Skip to main content

Good Money, Bad Money

It's no secret that Apple's iPad product announcement (and now a specific availability date) has been met with as much yawning as there has been excitement. Personally, the commercials look enticing, and anyone who owns an iPhone or iPod is probably drooling at having such a large surface to play with. I will avoid rehashing my questions regarding the lack of certain, "must have" features or the price of the device since I've already written about these two things in a previous entry.

Given the bevy of people calling this the iFail, iDontKnow, etc. it is surprising to see Nintendo announcing a new product that, like the iPad is in relation to the iPod, is essentially a new device with the same capabilities as before. (In reality, it's not really that surprising that these products are generating buzz since we've seen Blackberry release a huge number of products that essentially do the same thing: send email and make phone calls. In fact, I could still be using the 8830 that I was given 4 years ago and wouldn't notice the difference between that and my 9630 that I have now.)

Why did they do it? Granted the product has probably been under development for quite some time, and you can't simply throw away the R&D that you've done simply because another company's concept isn't necessarily a home-run before it steps into the batter's box. (And Apple has that sort of reputation, no?) Still, how much R&D do you need to produce a DSi with screens that are slightly larger; different pre-installed software; and no other differences?

"Hello Nintendo!" I want to scream. "This is what we call Market Research."

Popular posts from this blog

"Ni jiang yi yang de hua ma?"

Last week, I wrote about the necessity of having a clear message . Because this topic is so important I decided to follow-up with another entry on this general subject. This week we will approach it from another angle. (For the curious, the title says " Do you speak the same language? " in pinyin, which is a transliterated Mandarin Chinese.) Recently, a good friend of mine (who is Chinese, ironically) and I were playing pool. He had to bank the 8-ball in the pocket to win the game, and since it was an informal game and bank shots are my area of expertise, he asked me for advice. I told him, "you just need to strike the cue ball with medium speed so that it hits the 8-ball right in the middle." He didn't believe me so we marked the positions of the balls, and then he took his shot only to watch the 8-ball sail past the pocket. "A-ha!" he exclaimed. "I told you it wasn't that easy." But when we reset the positions and I made an attemp

It's Easier to Fail at DevOps than it is to Succeed

Slippery when wet Since the term DevOps was coined in Belgium back in 2009, it is impossible to avoid the term whether in discussions with colleagues or in professional trade magazines.  And during the years while this movement has gained momentum, many things have been written to describe what elements of a DevOps strategy are required for it to be successful. Yet in spite of this, there is an interesting data point worth noting: not many organizations feel there is a need for DevOps.  In a Gartner report entitled DevOps Adoption Survey Results (published in September 2015),  40%  of respondents said they had no plans to implement DevOps and 31% of respondents said they hadn't implemented it but planned to start in the 12 months after the survey was conducted. That left only 29% who had implemented DevOps in a pilot project or in production systems, which isn't a lot. "Maybe it's because there truly isn't a need for DevOps," you say.  While that

Is No/Low-Code the Key to IT Nirvana?

 Unless you've had your head in the sand for the past year or so, you've seen the phrases low-code  and no-code  bandied about quite frequently everywhere you look.  You've probably wondered if this is something new that's here to stay or just a "flash in the pan."  Although the terms have been in the fore of the IT trade publications recently, Low Code Development Platforms (LCDP) (and the corresponding No Code Development Platforms) have been in existence since 2011.  Their roots can be traced to the 90's with 4th generation programming languages and GUI-assisted programming paradigms, e.g. IBM VisualAge for Basic, which was discontinued in 1998. For those of you who aren't familiar with either, the premise is that these platforms allow someone to quickly build applications using a WYSIWYG interface and a "click and configure" paradigm to Isn't this the source code to Roblox? rapidly build full applications with little or no coding requ