Creating an Alexa habit

Smart speaker skills have proliferated but most reporting I've read suggests there has been little actual usage of these skills.  Instead, smart speakers are mostly used for listening to broadcast terrestrial radio, listening to music, setting timers/alarms/reminders, and getting the weather/news.

If I worked on a smart speaker project (in particular, Alexa), I would try a Trojan horse to get people to develop habits to use the speaker more in order to exploit its potential.

Two specific ideas: 

One: team up with public radio to allow listeners to contribute to pledge drives by voice.  This feels less commercial and more altruistic and so would be a nice path to getting people comfortable with purchasing by voice.  For those without linked credit cards (is that even possible with Alexa?  Maybe if Google wanted to do something similar with Google Home as Google has fewer credit cards on file), the system could at least take a command to send an email reminder with a simple one-click donation button for an amount already specified.  I think of this as a variation of Amazon Smile.

Two: work with radio (and podcasters) to make ads (including those on public radio - there's no lack of them) voice-aware by offering discounts or similar promotions to those who indicate interest by voice.  Again, expanding people's comfort zones with new voice interactions would seem useful to get Alexa to where Amazon would like Alexa to be.  This is a variation of the promotional code which appears on lots of podcast advertisements; those codes feel anachronistically low-tech.  A smart speaker knows your email address - why memorize a code if the speaker can simply send it to the listener?  This of course would create valuable information on engagement and interactivity for marketers by proving that people are listening to ads and showing concrete follow-up (promo codes would be custom and thus much better than the wholesale generic codes now being used that don't directly link listening with use of the code).  I think of this as matching the evidence based marketing of Google Ad clicks.

To be clear, I'm perfectly happy without another intrusive, advertising platform but was just thinking about the strange stagnation and limited use cases of the voice platforms given the presumed interest in Amazon of using Alexa to embed itself more deeply in our transactional lives.

Amazon's expanding B2B efforts

The recent news regarding Local Register, Amazon's new mobile payments system, may be the next step in my pet theory that Amazon was designed NOT to be a retailer but rather to be the backbone for retail and take a margin on retail generally.  However, to create the scale and credibility needed to move into these businesses, Amazon first needed to create a massive retailer.  But making money from retail itself is perhaps not the true goal.

For example:
1) Warehousing and third party sales.  Amazon has expanded greatly into storing goods for third parties.
2) Fulfillment and Delivery.  Amazon acts as storefront and handles logistics interfaces for third parties.
3) Finance.  Amazon provides small business lending.
4) Cloud.  This is very well known.
5) Payments.  Now Amazon handles payments for goods that have no other connection to Amazon.
6) Devices.  Although superficially supportive of Amazon's retail business, these are equally supportive of Amazon's third party retail businesses.

What's next?  What does Amazon do that is easily portable and deliverable for third parties?

iPad Mini

A few not-so-special thoughts on the iPad Mini that put in writing what I would say if someone were to ask whether to buy it:

1) It is really an iPad 2.  Same processor (noting, as anticipated, that the 32nm process allows Apple to stick to the 10 hour battery life specification that they have chosen to be a fundamental iPad feature), same memory, same resolution (but not PPI), etc.  And an iPad 2 is only $70 more.  So if one doesn't own an iPad and is price sensitive, he should just buy a 2 (noting that it may not get supported up to iOS 7 as iPad2 was not given Siri).
2) It's a bit pricey compared to Androids (both branded and unbranded) and iPad 2.
3) But, if one already has an iPad and is looking to add another, the Mini starts getting more attractive vs. a 2 (Siri, better camera).  Especially if "another" means an "auxiliary" iPad - one that is picked up because the other is being used or that is taken on the road, etc.  The distinguishing physical features (weight, size) tied to the same overall experience (iOS 6 with no compromises) might make this the device of choice for out-of-the-house use.
4) This is especially the case for those with a first-generation iPad and a second (iPad 2 or New iPad).  For those who can't quite justify buying a third full-size iPad when the iPad 2 works just fine, the slightly lower price with changed physical attributes could be enough to make this worth buying.
5) I imagine that the $329 price is strong evidence that Google and Amazon sell their tablets at cost based on Apple's 30-40% profit margin target.  This isn't really relevant to a purchase decision other than to suggest that the lower price of the Nexus and Fire shouldn't be seen as a sign of significantly worse quality.  This is #2 stated otherwise and might push a buyer towards one of those two.
6) I suspect that there will be some interesting education pricing (maybe $300) but that the iPod Touch made the $299 price almost impossible to use. So look for reduced prices for the Touch and Mini in 6-9 months.  Meaning that there's no rush to buy a Mini here - especially with an A5 that will be two generations behind an assumed A7 in 12 months or less.
7) I have thought that the product introduction cycle for iPad and iPhone was backwards - although both are suitable gifts, because of the carrier hassles, iPad makes a better gift.  And thus Apple would be better served with fall introductions than spring.  Perhaps the iPad 4th gen introduction is a sign that iPads will now get updated in the fall and phones will transition to the spring.  Now is exactly the right time to make this switch.  The next phone will likely retain the 5's design and so development time is slightly easier (one less major change to manage).  Fall 2013 iPad has a natural design direction (thinner and lighter as the current is heavier and thicker than the 2) and so has a good selling proposition.  Six month upgrade cycles are so fast as to upset purchasers (note those who have asked to return their third-gens because the fourth came out) and perpetually delay purchases.  I note this in the context of an iPad Mini purchase because one should not hold out for an iPad fifth gen in spring 2013 if the choice is between Mini now or fifth gen later.

My takeaway from my advice to myself:
- We have a first-gen that is getting laggy;
- We take the iPad with us all the time and it can be a little burdensome (it has a heavy case);
- We haven't been spoiled with the retina iPad's display (only have an iPad 2 and the first-gen);
- We won't buy a new full-size iPad until it gets thinner and lighter; and
- $329 is not great but still better than $399 for another 2.

So we will buy one for Christmas and strip down the old iPad so it runs a little faster as a pure web + iTunes machine.  Like our old iPhone 3Gs.

A last thought: the iPad 2 may have been retained to do something similar with the MacBooks: create a retina line and a non-retina line as Apple transitions to all-Retina over time.  The continued presence of the 2 without highlighting it as the "base" iPad is weird.

Amazon and Google

Amazon is getting into the loans business.  Google has self-driving cars.  What do these two things have in common?  My pet theory is that both of these companies were built to help fund the true enthusiasms of their founders and that their genius allowed them to build enormous businesses as tools to get there.  Their success in retail and search has obscured what I hope are their underlying motivations.

Amazon moved from books (among the easiest of goods to sell on-line because of almost zero concerns of customers of fraud, mishandling, etc.), to general retail, to cloud computing, and now to loans.  I've come to think that its real goal is to dominate what was quaintly called B2B.  By developing a deep understanding of retail, customer service, and branding, Amazon has built up the expertise to begin providing services to business.  Taking a few pennies here and there but across the entire value chain.  And it started with general retail because you need a big arena if your business exists to make money on the margins.  And, with the enormous scale of Amazon, it can enter into markets that seem impenetrable or daunting because of the capital demands.  And (another and), become the largest company on earth.

Google is doing something slightly different but similar in tone.  Here, the founders built a search engine, now advertising company, not because they love marketing or search but because the gold mine of google affords the freedom to try capital intensive projects.  Again, similar to the way Amazon grew based on the value created through retail.

All complete speculation but a way to explain why some very smart people seem to be so unfocused - I think the presumed focus is merely a means to reach the true goal.

Amazon Phone and Instant Video

The longer Amazon goes without releasing an instant video app for iPhone, the more likely it seems that an Amazon phone is imminent.  If it were far away, it wouldn't make sense to hold off issuing.  And there is no technical reason not to release (as there is an app for the iPad).  So, my only explanation (I'm sure there are others) for no iPhone version is that Amazon wants to have as complete a differentiated feature list as possible.

I think (I could check but am too lazy) that Kindle books also followed the same pattern (Amazon proprietary device first, app version later).

UPDATE: I was clearly wrong.

HP problem

As a sharp illustration of the problems with HP, I discovered that Amazon does not carry any photosmart printers.  There are plenty for sale through third-parties on the site but none that are eligible for amazon prime.  That is disturbing and odd.

Kindle Fire comparisons

I think a lot of the reviews and analysis of the Kindle Fire are missing a key comparison.  Although the iPad, GalaxyTabs, and Xooms of the world are relevant, equally relevant (and perhaps more so) is the iPod Touch.

Like the Touch, there's no cellular connectivity.  Like the entry-level Touch, it is 8GB.  Like earlier generation Touches (which sold fine), it lacks a microphone, camera, etc.  And its screen is far bigger.

And so, for a lot of people who wanted apps (games) and media (movies/TV), the Fire will be an attractive alternative.  I don't think this matters much for Apple today.  Perhaps with a deeper pool of users built on this first Fire, a larger Fire will present a real alternative to the iPad.  At the same time, so long as the Fire concentrates on being a delivery system for Amazon-sourced content (and so leaves off features that work for apps but not for content - such as a front-facing camera), they may simply co-exist peacefully (and, by further fragmenting Android and, in any event, "unconcentrating" it, make it harder for an Android competitor to the iPad to succeed).