This post is in response to The Apple Killer? on Calculated Exuberance.

So it seems like with the introduction of Chrome, Google’s going for the jugular in the war against that other tech firm that controls your life. By decoupling the web-user's online experience from the OS, pretty soon you'll be able to do just fine with a copy of Chrome strapped onto a barebones Linux OS. Why would you ever want to shell out cash for a bloated Windows system? And why would Macs still even be in the picture?

Well, there is a reason why Macs are still around and doing better than ever. After being thoroughly crushed by Microsoft in the '90s, Apple used a neat trick to bounce back that differentiated its products from competitors, sent profit margins soaring, and virtually inoculated it from future market share erosion: building a brand based on image. Both consumers and Wall Street approved. In a highly competitive, commoditized market, Apple found a way to thrive (or at least survive) by promoting something as intangible and unassailable as coolness/hipsterishness rather than pure performance, price, etc. Of course, that didn't quite top Microsoft's even niftier trick—establishing a monopoly—but it helps explain why destitute college students who fret about their college loans continue to empty their bank accounts (or take out more loans) for outlandishly overpriced MacBook Pros. In the end, Mac-lovers, like religious fundamentalists, base their devotion on something far beyond the realms of reason and basic economics.

Microsoft’s story, on the other hand, is a bit different. In fact, it’s the opposite. Microsoft has to force itself onto users rather than reeling them in with glitz and glamour like Apple. The Microsoft brand is practically a liability, especially the brand of their latest OS, and the company is soberly aware of this as evidenced by their recent Mojave Experiment ad campaign. While users continue to flock to pricey Macs, Microsoft’s iron grip on the world is slowly being pried loose—first by international lawsuits, and then by the introduction of pre-installed Linux PCs. True, specialists may still prefer a powerful OS that can support complex computer-based software, but the vast majority of users just want something simple to get online, check email, and watch that guy dancing on YouTube.

Maybe the time isn’t quite right for Google to flush out Microsoft for good—online apps are still primitive, Microsoft’s monopoly is still very real, and most people still cling to an “If it ain’t broke…” mentality. But it’s nice to see Google make a move and become the change it wishes to see in the tech world (my sincerest apologies to Gandhi). Plus, Google’s not doing too shabby with this whole brand thing either, which is always a nice piece of extra leverage.

In conclusion, Google: buy; Microsoft: sell; Apple: hold.

Wireless Energy

Physicists at M.I.T. have discovered a way to transmit power wirelessly through magnetic resonance. Distance so far: six feet. Combine this with the cell structure of cellular phone networks (in fact, you might as well embed them directly into cell towers) and the result may be continuous, ubiquitous wireless energy. This could herald the end of batteries and perhaps even power lines. One of the big questions is: What are the longterm effects of all this constant wireless transmission on our physical bodies?

Another Step Towards Brain-Computer Interface

The keyboard and mouse must go. Their limited portability and versatility have been a primary obstacle in the abortive push towards truly mobile computing. Speech recognition software is a possible replacement, but progress on its development has been surprisingly sluggish. The complexity, ambiguity, and creative demands of human language make it particularly inaccessible to computer logic. Recent breakthroughs in brain-computer direct interfaces now bring this option within reach of present technologies. Most recently, Sega has joined forces with NeuroSky, a bio-sensor and signal processing firm, to produce a viable game using brain-computer direct interface. "Sega and NeuroSky to Make Mind-Controlled Toys" (Wired)

eBooks Can Never Be the Next iPods

The eBook will not take off like iPods did. People love music; nobody reads books. Music is more entertaining, more immediately stimulating, and requires less effort to appreciate. Music is also more versatile (parties, relaxation, focused listening, casual background sounds), faster (one track lasts about three minutes and an album lasts no more than an hour while books take several hours of dedicated reading), and strongly embedded in common culture (books, frankly, are not).

While eBooks may be a hard sell as an entertainment device, they could become standards in business in education. Features such as annotation, highlighting, search, and more powerful organization (basically, the advantages of computers) may allow it to slowly replace books. But it can never have explosive growth as an entertainment device like the iPod.