The Teckki Says

Yesterday Adobe, the maker of Flash software, announced that it was no longer going forward with mobile software development. While this is "eyes glazed over" news to most non-technical audiences, it is one of the most significant developments for users of tablets and smartphones. Apple won the battle over Adobe on whether Flash will play on its iOS (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch) devices, and as the 800-pound gorilla, Apple sways how mobile development will be done on all mobile devices.

This is not a technical battle where your web developer throws in a different kind of poof dust and your website displays with no problems – many businesses, especially those with all or mostly Flash websites, will have to have them redone. In addition, Flash was the best in the business in terms of animation, which is why it was so widely used. Today’s tools aren’t as robust or finely developed, which means many websites will take a step backwards in animation.

So what does this mean to the average business, who wants a very attractive site that attracts loads of customers, requires little maintenance, all at a reasonable price? It means you are still living in a fantasy world, but here are five things you need to know as you look at your future website needs:

(1). Stop insisting on Flash websites. Clients don’t ask for Flash per se, but they ask for Disney-like animation, video and stuff that moves and twinkles. That’s usually Flash. A better question to ask is, "Will my site display on all smartphones and tablets?"

(2). Get used to a new alphabet. Most people I know understand the term HTML, the code used to make stuff appear in web browsers. HTML5 is the new term. It also would not hurt to know video formats, in particular the format of the video you are supplying to your web developer. Then you might know beforehand if you need to shell out additional bucks for a conversion. Some videos are supplied in Flash formats.

(3). Flash will no longer be a selling feature on Android-based platforms. Yes, Droid does Flash, but most websites will want to do iPad and iPhone. Unless you’ve got the deep pockets to do both, you’ll probably want your site to display on Apple devices first. And don't buy into the hype that there are more Droid devices than Apple devices. The surveys are nuanced, with many referring to units shipped to stores as opposed to customers actually using them.

(4). If your website contains a significant number of Flash elements, it will probably have to be redone. One way to find out for sure is to right-click on any element you think might be Flash (hint: it’s probably animated). If you get Flash player information in the popup, you’ve found it.

(5). Open up your wallet. The new technologies will cost money. You could, of course, stick to the old, basic website, and you can probably get a good deal on one from your hosting company. They can be splendid to view, but that’s all they are.

The decision by Adobe is more than a capitulation. It is a sea change for many business owners. Web development can now focus on a single presentation that will work well in most browsers, mobile and desktop. However, Flash-based websites are on the other side of that presentation, and as more developers ditch Flash, or not take it up, it will become a legacy platform on the mobile device that will become expensive to maintain.

About a month ago, Verizon Wireless ended its unlimited data plans for mobile devices running over its cellular network. With AT&T ending its plan a year ago, you can no longer get unlimited data plans from most carriers.

While Sprint is the only carrier to still offer unlimited data, it does not sell the iPad, so hookup is via MiFi. I hook up my iPad to cellular via my iPhone, so this arrangement is not a bad option for those who need it. However, if you spotted the extra $130 for a cell-based iPad, going with another carrier is against the grain.

I recently had the opportunity to question AT&T's Illinois President Paul La Schiazza regarding a statement he made to a business group concerning the explosive growth in phone apps. Apple had just made the announcement that it would be releasing its newest operating system, Lion, via its app store. At over 4GB, anyone downloading it by cell would blow past data caps. His response to me was to reiterate the justification of the pending acquisition of T-Mobile, the fourth largest mobile carrier. His answer was that AT&T needed the spectrum T-mobile now owns, which to me was like needing more highway lanes to handle the traffic, but no mention of lowering the tolls (raising the data caps). Interpretation: Don't cut your landlines too soon.

All of this reminds me of two sore points that Apple has been criticized for: Not allowing Flash to play on its tablet, and that of one of its newer features, Facetime, to be WiFi only amongst its tablet, phone and Touch devices. We'll tackle Facetime first. As a video chat, you know this app is going to be a data hog. When my daughter first got her iPod Touch, she downloaded Skype and spent several hours chatting with friends. Had she been on a cell network, I would have been a very unhappy parent when that bill came. Since it was over WiFi, my bill was the same as it always was. Although my carrier placed caps on broadband a couple of months ago, she still would have come significantly under the cap, which is about 75 times greater than most cell plans.

Flash is another story. It's not phones that users have to worry about, because if performance is dismal, which it is on underpowered phones, people will avoid the website. On a tablet, Flash plays like it does on a larger computer. As a web developer, the only protocol one follows when designing a Flash piece is that it works. Most developers don't have formal training, and aren't taught to think a 2MB movie can work just as well as 10MB one. If you don’t know, all it will take is a couple of phone bills for your site visitors to realize that surfing you is the one costing them money, where you will see minimal traffic or outright avoidance take place.

If you want to know what cellphone companies are thinking, all you have to do is remember the launch of Motorola's tablet, Xoom, earlier this year. It had mixed reviews, but was seen as worthy competitor to the iPad. Then Verizon did something extraordinary, sure to sour sales right from the gate - it charged $20 to unlock WiFi, something unheard of with any WiFi-capable device. Motorola also incensed potential buyers by charging nearly $800 for its 32MB tablet, pricing it exactly the same as the 64MB model from Apple. Other competitors have learned from these mistakes, but these missteps have given Apple another years’ head start on top of the year it already had. Still, the cellphone companies trudge on. Verizon is offering plans that are $5 more than AT&T's plans. Gotta feel for you guys that purchased Verizon iPads.

These developments make the case for two things - one, don't cut your broadband cord. You'll need it to do the big tasks that cellular will make you pay dearly for. Two, keep you map of hotspots handy, because at the end of your billing cycle, you're going to need it.

In this increasingly connected world, there are two major reasons to possess a smartphone - the need to be connected and the convenience of being connected. I fall into the category of the latter. I check my email, news websites, and sometimes my Facebook page, among other things, all before I get to the office. The convenience of not having to wait several minutes to boot up a computer is ideal.

Often, I bounce between the two. These little devices could never replace a full sized computer. With the industrial strength computing power I need in developing programs and editing pictures and video, something that I hold an arm’s length to use one-handed could never replace my high-powered box.

Or could it? The following story may make you think about just how fast current technology, and conventional wisdom, could evolve.

I worked at Sears Roebuck when we were celebrating out 100th year in business. At the time, Sears was the world's largest retailer. There were others, Montgomery Ward’s, among them, but there was also Kmart. Wal-Mart was still a collection of rural stores. You could even buy groceries at some Sears’ stores. We were so big for so long, no one ever dreamed we would be anything less.

But we were wrong.

What we told the public, and what we did in private, were different things. We were losing money, and closing stores. We ceded the rural market to Wal-Mart. We didn't realize how fast the environment would change, and didn't adapt fast enough to make a difference. We were also being attacked not as a large department store, but in segments. Home Depot was attacking the Craftsman and hardware brands. J.C. Penney and Kmart were attacking apparel and merchandise. Best Buy and Circuit City were attacking Kenmore and appliances. Wal-Mart was beating up everyone on price, and it hadn't even moved into the suburban areas. The retail market was changing and taking no prisoners.

I see parallels in the computing world. First, Blackberry devices have taken over the email world. Google is in active battle with Microsoft on three fronts: Desktop applications, the Chrome web browser, and at the heart of Microsoft itself, the operating system Android. This battle has even spilled into the mobile world where Android is on target to snare the largest market share, having already dwarfed Windows Mobile, but soon overtaking Apple's iPhone OS4. As an extension of that battle, the tablet, which the troika of Microsoft, chip maker Intel, and the small cadre of computer hardware companies like Dell, HP and Toshiba hoped to dominate, Apple’s iPad is king. All of this will be at the expense of the big box.

Sears didn't disappear, and neither will the big box. But Sears I used to work at in no way resembles the Sears that exists today, and in the next decade, neither will the desktop computer in which I type this post. The Internet, along with wireless devices, has forever altered the landscape, and is quickly relegating the big box to the background as a hub in which all others draw upon as needed.

These changes will cause their own issues, but the momentum will go forward and resolve these problems, not backward to the familiar. It will also mean that businesses and organizations will have to adapt to a multi-device world. In this scenario, people have not stopped using their computers; they have added other devices to the mix. There will not be less of an information demand, just multiple different ways of presenting it. Access and presentation will be key.

In a companion article, The Eye of My Apple, I chronicle Charlie Havens, of Wooded Isle Computing, as an early purchaser of Apple's iPad. As an Apple computer consultant, Charlie keeps abreast on Apple's technologies as his clientele, mainly business and organizations, are increasingly looking for ways to incorporate Apple's new devices into an increasingly crowded world. His experiences with these technologies gives us insight, and will likely mirror our own.

If there is someone who should know how Apple's latest technologies will fit in or complement the business world, it's Charlie Havens, of the Apple computer consultancy Wooded Isle Computer Consultants. If there is someone who is still trying to figure this question out, it's also Charlie Havens. This is not a knock on his expertise, he's first rate. It does demonstrate the flux these new products are creating, and since they are directed at the consumer world, it also shows the complexity of making the crossover to the business and non-profit worlds. In comparison, Research in Motion's (RIM) Blackberry products went the other way, from the business to the consumer world. That is a much easier transition.

Havens' first thoughts were that his iPad was a lot more fun to use than his iPhone, but quickly found some quirks, such as the way either device displays the keystrokes of a password before it hides them on the screen. The iPad’s screen is much larger, magnifying this effect. Typing, while better, is not as easy as it is on a laptop, so most heavy interaction will continue to be on a big box. For the features the device shines at, like reading eBooks, web browsing and email, Havens gives the iPad very high marks.

Havens’ experience has been that of an early adopter. He encountered this a few years earlier with the iPhone. Both experiences are still fraught with growing pains. Apple makes it child-like simple on the consumer side to operate its devices, but something that businesses want, and take for granted, is integration of services on the back-end. Email, Google and Facebook work extremely well on the iPhone, but you are talking about systems that have hundreds of millions of users, and the experiences of each user are rather generic. Customized solutions for the iPhone OS-based devices yield mixed results at best, and some horror stories, as Havens can relate in trying to make Apple work in a still Microsoft-dominated world. I expect this to continue as Google becomes more pervasive in our computing experiences, and Apple continues to develop divergent paths with its new rival.

Havens’ job going forward will be to sort out this mess, and find new ways to use these devices. One such way was the use of an iPad as the server of a Keynote (Apple’s equivalent of Microsoft’s PowerPoint) presentation he made at a seminar back in May. First, hardware connections, like VGA adapters, had to be purchased, since they are not built into the device. Another challenge is getting that laptop-built-but-excellent presentation over to the iPad, since there are no disc or card slots. Finally, he had to deal with differences in laptop machine fonts that were used in the presentation, but were not natively loaded onto the iPad.

It struck me as curious that days prior to his presentation, he downloaded several different presentation applications from the App Store to get a feel of how each app might work with one. Apple had developed Keynote to the iPad, but it is easier to create more robust presentations on a laptop. To him, it seemed that every app had something that he wished was on all of the others. He settled on Keynote, and after the technical hurdles, everything was plug and play. Havens was able to do a great presentation, and his audience was wowed by the sight of an "everyone wants’ one" device demonstrated in the real world.

It might sound like a reinvention of the wheel here, because Havens had his laptop and could have easily done the presentation using that device. Havens wasn’t doing this as a part of an ego trip, but I am sure that advertising had some role to play here. More importantly, a client is going to clamor for a solution that involves the ability to use an iPad in this manner, and the client will expect Havens and Wooded Isle to deliver. That will require more than a Keynote presentation of how this might work.