Apple Hires IBM Chip Designer Who Had a Non-Compete Clause

Apple recently hired an IBM chip designer, Mark Papermaster, who was the vice president of microprocessor technology development at IBM. Now IBM is suing Mr. Papermaster for violating a non-compete clause. According to CNET, IBM released the following statement:

"Mr. Papermaster's employment by Apple is a violation of his agreement with IBM against working for a competitor should he leave IBM. We will vigorously pursue this case in court."

Non-compete clauses are tricky things. In the state of California, where Apple is located, non-compete clauses are illegal, and out-of-state non-compete contracts have, in the past, not been enforced (Application Group, Inc. v. Hunter Group, Inc.). However, the court case has been filed in New York, and I'm not a legal expert, so who knows where this is headed.

Link to CNET story.

Apple Has $24.5 Billion in Cash. Now What?

It's time to play that game again. It's called, What Is Apple Going to
Do With All That Cash? Well folks, they're going to continue to sit on
most of it. If they do anything, it will be small acquisitions like the
$278 million dollar deal for PA Semi.

You see, Steve Jobs has no interest in buying someone else's vision.
Apple has its own vision. And what it needs is more people who can help
bend technology toward that vision. Apple has a vision about
smartphones, and the engineers at PA Semi have some skill at making
small processors work in smartphones. They were a match made in heaven.
That's the kind of deal they're looking for.

If you want to check the validity of any Apple buyout rumors, and I'm
surprised hedge funds haven't started this game yet (maybe they're too
busy with the recession), just ask yourself, can Apple take the people
and throw away the hardware (or software or whatever). If the
intellectual property is too valuable to toss, then the buyout rumor
isn't true.

Is the First-Gen iPhone Better Than the iPhone 3G?

I was sitting on a Chicago train on my way home from work, playing a game of Teto Teto!! on my first-gen iPhone. The lady sitting next to me suddenly asks, "Is that one of the new ones?"

"It's the original version," I responded.

"Oh, I wish I still had mine. My husband upgraded me the iPhone 3G, and I hate it. It only gets 5 hours of battery life."

"Do you like the apps and games and stuff?"

"I don't know. It keeps crashing and I can't get anything on it."

What followed was a 10 minute whining session about the iPhone 3G and her husband's bad decision making. A part of me wanted to troubleshoot her problems, but instead I just nodded in sympathy. For strangers, I know to keep my nerdery in check.

But the conversation on the train confirms my feelings over the past month of not wanting to upgrade. My original decision was based on economics. No free text messages? $10 a more a month on top of an already outrageous pricing plan? An upgrade fee on a free upgrade, huh? Higher taxes on the bill? No thanks, but maybe someday.

I'm one of those people who rarely makes a call on my cell phone. But here I am, paying AT&T Wireless $39.99 a month to make make 20 calls a month. That's over a $1.00 a phone call for mainly local calls. So you can see, I'm already getting fleeced.

But the battery issue is a deal breaker. Having a charged battery is the difference between having a phone or carrying around the world's most beautiful brick.

Steve Jobs was right about 3G, the technology isn't ready for prime time, at least not in the US. But nevertheless, there it is, on the phone because people were whining about it incessantly. And sure enough, they're selling like hotcakes. But at what cost to customer's perception Apple and the iPhone?

Video Reviews of the Samsung Instinct

You may have seen the commercials of the Samsung Instinct that compare it side-by-side with the first-gen iPhone. Here is a video review (in 5 parts) of some of the phone's features, done by PhoneDog.com.


Pt. 1: Web Browsing


Pt. 2 :Multimedia A


Pt. 3: Multimedia B


Pt. 4: Email


Pt. 5: Messaging

iPhone Competitors Should Focus on Keyboard

Here's some free advice to companies like Nokia and Research In Motion: focus on the keyboard. It's amazing that so much money is being poured into making touchscreen clones when it's obvious these companies simply don't have the software-developer talent to compete with Apple. What these companies need to do is spread FUD (fear uncertainity doubt) about the iPhone's touchscreen keyboard and point out that most people still prefer a keyboard with keys. Check out the Samsung vs Instinct video below. The whole point of the commercial (that the Instinct has GPS, the iPhone doesn't) was outdated as soon as it was made. And how much money do think was wasted on it? Competitors, focus on something that's likely not to change. I mean, the iPhone is still going to destroy you, but this way, it'll take a little longer.

Mobile Firefox Looks Good

Check out this video demo of Mobile Firefox. One thing that Apple should take away from this video is the disappearing URL bar. I can't understand why Apple let the URL bar take up so much screen real estate. It should go away when the page finished loading. Give the viewer maximum screenage. Another strike against Mobile Safari is that it also keeps a bar on the bottom of the screen that accesses and adds bookmarks and navigates to tabs. I know the iPhone offers a larger screen that most cell phones, but that doesn't mean we don't want every centimeter of it to view web pages.



Firefox Mobile Concept Video from Aza Raskin on Vimeo.

How Much is Apple Getting from AT&T for Each iPhone 3G?

Now that AT&T is no longer delivering revenue sharing, I wonder how much they're giving Apple upfront for every iPhone activated?

A clue may be in the price Vodafone is selling a contract-free iPhone 3G in Italy. They are selling the 8 gb for 449 euros, which is about $691, and the 16 gb for 569 euros, which is about $876 (according to Google's rate conversion for today).

If we assume those prices are what Apple would sell the iPhone in the US, then AT&T is reimbursing Apple $492 for the 8 gb and $577 for the 16 gb.

If we look back to revenue sharing and say Apple was getting $15 a month per contract, that comes out to $360 for each iPhone over a span of two years. Could AT&T have upped the ante in order to get the more draconian activation rules in place?

If I were AT&T, I would definitely up the ante, especially knowing just how powerful the new enterprise features in the iPhone are. They have to be salivating at the thought of getting contracts from the corporate world--the easiest big money out there. Plus, they are making an extra $10 per month on the $30 data plans. If Verizon didn't regret passing on the iPhone the first time they saw it, they have now with the iPhone 3G.

I did not think Apple would allow the kind of shitty customer experience that comes with phone activation for the iPhone. But I think all that upfront cash changed their mind.