Last year at MacWorld, Steve Jobs announced that 2006 would see many great new products. That was clearly an overstatement. Even though most Macintosh computers were redesigned as part of the Intel processor adoption plan, I think that it is fair to say that most Apple customers were clearly disappointed by the level of innovation displayed by the Cupertino company. This is specially true when it comes to the iPod product line. Sure, the iPod shuffle and the iPod nano were totally redesigned, but since the functionality remained the same, there really wasn’t much to write home about. Even less impressive were the marginal improvements made to the iPod with video. Sure, there were some bright spots, the iPod Hi-Fi offers rich sound in a practical form-factor and the Nike+iPod kit is a nice addition to the iPod nano, but nothing earth-shattering was released.

As a result, expectations for this MacWorld are high, extremely high. In fact, probably too high. People expect Apple to introduce the long rumored iPhone alongside a new “true” video iPod and even an “ultra-light” Mac Book Pro. This is simply not realistic. In order to be effective, a product launch has to focus on a limited number of products and convey a clear message. Apple understands this very well. In September, for example, the 24″ iMac was launched without fanfare, just a couple of days before an Apple event. Why? Because they wanted the press to focus on the new iPods as well as the strategy that the company had designed for the future, nothing else.

Simultaneous product launches and rare and usually ineffective. I recall a 2003 Hewlett-Packard product launch that introduced over 150 new consumer products, but that largely remains an exception. These types of events are generally targeted at industry analysts and resellers rather than consumers. That is not the kind of audience you get at a MacWorld keynote.

So, what should we expect from MacWorld?

1. State of the union address.
Last year was a great year for Apple. We should expect Steve to talk about significant market share gains for the Macintosh division as well as stellar results for the iPod.

2. Upgrades to iLife and iWork
This shouldn’t come as a major surprise as iLife and iWork are important cash-generators for Apple. That is why Steve has to generate excitement over new versions at each MacWorld. Last year Steve almost ignored iWork and instead focused on iLife which included many new features as well as a new application, iWeb. This year expect Steve to spend more time on iWork, specially if a rumored spreadsheet application is finally announced, which at this point is likely. Nobody really expects major changes to iLife, except for probably an important iWeb revision.

3. Leopard preview
Mac OS X is another important cash-cow for Apple. Steve has to generate a lot of buzz to make sure that Mac users lineup in Q2 to purchase the new OS when it becomes available. This is specially true, now that Microsoft is so close to launch Vista to the general public. Therefore expect Steve to show some of the “secret” features he talked about at WWDC.

4. 802.11 everywhere and iTV
We already know that Apple will officially launch the iTV (along with a new name). That, by itself is important, but I think that Steve Jobs will also use that announcement to endorse the emerging 802.11n standard and announce a free OS upgrade (10.4.9) to enable it on modern Intel Macs that already support it. He will probably also announce an external 802.11n adapter for older hardware as well as a replacement for the Airport Express.

5. Updated Mac Mini and/or new Cinema Displays
Apple has not updated their displays in over two years now, and it shows. This means that in order to remain competitive they need to refresh their line of Cinema Displays. Some expect the new displays to sport a built-in camera, but personally, I am not convinced. This is probably not a very important feature for the pros who buy multiple displays to edit video or design magazines. I find it more likely that Apple will add new features that will make the displays more palatable to consumers. On the other hand, the Intel based Mac mini, which is now turning one, could finally evolve into the media center everyone has speculated with.

6. One more thing
All these expected announcements do not leave much time to introduce a lot of additional new products, unless anyone expects Steve to stay on stage for four hours. My personal bet is that Apple will release a new video iPod with a much larger screen, but similar in concept to the current iPod with video. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that Apple will ultimately release an iPhone but not at MacWorld. When that finally happens, probably after the echoes of MacWorld and CES start to fade, it will be at a special event, in order to generate additional buzz but primarily to have enough time to explain in depth how Apple will differentiate its offering from the competition as well as its mobile strategy.

Wow, this year has gone fast, it is once again Christmas time and, like every year, I simply cannot believe it. From a professional point of view, it has been a very interesting year. Even though I have turned 40 and become a second line manager, I have been able to spend some time to return to my programming roots (which allows be to balance a less technical day job) and been able to attend WWDC, almost 20 years after attending my last Apple II developers conference. I really enjoyed 2006 and I can only wish for a similar 2007, more would simply be greedy, specially because it was also a great year on a personal side.

But enough about me. What I really wanted was to wish all my friends, as well as those who occasionally read my blog a Merry Christmas and a Wonderful 2007.

I have heard recently someone say that if you are seeking balance between your personal and professional life, it basically means that you have given up. The person who said that was one of those Silicon Valley Entrepreneurs who most seem to admire/envy.

It is clear that those who agree with such an assertion have set for themselves very high goals in terms of professional success. They must also have high levels of self-confidence in order to believe that they can reach them by investing long hours of hard work into their dreams. I have no problems with that and I wish them well.

However, putting long hours of work into a project is not really hard for those of us who happen to enjoy their work. In fact, when I program, time simply flies. Therefore, if I had to spend all my day working on a personal project, I wouldn’t call it a sacrifice, on the contrary. So, in theory, for me and everyone out there who have a passion and are good at it, it should be easy to fight for success and riches.

The question is, do we really need to focus on a single objective and sacrifice everything else in order to achieve success? I really cannot agree with such a statement. Success is not an absolute, we define it ourselves and everyone uses different metrics to measure it. For me, in order to consider myself successful, I need to be successful at work as a manager, I have to be able to prove myself technically constantly by writing computer programs and, last but certainly not least, I need to spend quality time with my family and friends. If I feel that I am failing in any of these three aspects of my life, I start to worry and devote more time to fix the problems. It is true that I could probably achieve more in any of these aspects by focusing just on one of them instead of all three, but I do not want to. That doesn’t mean at all that I am giving up, it just means that I am fighting three battles instead of just one. That is a personal choice, and I am totally comfortable with it.

Don’t get me wrong, the fact that I do not agree over the assertion that we must focus on a single objective in order to be successful in life does not mean that I condone giving up, on the contrary. We all know people who have lost interest in almost everything, spending their days watching TV and apparently just waiting for death to come, while in their 30s or 40s. That is totally depressing. For me, giving up means not having any passions and watching life pass by. That can happen to anyone, no matter how hard you work.

The new Internet is all about collaboration. Wikis, team rooms and other technologies look to foster team collaboration as an effective way to quickly reach better results. As community efforts like wikipedia yield amazing results, the private sector is looking into using similar tools in the enterprise to make significant productivity gains. The question of course is, does this model work within for profit organizations.

I do not believe that it is very controversial to say that in all teams there are high and low performers. In the past, this could easily be detected by the team leader. However, as we are moving to virtual (geographically dispersed) teams and virtual offices, understanding perfectly the level of contribution for each team member can be challenging, specially if the software used to publish and share those works does not include some kind of management system. It may seem silly but this is a real problem because while most employees are willing to share, they expect to be compensated or recognized for doing so, and I believe that this is a fair request. There have always been individuals taking credit for someone else’s work, and as technology evolves, this could become easier than ever. If we want to work effectively in this new world, we must make sure that everyone is fairly evaluated.

The problem therefore consists in accurately measuring individual contributions. This is not easy. How-much recognition do you get for a new presentation, compared to say modify or add a couple of slides to it? What is the value of a new reusable component? Those are obviously subjective values, but an automated system that tracks contributions can help.

If we think that web 2.0 is all about collaboration, we should use that fact in order to rank contributors. By allowing employees to rate documents or even specific versions of that document, we can see how a document has improved over time as a result of individual contributions. This information could allow us to quickly find out who the top contributors are and reward them accordingly. Today, most wiki tools lack those features which, from my point of view makes them unsuitable for the enterprise. There are fundamental differences in what motivates a person to work on an altruistic project such as wikipedia and what motivates a person to work for a company. This needs to be recognized by enterprise collaboration software vendors. It is nice that enterprise wikis offer features such as better security, spam prevention and change control. However, that is not enough. For collaboration to work, employees must be certain that they will benefit personally from sharing their work. Today, most systems I have used do not recognize that fact and therefore fail after a while, usually when the managers stop forcing employees to use it.

I was recently assigned a new company car by IBM, a 2007 Toyota Camry. I must say that, so far, I have been pleased with it. My only major complain has been related to the audio system, which cannot be replaced by a different one. The reason I wanted to change it was because of the poor integration it offered with the iPod. Sure, there is an AUX entry which can be used to connect any MP3 player to the car’s audio system, however, this is not very practical as you need to take your eyes off the road in order to control your device. Furthermore, if you are charge your device by connecting it to the cigarette lighter, you will immediately notice an annoying noise distorting the sound, which makes it very unpleasant to listen to music while charging your iPod (this is not considered a flaw, it is documented in the car’s manual).

In my previous car, a Chevrolect Vectra (also known as Opel Vectra in Europe), I had replaced my built-in stereo with a Pioneer device that allowed me to easily control the iPod from the radio controls, with my MP3 player hidden in the glove compartment. That is why I immediately started looking for a similar product for my Camry.

I must say that there weren’t many options for my vehicle. Products like the iCruze from Monster simply do not support my car and I know that many other car owners face similar problems. So, when I finally found the drive+play system from Harman Kardon, which works on any car, I was relieved to see that there was a solution to my problem. The best part is that the functionality I get from this product is much better than what my previous car stereo offered me, as I can now have access to all my songs and not just a limited number of playlists. In addition, this device not only allows me to easily control my iPod but also see the songs that are playing on a small but slick screen that does not obstruct my vision. Last but not least, I can also finally listen to the music while charging the iPod. The background noise is still there, but is much less noticeable. I can even swear that I get better audio quality than before, but this is just my particular perception, your mileage may vary. No wonder this product has won so many awards, it is an outstanding, well built solution.

Although I totally recommend this product to any serious iPod user, it has a number of small irritating flaws. The first one is that it cannot handle non-ASCII characters. Since I listen to a lot of international music which often includes accentuated characters in the song metadata (title and artist), seeing them replaced by blanks is disappointing. The other problem is that the scroll wheel is not as responsive as the iPod’s and therefore, navigating through long lists of songs, albums or artists can be cumbersome. However, this does not change my overall opinion that the Drive+Play product is the best car accessory I have seen so far for the iPod.

With the recent revelation that Apple will add support for ZFS it has become totally clear that Apple does not suffer from the “not invented here” syndrome that has affected many other hardware and software manufacturers. This is the second open-source project created by Sun that has been quickly adopted by Apple, the other one being DTrace which is at the core of Apple’s new XRay application that will help developers debug their applications more easily.

It is important to mention that while ZFS and DTrace are open-source, they are not licensed under the GPL. Instead, SUN decided to use it’s own CDDL which is not compatible with the GPL and therefore complicates efforts to add ZFS and DTrace to Linux. While some are willing to overlook the license issue and are trying to port these projects to Linux, it is unlikely that any of these project will make it into any standard Linux distribution, because Linus Torvalds and other important members of that community are not willing to add core kernel modules that are not GPLed. That means that Mac OS X will probably become the first OS after Solaris 10 to implement ZFS since there are no plans to add it to AIX, HP-UX or Windows.

While many will think that this is great news for Mac users, who will get a greatly improved file system, the way I see it, this situation underscores some of the problems with the way some companies deal with open-source projects. While I do understand why companies want to keep some level of control over the projects they initiated, they must also be aware of some of the negative consequences that the use of restrictive licensing can have over the adoption of their technologies. Sun must have known that by not releasing these technologies under the GPL or LGPL licenses, only Apple was likely to consider its use in their OS (as neither HP or IBM are likely to endorse a technology from a direct rival). So, why do it? Is this just another marketing stunt to try to get some publicity and win over developers without risking to lose valuable intellectual property to competitors? I am inclined to think so.

Apple also started dealing with open-source in a similar short sighted way when they decided to publish the source code for Darwin, the heart of Mac OS X, under the Apple Public Source License which is very restrictive.

However, even though Apple has not changed the license for Darwin, they have used the much more liberal Apache 2.0 licence for their projects hosted on Mac OS forge. This is a big step forward, as most developers feel very comfortable with that license. On that site there are a lot of great projects initiated by Apple such as Bonjour, Launchd and Webkit, to name a few. Therefore, while I still believe that Apple is getting more from the community than what it is giving back, I feel confident that they have learned their lesson and are really playing fair now with the open-source community by sharing some valuable projects in a way that allows everyone to use them, without significant restrictions. On the other hand, it is clear that Sun still needs to walk the talk.

I started blogging relatively recently, which means that while my audience has been increasing steadily, it is still relatively small. That is why I was quite surprised to see the response I got to my most recent posts.

Two days ago, I wrote about a web-site called yourminis.com. It is a great site and I highly recommend it but, in my commentary I mentioned some small problems as well as some wishes for future releases. I was very surprised to see that I almost immediately got a post from one of the developers addressing the issues and telling me that indeed a future version of their site would include some of the features I wanted to see implemented. I was shocked. Sure, my site is listed on technorati, but even so, they must have been doing some serious blog monitoring to find my post that quickly.

Yesterday, I wrote about the motives that may have pushed Adobe to publish a beta version of Photoshop CS3. Sure enough, I almost immediately got a response from someone claiming to be an Adobe employee. In this case, finding the post may have been easier since my post was mentioned on digg. It is therefore possible, and even likely, that this particular Adobe employee just stumbled upon the article while looking for technology news. Even so, the fact is that he took time to write a post and tried to diffuse some of my speculations by stating Adobe’s position.

The point is that companies, large and small are listening to what is being said in the blogosphere. They know that if they want to be successful they have to both leverage the positive comments as well as address the issues before they grow out of proportions. Bad comments can have terrible consequences. Take for example the recent Forrester study that alleged a sharp drop in sales at the iTunes store. Even though Apple denied the story, it was too late. By that time, newspapers everywhere had published the story, which bloggers had made popular over the Internet, and Apple’s stock was down 3%. Even though this mishap was short lived, the stock returned quickly to its previous value, it is clear that bloggers are gaining a growing influence. This fact cannot be ignored by corporations and small companies alike and some are starting to act. Companies like relevant noise or cymphony are capitalizing on these new needs to grow a business. I can’t blame them, it is obviously a market that should experience explosive growth over the close future.

I just watched the latest MacWorld video podcast which discusses the launch of a beta release of Photoshop CS3 for existing Photoshop customers.

While I am sure that pro Mac users will be very pleased to be able to finally use this great app at full speed on modern Apple hardware, I cannot avoid wondering why Adobe decided to take this unprecedented step. Don’t get me wrong, I am well aware that this isn’t the first time Adobe has released a beta of one of their products. It has happened twice before. In order to react to the launch of Aperture by Apple, Adobe rushed to offer a free beta of LightRoom. Something similar happened with Soundbooth, a new product designed to compete against Apple’s SoundTrack Pro. It was clear that these moves were in reaction to competitive threats and there was no reason to believe that Adobe would continue on this path with established products such as Photoshop.

On the video, Adobe product manager says that one of the main reasons to release the beta was to please their existing Macintosh customers. The fact that this beta is not open to everyone seems to confirm this. If they had decided to offer the download to everyone, this could have affected their sales to new customers, not a pleasant scenario. But what does Adobe gain from helping Apple customers? I think that this is a fair question, because in the past, Adobe has proven in multiple occasions that they couldn’t care less if their customers ran their products on Windows or Mac OS X boxes. In fact, it could be argued that they preferred Windows since some of their products only run on that platform. The fact that over 60% of their customer base is currently on XP is a direct result of their business decisions.

So, what has changed? As a publicly traded company, Adobe cannot afford to take decisions based on OS preferences or even customer preferences (otherwise they would just give away their products). They have to take a look at the competitive landscape and act accordingly. The question therefore is, what competitive threats is Adobe facing?

As any successful Microsoft partner knows, if they grow past a threshold they will ultimately have to compete against Redmond. Don’t believe me? Just take a look at what is happening in the antivirus or ERP market. It is well known that Microsoft has been working hard on competitors to Photoshop and DreamWeaver, and that those products have either just been released or are in late beta stages (under the new Expression brand). The launch of the Photoshop CS3 beta could therefore be interpreted as a defensive move against these new products and as a way to stop more designers to move to the Windows platform where there now is more competition than on the Mac.

That is a nice theory but I hardly believe it is the whole story. The Macintosh platform is hardly a safe harbor for Adobe. Apple has grown a solid software business in the multimedia market where Adobe has its own ambitions. Apple has also significantly beefed up Mac OS X in recent versions, adding new APIs such as Core Image, that make it easier and easier to create Photoshop competitors. This has led many to believe that Apple could be close to launch its own Photoshop competitor. It could be that Adobe has reasons to believe that Apple is very close to release a product, maybe as soon as MacWorld. After all, in Silicon Valley rumors spread very quickly.

Whatever the reasons that motivated Adobe’s move, it is clear that currently, even though they currently totally dominate the creative software market, they indeed are between a rock and a hard place. Of all their products, one of their cash cows, Photoshop, is probably one of the easiest targets. Losing market share in that product category would directly translate into a sharp drop in profitability which would have dramatic effects on their stock price. This, in turn, could make them an acquisition target for a company with deep pockets, like, surprise surprise, Apple (MS would run into antitrust trouble if they tried to buy the company).

In the end I believe that this was just a defensive move designed to anticipate on both Microsoft and Apple. It is probably part of a strategy, where being truly platform agnostic will be presented to their customers as an important competitive advantage. This is a significant shift for Adobe and Mac users stand to gain from this new situation. However, even with a non-partisan Adobe, I still would like to see Apple enter the competition. Why? Well, simply because I believe that they have consistently demonstrated that they do develop great software and we all know that even though Photoshop is a very good product it can be improved.

Every time I read articles in which the author is amazed by the alleged ability of teenagers to effectively multitask I can’t avoid frowning. It is true that we can all see examples around us of young people chatting simultaneously with countless friends while listening to music or watching TV, but does it really mean that younger generations are better at multitasking? I do not believe so. I think that this is yet another example of parents being amazed by what their children can do, amplified by their own lack of understanding of new technologies.

I just turned 40, so I guess that I can no longer be categorized as being young, yet I am writing this post in a restaurant while watching a soccer game. If someone called me on my cell phone right now, that would probably not interrupt any of my other two activities. Am I specially gifted? My mother probably would love to think so, but since she doesn’t use the Internet I can confess that unfortunately this is not the case. The only reason I can do multiple activities at the same time is because none of them requires my full undivided attention. It is that simple. This has always been the case for me (and I suspect, most of us). For example, at school I could listen to music or watch TV while doing simple repetitive math exercises but not when trying to memorized laws. Today, nothing has changed, I can watch TV while testing an application or making small changes to it but I need to avoid any distraction when developing a new algorithm to solve a complex problem.

I have found that time is an extremely scarce resource. Once I take into account the time I spend working at IBM and the time I devote to my family, not much is left. That is why I try to use it effectively. Since many of the activities I enjoy do require my undivided attention, you are not likely to find me logged on my IM system. That is because I find the simple thought that I could be receiving a message at any time, distracting. The truth is that any complex activity requires at least a couple of uninterrupted hours of work to make progress. We all know that, even teenagers who claim they can effectively multitask while doing their homework. So, why lie? Well, we have all been there. Studying is not (always) fun and I can certainly understand (and sympathize with) those who want a little distraction to ease the pain. However, when you grow older, reality catches up with you. If asked to do something complex and fail to deliver, we have to pay the consequences. So, what do we do? We just turn the TV off and focus on our work. That doesn’t mean that adults are less capable of multitasking, it just means that we have more responsabilities and that what we do is more complex than chatting with friends, and therefore requires more focus.

There has been much discussion on the Net over the fact that Google has an unfair advantage over any potential competitor because of their leadership in the Internet search market.

The truth is that even though Google has been building up an amazing arsenal of online services, either developed in-house (gmail, google calendar and google maps come immediately to mind) or through acquisitions (writely and youtube, being some of the most notable so far), most users have not felt yet Google’s dominance outside the search market.

From my point, this is due to the fact that they have done a lousy job integrating all these services into a single, practical portal. Sure, you can now customize Google by clicking on the “Personalized Home” link on their home page (by the way, this link is not available for Safari users in the U.S. but seems to work fine on their British site) but this is certainly not the kind of experience I was expecting from this company. Of course, I did not expect ground breaking graphic design, as Google is known for their spartan (bandwidth saving) looks, but this portal looks just plain ugly and doesn’t offer any compelling features that will make me oversee that problem.

I recently discovered a site that offers exactly what I expect from a portal that could become my home page. That site is yourminis.com and it is simply gorgeous. Adding or removing widgets, minis or portlets (whatever you choose to call them) is very simple and is clearly based on the way Apple manages its dashboard widgets, which makes it very intuitive to Mac users. Currently there are plenty of widgets that you can place anywhere on the page and resize as you wish. Besides the well known time and weather widgets there are many games and useful services to choose from. Even if you have no use for widgets inside your browser, it is still an amazing display of what can be accomplished with Flash (not that most users would know that that is the underlying technology used by this great site).

The only problem, from my point of view, is that in order to succeed, your minis.com needs to offer a few additional minis and rethink some of their existing components. For example, the .mac mail mini shows the first twenty emails in your inbox. That is correct, the oldest twenty messages, not the most recent ones, which would have made much more sense. It would probably be even more exciting if developers could create and offer their own minis.

Until now, the web has seen a lot of competition because there simply isn’t a single site that offers almost everything to everyone. Google has been very successful developing strategic web services that are appealing to most of us. Still, today most internet users only use a couple of those services, mainly because of their poor level of integration. However, that could change quickly if Google learns from companies such as yourminis.com or even Yahoo (which despite its current woes offers a much better portal). Then, and only then, will most people realize the amazing influence that Google has over the Internet and the negative effect this can have over competition in the virtual world.