Just wanted to share these slides from a presentation I am currently working on. A generation that grows up without a keyboard communicates differently. Their relation to writing and, in extension, to reading, will make them media consumers that are very different from what we are used to.
During the past 18 months I have noticed a change of mind(set) in my work with traditional publishers, mostly from TV: Most of them do not consider digital some extension of their “real” business anymore, but finally start to prepare for a digital-only future. To many this may seem very late and trivial, but keep in mind that turnover and profits of traditional publishing in most cases are not a different ballpark, but a different sport, and although we can see first cracks in the iceberg, this will probably persist for a period of time to come. I like the ballpark/sports analogy, because I don’t believe in the term “digital transformation” in this case: Not only because everybody and their mothers suddenly became specialists in digital transformation, but also because in this special case, transforming TV or print into a digital business would mean they are the same sport, and in some time will meet at the same ballpark. I firmly believe that this is not the case; I am convinced that the mechanics and dynamics of digital publishing are so different to TV or print, that digital publishing has to be seen as a new, different, only somehow related industry, even if they are currently fighting over the same audiences and the same attention, and they are similar in the structure of their value chains. Continue reading →
In August 2006, Facebook launched its developer platform. If you define a platform as an environment in which software can be executed that embeds into this environment by utilizing standard features and data provided by this platform, this may have been one of the first large-scale platforms that entered a new abstraction level: “above” hardware and “above” operating systems, building on a customer-facing software that was designed to run on a variety of computing and operating systems and, by extension, on a number of hardware devices – kind of a “meta platform”. Compared to pure Windows, Android and iOS developing for example, the grade of openness on such platforms is very high, and at the same time the abilities of such platforms are limited to the “lowest” degree of functionality that will be available on all the software and hardware it has to work on. In theory, this could mean that peak innovations may happen on more limited, specialized platforms, while their broad adaptation may happen or be accelerated through such “meta-platforms”. I believe that cameras will be the next iteration where these processes can be observed: They provide an environment in which software can be executed that utilizes standardized features and data. This may lead to an entirely new breed of “apps” as well as to a significant enhancement of many apps as we know them today. Apple is moving into this direction with its ARKit, and Facebook made its camera a platform, too.
When I understood the mechanics of Snapchat (with my third try), I came to the conclusion that the service is here to stay, and to grow further, also beyond “crazy millenials”. I am sticking with that. Instagram’s move to introduce stories will certainly make things harder for Snapchat, but it will not be a question of survival: Snapchat’s biggest issue will be account discovery.
Es ist nicht einmal eine ganze Woche offiziell verfügbar, und dennoch führe ich kaum noch ein berufliches Gespräch, in dem nicht PokémonGo vorkommt. Der vorherrschende Ton dabei ist immer getrieben von Faszination einerseits und dem bevorstehenden Ende der Menschheit andererseits, aber darunter liegt meist die Frage: “Was kann ich daraus für mein Business lernen, wie kann ich mir den Erfolg zunutze machen, was kann ich damit anfangen?” Nummer eins: Abwarten.