There were two stories, both inevitable, that dominated the smartphone wars this week: the Facebook IPO date and confirmation that smartphones now outsell PCs.
Both of which pale in comparison to my personal news: I'm having Sheryl Sandberg's baby.
It's true! And it has nothing to do with the fact that this uber-smart -- and oh so beautiful -- lady will soon be worth a couple billion dollars. No. We love each other.
She don't care if I'm a gold digga...
On the subject of gold...Almost from the beginning of this site I've written that the smartphone is a completely *new* personal computing platform. The old business models will not simply re-compile and port themselves from PC over to the smartphone. Thus, little click-thru ads are probably not going to do for Google what little click thru ads on the PC did.
Thus, I was the only one not at all surprised when Facebook called out "mobile" in their S-1 as a potential negative to their valuation. Unlike pretty much every other analyst and blogger who ran with: FACEBOOK CANT MONETIZE MOBILE!
Actually, being just about the most used app on just about every smartphone in the world and, soon, baked into iPhone 5, means that Facebook is in the lead for monetizing mobile activities. Only, it's a long, treacherous race and anyone can still win.
But what about Sheryl Sandberg? I've repeatedly called her "the best hired hand in Silicon Valley -- ever". Score still one more for Mark Zuckerberg. Soon, she will be a multi-billionaire. Then, she will help Facebook reach at least 1.5 billion users. Then...she will no doubt seek new ways of directly improving the world. She is that smart, that capable and will have the resources to do so. My guess is she will create a global bank - start-up incubator - marketplace that provides all the tools necessary for every female on the planet to operate her own business, no matter how old, where from, how poor, how young.
One area I suspect Facebook to make money is as a platform for content distribution. Facebook currency, credit, sharing and likes should allow me to carefully discover and purchase quality stories, books, news analysis, movies, music. Which I think is a good thing.
I usually feel a bit hesitant asking for money from readers but then I remind myself that I drop $20 every month for the New York Times not only because it's great but because the company still can't make quality news gathering and analysis work in a digital world. I do my part and sure do hope that quality does not die. While former TechCrunch writers, for example, are boring us all with their stories about TechCrunch, and current writers at TechCrunch are doing them one better by writing still more boring stories about TechCrunch, others are out uncovering and writing -- well -- about actual stories of import. Sadly, it's the TechCrunch's of the world, and their spawn, that make money. Or, more correctly, they take money from wealthy insiders and never actually need to generate a profit.
The fact is that right now, using Google's business model, pure quality content is barely able to survive. I sure hope someone comes up with a replacement, fast. BigBlog, which thrives on Google, SEO and self-congratulation continues to be so self-obsessed as to be borderline irrelevant. We need real news. If it falls to Facebook, so be it.
Speaking of Google, I wonder if the Microsoft bear has finally awoken from its decade-long hibernation? Windows Phone is pretty damn good. Nokia Lumia is hot. And from what we've all heard, Windows 8 should beat Android at just about any carrier and at any price point. Plus, Microsoft is now starting to talk the talk once more. Y'all know I dig their Communications VP, Frank X Shaw, who is always happy to very publicly tweak Google (and Apple). Now more are jumping in. Just this week, Bing Search director, Stefan Weitz, told AllThingsD that Google saw what Microsoft was doing -- on search -- and blinked:
They did what we didn’t want to do, which was make the user experience peppered with this stuff, with +1s everywhere, the Google+ content in the top corner. I think [Google] realized we were ahead and they overextended.
Heh.
But shiny new product and big talk aren't going to bring the world to a halt. As I've predicted for three years now, back when the world said I was MAD! MAD! I tell you!, smartphone sales have now eclipsed PC sales. Confirmed. Again.
This will never ever reverse itself.
Per Canalsys, smartphone shipments in 2011 totalled 488 million. PCs? A meager 415 million. And that 415 million *includes* the iPad. Meaning, Microsoft -- right now -- has the most lucrative software licensing franchises, but on a platform that is *shrinking*, has no iPad competitor whatsoever and for every 10 iPhones sold, I still bet doesn't even sell a single Windows Phone, of which all they would really receive is a OS licensing fee.
I don't know how many people and how much money it takes to protect and grow the Windows/Office franchise. But I will ask: what the hell has everyone else been doing in Redmond for the past 10 years?

Unlike Microsoft, Apple, per usual, didn't say much this week. As usual, us bloggers did all the talking for them. (Except for, you know, Apple's CEO letting it get out that Apple gave $100 million to high-visibility Silicon Valley-loved charities.)
I was right there at the head of the line cursing Apple for their foolish, over-reaching iBooks Author licensing agreement. The one whereby they effectively granted themselves control of your iBooks Author'ed property *everywhere* you sold it. Since Apple rarely speaks publicly, this act, which was either exceedingly sloppy and/or greedy and/or stupid and possibly illegal, created much finger pointing and gnashing of teeth.
Far too many fanboys tried to excuse Apple.
I think my method was the better: call out Apple for something they did wrong. State it loud. State the obvious. Nothing more. Do *not* defend them when they should not be defended. And, unlike the haters, do not try and link one (bad) Apple act with all manner of conspiracies.
Result: Apple revised their EULA. It's all good. And I know I did the right thing.
Speaking of doing the right thing, I confess I'm disappointed in many of you Apple fanboys out there with respect to over-reaching and naive accusations that Apple is "USING SLAVE LABOR IN CHINA"!
Yes, the charge is bogus. Yes, Apple is being unfairly -- and dangerously -- singled out because they are so popular and so profitable. And, yes, the haters are always looking for any datapoint to add to their rage-filled quiver.
So the fuck what.
We use Apple not because of marketing or because of Steve Jobs (RIP) or because we are sheep: we use Apple because their products are so undeniably superior. We know Apple demands better of themselves -- and us -- and the result is something magical, revolutionary and amazing.
We should therefore demand better of Apple in all things, in my view. Even Gruber falls into the reflexive Apple defense trap on this whole Chinese labor kerfuffle, where he appears to mock Chinese Labor Watch for criticizing Apple more than the companies whose Chinese labor practices are worse, such as HP.
What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Apple is better. Of course the guy on the bench is going to do worse than Michael Jordan, say. Let's keep the pressure on Apple. I'm happy to demand more from Apple. Always demand more from the best. HP doesn't really matter to any of us. Apple does.
And speaking of Apple and demanding the best, I confess I loved this story, yes, about Steve Jobs, and his 'charge' for the iPhone:
When late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs assembled his first iPhone development team, he wasn't focused on conceiving a device that would run all sorts of apps and media but instead laid out a simple mission to his team: to create the first phone people would love so much, they'd never leave the house without it.
"His [charge] was simple. He wanted to create the first phone that people would fall in love with. That's what he told us."
Perfect.
I still recall the day I traded in my Blackberry for an iPhone. Thing is, I thought it was probably better and I knew I could not let it go. Yes, it's more important than my wallet. It has changed my life. Jobs' mission was fully realized. The entire Apple Insider piece is worth a read, though I confess to one disappointment: it offered no date! When, exactly, did Jobs assemble his first iPhone development team? I want to know. I want to know when because I want to recall exactly what the world was like at that moment.
Although, whenever it was, odds are high that RIM was selling plenty of Blackberrys and doing quite well. Unlike now. Just how bad, exactly, have things gotten for RIM?
So bad that Canada's Prime Minister, yes, they have one, labelled Blackberry a "critical technology" and thus the government of Canada, yes, they have one, could theoretically block the sale and/or foreign takeover of the company. Of course they won't, because that's not how Canada rolls. Still, kind of sad it's come to this, isn't it?
Though I confess that, sometimes, it would be nice to hear the leader of the United States talk similar to this:
“Takeovers of critical technology that the government’s invested in, or … hostile takeovers of key Canadian businesses, are obviously something that I think is widely understood is not in this country’s interest,” (Prime Minister). Harper said.
The government has the right to determine whether foreign takeovers over a certain size may go ahead. Its decision is based on whether the bid is considered of net benefit to Canada.
Net benefit to America, perhaps Mr President?
Actually, I think we will soon have a President uttering words such as the Prime Minister. Only, not because they are thinking about protecting the "net benefit" to the country. Rather, because we've allowed ourselves to fritter away much of our strength and indebt ourselves to people and nations not like us.
That and general seething anger over the harsh reality presented to us by a completely new world.
Such as being pissed that those hardworking and very smart Chinese kids that come to America, since we (still) have the best universities on the planet, are now the ones with all the cash. Per the Economist:
The number of foreign undergraduates has increased 25% in the past four years, while the number of Chinese students has almost sextupled, to about 57,000. China thus leads India and South Korea as the primary country of origin for foreign students. On the demand side, China produces vast numbers of highly qualified applicants whose families can afford to pay American fees. On the supply side, American universities are usually happy to accept such good students.
Public universities, moreover, have an additional incentive. Many are struggling financially because their states have been cutting budgets in a weak economy. So they take more pupils from other countries and states in part because they pay higher fees. For example, Californians pay an average of $13,000 a year at the ten campuses of the University of California; outsiders pay about $36,000. Naturally, this leads to some resentment among in-state applicants who fear rejection.
Rich Chinese coming to America for our universities? I'd be fine with that if we did a far better job of ensuring they stayed here -- and helped create American jobs. I'm not so sure that's the case any longer. Meaning: we need to do a better job of bringing the right Chinese (and Indians and Malay, etc.) to this country and keep them here.
And speaking of jobs, I consider most academia-led typologies of how AMERICAN BUSINESS can create wealth -- and jobs -- to be comically off-base. But probably the worst such academic notion is the calcifying idea that every business must learn what "job" their product is doing for the customer. You know, that nice bottle of Evian isn't really "performing the job" of quenching thirst. Rather, it's "job" is to signal to others how cool and well-to-do and sophisticated you are.
Attempting to determine the "job" of your product is a very quick way of killing off your creativity. Probably forever. Thus, you get articles like this one, from Tim Bajarin, that are able to tell us that the various "jobs" people conduct are often better served by a tablet than a PC. Which is extremely true.
And tragically after the fact.
When Steve, er, Jobs, was building the iPad I can guarantee you that he never started, likely never considered, how he could create a device that would do a better "job" than the PC.
Though let's close with this notion of jobs since so many are looking for so few good ones.
No one is buying Windows Phone, still, and Windows 8 isn't expected to be out til -- maybe -- late 2012. Late 2012! Anyone think *any* Windows Phone will be better than iPhone 5 or iPhone 6 by then?
Somebody, lots of bodies, need to lose their job over that.
Someone who should not lose their job, however, is Dan Frommer. He gets the award for chart of the week. This beauty reveals how dependent various tech companies are on their leading revenue generator. Not surprisingly, Google remains, for good or bad, in the top spot. Stationary web ads are still contributing over 90% of their revenue!

Here's hoping you have a great job!
Till next week!