, instead they intentionally leave them out because that is innovation. The reason that no other company can catch up with Apple is because they are playing a different game. While Dell, HP, and Lenovo duke it out for the most features, Apple looks to have the least. They want to keep only what is essential, and they believe it costs more for that.

While common logic would say this makes no sense, the proof is in the sales figures. Customers buy Apple products in droves because there are fewer options to choose from.  Tests have been done in the past where shoppers in a grocery store are offered 3 different flavors of jelly, versus being offered 6. While again, our logic would say that customers would buy more when there are more options; shoppers are actually overwhelmed and end up less likely buying at all. This same process occurs with technology, the less the better. For example Twitter should be an utter failure; it has a fraction of the fraction of the utility Facebook provides. However, the simplicity is attractive and is innovation.

I think we have come to a point with technology, where an enormous space for growth will be in the limiting of features. Some small companies such as 37signals have taken this mentality to heart and have been very successful. They sell CRM and Project Management software, however they have only a small fraction of the feature set and flexibility of programs like SalesForce. You have likely never heard of 37signals, yet they have been profitable for 10 years as a small company charging more for less. In their view, me as the user does not want to deal with a million unnecessary features I will never use, so they just take them out for me and don’t give me the option to put them back in. There will be less thinking necessary on my part.

While I value more features and am compulsive enough to care about each and every one, I understand that the vast majority is not like me. They just want their products to work; most people hate spending their time in the settings menu and would rather spend more time just using the product. This appeal of simplicity is somewhat unconscious in all of us, we are perplexed as to why we are drawn to the iPod Shuffle, which has no screen, but costs more than one that does. This and everything Apple and a slew of other small companies are doing show that humans value product and usability over features and settings. This is why real innovation is limiting down to as little as possible. 

 

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/972503/sanketh-katta.jpg http://posterous.com/users/fcUwgJdwu Sanketh Katta sankethkatta Sanketh Katta
Sun, 13 Feb 2011 19:51:00 -0800 Cloud Computing. The End of The Desktop. http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/cloud-computing-the-end-of-the-desktop-comput http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/cloud-computing-the-end-of-the-desktop-comput

Cloud-computing
What is the first thing you do when you get to your computer? What application are you on right now? Chances are the answer to both those questions is your web browser. Most computer users today hardly use the processing and storage capabilities of the actual machine and resort to the web for all of their needs. And why wouldn’t they? With services such as Grooveshark, YouTube, and Netflix for their entertainment, Google Docs for their work, and Gmail for their E-Mail, there is no longer a need for the desktop computer.

Let me clarify, the small population of people who do heavy editing on Photoshop, render videos on Final Cut, and other specific tasks, still need their local machine to handle running all of these tasks. That small population is however growing ever smaller. When we have YouTube allowing us to do small video cuts online on and services such as Avairy and Picknik to do simple image edits, the casual user no longer has to deal with heavy, complicated desktop software.  Google is one of the main proponents of this shift with their Chrome Netbook, which runs completely on the web. Taking the next step from “Netbooks”, the Google netbook does away with the operating system, replacing it with the Chrome web browser. The realm of online applications is rapidly growing, while desktop applications are slowly dying. Can you remember the last time you bought a CD from the store to install an application? Other than maybe Microsoft Office, chances are you haven’t.

Computer manufacturers will quickly realize that placing importance on hardware specs is not the future. There is a reason the iPad has met so much success. It is not because of the device’s astoundingly futuristic internal hardware. It is because of its ease of use, form factor, and quick accessibility to the web. These low-powered tablets and laptops will be the future because their low cost will undercut any traditional alternative, and when almost all of your computing is spent online there is no reason not to buy one.

People will argue that there will always be a need for local machines. But I believe that even those heavy duty tasks will soon be ported to the web. Photoshop already has their online web editor which could soon become full featured. And even video games which are at the forefront of the push for better graphics capabilities are being stopped in their tracks by two things. One, the casual gamer audience is growing, and they are consistently choosing mobile-phone, flash, and Facebook games over their more complicated, hardware intensive counterparts. Two, users can already stream games to their computer via services such as OnLive.  As the library of games for OnLive increases, the market for desktop gaming will diminish as anyone on a high speed connection can play games once only reserved for high performance machines.

The next generation of computing is rapidly approaching and the desktop computer no longer holds the central position it once did. We have already seen the near death of the desktop, monitor, keyboard, mouse setup, in favor of Laptops. It is only a short time until high performance and internal hardware are no longer relevant. 

 

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/972503/sanketh-katta.jpg http://posterous.com/users/fcUwgJdwu Sanketh Katta sankethkatta Sanketh Katta
Sun, 06 Feb 2011 21:53:00 -0800 Why Net Neutrality Is Important http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/why-net-neutrality-is-important http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/why-net-neutrality-is-important

Net-neutrality
Net neutrality can be a touchy topic these days. Some have strong opinions in one way or another, while others just don’t understand what is happening. The Internet is a virtual realm, which makes it difficult for people to draw insight into what is happening.

This is how I would explain it: the Internet as I see it should be a public realm, in that like a highway or any other public road, all people on the road are limited to the constraints of the road regardless of their destination. Whether you are headed to the mall or a local burger joint, you have to share the same road. Internet Service Provider’s such as Comcast instead want to sell fast lanes to the highest bidder, which would be analogous to Best-Buy purchasing their very own lane on the highway only for those heading to their store. The Service Providers like this as they make more money, and the ones buying these lanes like Netflix would like this to get faster service to their customers and thus draw new customers. While some customer’s may think this is good at first, it clearly infringes on the idea of the Internet as a public sphere.

Small Businesses and Individuals will be hurt by this inequality because they are fighting on an uneven playing ground. Big businesses are trying to change the rules of business online. If they are able to attract customers with their abnormally fast connections, their competition is put at an unfair disadvantage. Eventually, Internet Service Providers will have to sell out more and more of these “fast lanes” as customers will expect their services/web-sites of choice to be on the fast connection.  This will simply result in a saturation of the “fast-lanes” to the point where there is no “slow” internet left; the Internet Service Providers just walk away with the profits. In that process a lot of small businesses who can’t afford to switch over will end up dying out.

Allowing even one company to participate in this type of activity entirely changes the dynamic of the Internet. We now have freedom and great innovation, but it could become a space closely controlled by big corporations with very little opportunity for new comers. Similar to the television industry, where it is near-impossible for anyone to just create a new station and have it syndicated on every television, the internet could transform into this realm.

I may have given an apocalyptic viewpoint there, but I think it is important to consider the possibility of the Internet transforming into a locked down space. Once the principle of openness is violated, the precedent is set for the future to continue this trend, until subscribing to the Internet will be like subscribing to television channels, here is one blogger’s interpretation.

It is hard to full grasp the effects these new laws will bring, but if one thing is for certain, we will have to fight to keep the Internet a neutral zone.

If my explanation was hard to follow check out this visual guide.

 

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/972503/sanketh-katta.jpg http://posterous.com/users/fcUwgJdwu Sanketh Katta sankethkatta Sanketh Katta
Sun, 30 Jan 2011 13:41:00 -0800 The Loss Of Anonymity On The Internet http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/the-loss-of-anonymity-on-the-internet http://sankethkatta.posterous.com/the-loss-of-anonymity-on-the-internet

Privacy-book

Everyday users share intimate personal details on their profiles with little regard to who their audience is. While it may have once been a community of one’s close friends, most now have hundreds of “friends” from every convention and party they have ever been to.  Securing your details is more difficult than ever before. While users want to retain their connections in this online address book, they do not want every contact to know what they are doing.  Facebook was born from an environment of openness and disregard toward privacy. From its facemash predecessor, the young CEO has always pushed for a more open system. In its college days it emphasized a “.edu” email requirement, which drew students to the service in masses. However, today, that level of security is nonexistent and does not seem to be coming any time in the future. One site called Openbook, allows users to search the status updates of Facebook profiles who’s privacy settings are set open.  In “The Facebook Effect”, Zuckerberg’s view of privacy settings is referred to as a “stepping stone” toward complete openness.

Openness can be a good thing depending on what users share on Facebook. Some treat their wall as a public posting ground and only reveal trivial details, while others treat it as their private message board with details only meant for close friends. I believe that more users will start converting to a conservative approach in posts.

As it moves forward, users will need to fight to control their information on Facebook, it is however futile. I think that Zuckerberg wants this opening to happen, I do not doubt that in the future all profiles will become available to everybody. I believe it is Zuckerberg’s goal to transform the internet from an anonymous playground into something as identifiable as real life. You would be known everywhere online by your real name, real photo, and real thoughts. The “One Identity” approach mentioned in “The Facebook Effect” may seem scary to some, but at the same time could create a safer environment online. Users would no longer hide behind a veil on anonymity but instead only post and act as they would in real life.

This concept is hard to imagine, given that the popularity of the internet stemmed out of its anonymity, AIM screen names were always masked, online gamers always had obscure handles, and personal email addresses hardly ever told us much about a person. In the future, going to a website could be more like walking into a store with your driver’s license taped to your shirt. Hate speech and online bullying would reduce. While it can be argued that this openness could lead to safety concerns based on the information shared, this view fails to recognize that shift in browsing habits. Users will also adapt to a more restrained behavior. For the same reason we do not run around shouting out our home address and back account numbers in real life, we will cease from sharing certain information online. The internet will become an extension of real life, not a playground for alternate personas. 

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/972503/sanketh-katta.jpg http://posterous.com/users/fcUwgJdwu Sanketh Katta sankethkatta Sanketh Katta