K.C. MacLaren, director of mobile and emerging platforms at Starbucks, talking to GeekWire:

You mentioned in your talk that Android is a ‘watered down’ experience. What did you mean by that?

In a broad sense, in terms of some of the fragmentation in Android, with multiple resolutions, multiple screen sizes, different capabilities of different platforms that run Android, some users may find that they have to produce a watered down experience. They can’t deliver a consistent one. If they are using a lot of native device elements — like the accelerometer and the camera and gyroscope and all of the different pieces of the hardware — those are handled very differently on different devices. So, if you needed that, you might not be able to deliver that in a great way. You might have to take that feature out, for example.

The usual response to this is about how solid iOS is in this regard, but it’s wrong to argue there’s no fragmentation at all on iOS. New devices arrive that are more powerful and have a different feature set to old models. Ageing kit is eventually unsupported by iOS updates. And there are now three different screen resolutions. But on iOS, the low number of systems and, importantly, their general consistency in terms of behaviour, nonetheless makes them appealing to developers despite the (very slowly) increasing fragmentation. Contrast this with MacLaren’s comments: not only are there tons of Android devices available, but even hardware components don’t work consistently across all of them.

Via Curious Rat.

Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes, in September (CNet):

How can you justify renting your first-run TV shows individually for 99 cents an episode? [This would] jeopardize the sale of the same shows as a series to branded networks that pay hundreds of millions of dollars and make those shows available to loyal viewers for free.

Warner, also in September (LA times):

“We just don’t think the value proposition is a good one for us,” [Chairman Barry] Meyer told analyst Jessica Reif  in an interview at the conference. He said in his view he’d rather license whole seasons of shows rather than “open up a rental business in television at a low price.”

I’ve now been running an Apple TV since the start of 2011, and here’s what I’ve learned from the experience:

• 99 cents for a 40-minute show isn’t fantastic value, but it is good enough as an impulse purchase, and stops me from bothering to find shows via ‘alternate’ means. It’s also a cheap and usable enough system to ‘convert’ me from using ‘alternate’ means to the semi-legal one (for me) of Apple TV (see below for more on that).
• 99 cents is too much for old shows that aren’t great and also for shows that are 20 minutes in length. For those, I tend to grab DVDs on sale from the likes of Amazon; studio execs say they don’t want to harm DVD sales through digital, but the stuff I buy tends to be significantly cheaper than an Apple rental would be, because I wait for the sales.
• The single-episode rental nature of Apple TV could be a boon for studios, since it enables you to ‘test’ shows you’ve not watched before. Our household’s $1.98 test of two episodes of Lie To Me (sadly now cancelled by idiots at Fox) resulted in all 48 episodes being rented. So the studio got a total of $47.52, minus Apple’s cut. We’d have never bought the DVDs.
• There aren’t enough shows for rental on the Apple TV, meaning interest will soon dwindle.
• I don’t want to buy most shows to rewatch them (most of our DVDs have been watched once only), and there’s no way in hell I’m paying £2.49 ($3.99) for a single TV episode in HD, nor even £1.89 ($3.02) for SD. £36.99 is terrible value for a season of a show that will soon end up on DVD for half of that.

Of course, execs would also argue that, despite me paying for TV content, I’m still breaking the law, because I’m in the UK and using a US iTunes account to rent TV shows. Frankly, I’m not going to cry myself to sleep over that—TV being locked to regions is an anachronism that makes no sense whatsoever today (and the same goes for movies), and the studios are getting money they otherwise wouldn’t have gotten.

I think it’s a great pity that Apple TV seems to be on a road to nowhere. Although new movies regularly appear, the top TV rentals have barely changed in six months, bar new content from the BBC showing up on a regular basis (which makes no odds to me, being British, but I’m sure Americans are happy about this, so: well done, BBC). And it’s bizarre that studio execs witter on about Apple TV ‘devaluing’ content when that same content is available in the US in unlimited form for under $10 per month from Netflix.

Give me the last season of House on Apple TV for rent. I’ll watch the lot and you’ll get money. Chuck, too. And probably a whole bunch of other shows. Alternatively, sit there stamping your little feet, covering your ears, shutting your eyes and pretending it’s still 1999. That’s all fine. Bitch and moan about how Apple somehow ‘destroyed’ the music industry (by convincing a bunch of people to pay for digital) and how you don’t want the same to happen to the world of TV. I’ll keep pretending it’s 1999, too, by waiting until the shows I want to watch are in the bargain bin (which happens increasingly quickly these days), and you’ll get less money—and it’s your own damn fault, you idiots.

Previously on Patent Trolling America:

Indie developers get hit by threats from company that makes a living suing people over wide-ranging patents.

Lodsys goes wah wah wah on a blog, suggesting they are the victims here. I disagree (and, judging by the fact my article from yesterday rocketed to second place in Revert to Saved’s all-time most-read list, I’m not the only one).

Today, the guy who first revealed he’d been hit by Lodsys, James Thomson, said another wave of attacks is happening:

Sounds like there’s a second wave of FedEx parcels today – the Iconfactory just got one.

This one’s going to run and run unless someone fights and wins, or Apple smashes Lodsys in its stupid face with a lawyer-shaped punch.

Two points people have been making about Lodsys are worth countering.

1. They only want 0.575% of US income from IAP, so why all the whining?

The figure might not seem much, but what’s to stop Lodsys amending this later? Or for some other party to say it has a patent that IAP infringes and demand 1% or 2%? And then for another to do the same? Before you know it, half your income is paying patent trolls and Apple’s platform gradually becomes deserted by the developers who made it a success.

Also, importantly, this figure is apparently not included in the documents being sent out by Lodsys. It’s all very well to say “but we’re not asking for much” after you’ve already scared the shit out of a bunch of developers. (Most can now, of course, find the information online, but they shouldn’t have to, and the many developers who received the letter on Friday probably spent the weekend wondering how much Lodsys would damage their business.)

It’s also still unclear whether paying Lodsys would breach the terms developers sign with Apple, meaning IAP in itself would be possible until some kind of global resolution is made, such as Apple amending its terms accordingly. (And that would surely open the floodgates to infinite trolling idiots on money rafts.)

2. Lodsys says Apple is licensed, so it’s not going to fight, and it’s only fair the devs get permission to use the technology too.

First, Apple provides no alternative to IAP, so devs cannot avoid it unless they ditch any app with this capability. Secondly, I don’t for a second imagine Apple legal thought problems like this would ever occur, and that it’d roll out a system that would eventually incur extra costs for iOS developers. Development platforms are supposed to be utterly bulletproof-safe to develop for. You shouldn’t have to think “I wonder whether some scumbag will sue me for using IAP at some point”—this should all be covered; developers should be protected by the company that owns the platform or service.

Should Apple capitulate here, expect—again—a ton more threats of this kind to appear, resulting in developer income being chipped away piece by piece. Given Apple’s rather powerful legal team, I’ll be astonished if it sits back and does nothing whatsoever.

World-leading PC manufacturer Lenovo has done it again, announcing the ultrathin ThinkPad X1, a hugely innovative laptop that looks like nothing you’ve ever seen before.

OK, so it might look a smidge like the MacBook Air, but here’s why Lenovo’s laptop will grind Apple’s into the dirt:

• Nipple: Everyone likes a nipple, and this laptop still has one wedged into its keyboard. Apple seems to think that multitouch trackpads are the way forward, but the nipple will eventually win the day.
• Stickers: The MacBook Air is extremely boring when you open it up—the entire thing’s just grey. Yawn. By contrast, the ThinkPad X1 has lots of exciting stickers on it; even better, these tell you what companies have supplied parts for your computer, enabling you to show off to your friend.
• Heft: The ThinkPad X1 is about 50 per cent heavier than the MacBook Air, meaning it’s far more satisfying to carry. You really know you’ve spent money on something when it’s in a bag and tugging at your shoulder. (Even better, 1.7kg is only the starting weight—you can actually make it heavier. I’m hoping for a special edition with a brick glued to the lid.)
• Battery: Lenovo reckons the battery should last up to five hours, compared to seven in the MacBook Air—a big benefit, because everyone works too much these days. The X1 makes sure you won’t, especially if your forget your charger.
• Windows: It’s got Windows inside! Everyone loves Windows.
• Poor screen contrast: Great reproduction of photos drops your productivity. By making on-screen graphics less exciting, you will do more work. Unless your battery runs out first, obv.
• Black: Black is the new black, and the black shell doesn’t at all make the X1 look like it’s the result of a torrid affair between a MacBook Air and a clunky 1990s Windows laptop.
• Specs: The X1 has more bullet-points than the MacBook Air, referring to extra ports and ‘stuff’ that is a surefire way to draw in typical users. They love lists of numbers.
• Storage: The SSD will be optional, rather than standard and enforced across the line. Futuristic technology is scary.

Run for the hills, Apple! I think I’m not alone in saying that Lenovo’s got you beaten here, and that within four days at most of the X1 being on sale, you’ll be down to third in terms of market-cap, because Lenovo will blitz past even Exxon, leaving you in its wake.

Ryan Sarver (head of Twitter’s Platform Group), in March:

Developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no. We need to ensure users can interact with Twitter the same way everywhere.

Mac Twitter client Kiwi’s developer, today:

I’ve stopped working on Kiwi. […] It essential that the platform you’re working on is eager for your app, eager to help you get to market, and eager for you to reap your well earned rewards.

Perhaps Twitter has a great long-term goal that involves the strategic decision of “crap on the guys that made your platform popular”, but it’s a pity so many clients and devs are taking a hit. And from what I see from Twitter itself—across Mac, iPad and iPhone, the company itself is being quite hypocritical when it comes to Sarver’s comment:

We need to ensure users can interact with Twitter the same way everywhere.

Maybe Twitter should make sure its own apps have some semblance of uniformity, then.