<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Jayway Team Blog » Innovation</title>
	
	<link>http://blog.jayway.com</link>
	<description>Sharing Experience</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/jayway/posts/innovation" /><feedburner:info uri="jayway/posts/innovation" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><item>
		<title>iPhone OS and the Lowest Common Denominator</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/jayway/posts/innovation/~3/BotKwlXIdXk/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.jayway.com/2009/03/18/iphone-os-and-the-lowest-common-denominator/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fredrik Olsson</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Architecture]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Embedded]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Innovation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[iphone]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[java]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[sdk]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jayway.com/?p=1178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nishant wrote a good piece on why Apple continue to outdo it's rivals, he used a variant of a quote by Canadian hockey player Wayne Gretzky to make his point:
A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
This is true as it stands, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nishant wrote a good piece on <a href="http://news.worldofapple.com/archives/2009/03/17/wayne-gretzky-and-why-apple-continues-to-outdo-its-rivals/">why Apple continue to outdo it's rivals</a>, he used a variant of a quote by Canadian hockey player Wayne Gretzky to make his point:</p>
<blockquote><p>A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.</p></blockquote>
<p>This is true as it stands, but I think the main reason why Apple can keep a pace and a high standard of inovation is because of how they manage the Lowest Common Denominator. And iPhone OS with App Store is the crown jewel.</p>
<h3>Technology vs. User Base</h3>
<p>The lowest common denominator is always of interest when developing applications and services for the end user with profit interests. The lowest common denominator is what defines your user base, and it is a hard game of balance. Sticking to the newest technology will allow you to progress faster with more elegant solutions, whereas using a more commonly available technology will give you a larger user base.</p>
<p>So the lowest common denominator should be as high as possible, while still economical. With Java ME a bold effort to rise the bar of the lowest common denominator is the <a href="http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=248">MSA JSR-248</a>. An effort to give Java ME developers a guarantee minimum of features. A noble effort, but in reality up to a year ago only Sony Ericsson was MSA compliant, making the aged MIDP 2.0 the de-facto lowest common denominator for any developer targeting a the majority of Java ME devices.</p>
<p>The lowest common denominator for an average Java ME developer is the MIDP 2.0 spec from 2002.</p>
<h3>iTunes as a Hub</h3>
<p>Apple has a different situation, largely due to it's decision to use iTunes as the hub for all mobile devices, iPods as well as iPhones. All iPods and iPhones charges the battery by plugging in the USB-cable to your computer, this have some large but not obvious benefits.</p>
<p>Most notably Apple knows with 100% certainty that all users will have their devices on a reliable and controlled connection often, in most cases on a daily basis. As the users also use iTunes to synchronize their media, any other synchronization is not a hassle but rather a bonus on top of something they already requested.</p>
<p>Adding software updates on top of synchronizing media and data content through iTunes is just genius. It is a two click operation for the user, and as a result Apple virtually guaranteed that all iPod and iPhone users have <a href="http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/03/14/iphone-firmware-running/">the very latest software installed</a> on their device.</p>
<h3>Back-porting Software</h3>
<p>Apart from the technology decision with iTunes as a hub, Apple have also made a business decision by always back porting their latest software to all iPhone OS powered devices. iPhone OS 2.0 can be installed on any first generation iPod Touch or iPhone, and with iPhone OS 3.0 this summer all three generations will be supported.</p>
<p>This back-porting model is the total oposite of almost all competitors, where instead new features are explicitly locked to the latest hardware in order to sell devices. So if the end users can get all the new iPhone 3.0 as a free download, why should they buy new hardware? Will not Apple loose revenue on unsold third generation iPhone devices? </p>
<p>In short term probably will, but the big win is <strong>the Lowest Common Denominator</strong>. Whereas the competition have a common lowest denominator of several years, almost a decade, Apple and all of Apple's third party developers have a lowest common denominator of virtually weeks.</p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>With a simple software distribution model that guarantees the lowest common denominator Apple has guaranteed that the common lowest denominator is the current software, period. This allows Apple, and all third party developer creating applications and services for their devices, the luxury of discarding all effort for backward compatibility, and technological compromises.</p>
<p>Apple and we are allowed to innovate with full steam ahead.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/jayway/posts/innovation/~4/BotKwlXIdXk" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.jayway.com/2009/03/18/iphone-os-and-the-lowest-common-denominator/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://blog.jayway.com/2009/03/18/iphone-os-and-the-lowest-common-denominator/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>OpenCauses.org - Do Good.</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/jayway/posts/innovation/~3/Vrxq_jF8sMA/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.jayway.com/2009/02/25/opencausesorg-do-good/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:32:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mattias Ask</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Innovation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Web]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[donations]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[opencauses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jayway.com/?p=962</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I had the opportunity to present the Way Group initiated project OpenCauses.org at TED@PalmSprings this year. It was a fantastic experience and I got a great response on the project. But what is it we are doing with OpenCauses.org?
For good or for bad, the market is unprecedented in its power to generate wealth. What if [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had the opportunity to <a href="http://blog.ted.com/2009/02/friday_mornings.php">present</a> the <a href="http://www.waygroup.se/">Way Group</a> initiated project <a href="http://opencauses.org">OpenCauses.org</a> at <a href="http://www.ted.com">TED@PalmSprings</a> this year. It was a fantastic experience and I got a great response on the project. But what is it we are doing with <a href="http://opencauses.org">OpenCauses.org</a>?</p>
<p>For good or for bad, the market is unprecedented in its power to generate wealth. What if we could use this power, not to generate wealth, but to generate good?</p>
<p>Since the market understands money really well, why not create representative money based on donations? If we do this, everyone will be able to handle donations as money. We could own it, measure it, trade with it, work to generate more of it... and every cent of it would represent donations for good causes.</p>
<p>This is what <a href="http://www.opencauses.org">OpenCauses.org</a> is doing.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.opencauses.org">OpenCauses.org</a> really only aims to change <em>one</em> word. Instead of saying “I <em>make</em> donations to good causes” you will say “I <em><strong>buy</strong></em> donations to good causes”. This slight change makes all the difference. </p>
<p><strong>What is it we are doing?</strong><br />
We are creating the Open Causes Platform, a non-profit donation platform, which will enable donations to causes aimed at the <a href="http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/">UN Millennium Development Goals</a>. The Open Causes Platform will also hold Cause Credits. Causes Credits is representative money based on donations. This means that each Causes Credit represents a donation made to a good cause. </p>
<p>When you donate through the Open Causes Platform you receive Cause Credits for your donation. Your Cause Credits are measurable and accumulative, and  they are also transferable between users of the platform. All this combined effectively makes Cause Credits into a means of trade.</p>
<p>The Open Causes Platform is an infrastructural platform which exposes a number of web-services. With these services integrators can integrate basically any site or Internet connected product to the platform. Anyone can create pretty much any implementation of donation based services imaginable. They will be able to make donations, show how much users have donated, compare and transfer donation. </p>
<p><strong>Using Cause Credits</strong><br />
If you, as a person or an organization, own 100 Cause Credits you have donated $100 through the Open Causes Platform. If you later donate $10 more, you own 110 Cause Credits. </p>
<p>Now, let’s say that I have a cellular phone that I don’t use. If you give me your 110CC, I’ll give you my phone. If so, I have made the actual donations for $110 and you have bought my phone in two steps. The value of my phone has paid for the $110 donation. You now own a phone, but have not made any donations.</p>
<p><strong>Summary</strong><br />
We are implementing a currency based on donations. Essentially we want to complement the market of today with a market based on generosity. Just imagine if every corporation where to accept a currency based on donations for 1% of their services and products... What couldn’t we do then?</p>
<p>Mattias Ask,<br />
Founder of <a href="http://opencauses.org">OpenCauses.org</a></p>
<p>If you have any questions or want more information about the project,  go to <a href="http://www.opencauses.org">OpenCauses.org</a> or contact me at mattias.ask@opencauses.org.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/jayway/posts/innovation/~4/Vrxq_jF8sMA" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.jayway.com/2009/02/25/opencausesorg-do-good/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://blog.jayway.com/2009/02/25/opencausesorg-do-good/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	</channel>
</rss>
