How to make money on mobile, in three easy steps

I figured, in response to many questions and comments, it was only fair to get a little wonky for a moment about who actually is making money on mobile, or how a site or start-up might try a mix of potentially successful strategies in the future. Here are my guesses.

First, the only apps and companies making significant money on mobile right now are making most of that money off in-app purchases. The apps are free, and if you want upgrades like extra jewels, more levels, additional features and so on, you pay small amounts of money over time. Research house IHS speculates that in-app purchasing would generate $5.6 billion in revenue in 2012, up from $970 million in 2011. That number would equal fully 64 percent of app revenue.
And in-app purchases can take all kinds of forms: it doesn't just have to be buying extra jewels in Bejeweled 2 or the Mighty Eagle to get you out of your Angry Birds jam. It's a popular option in photo filter apps, fitness apps like Skimble are trying it for additional workouts, and the model works fine for subscriptions, as well.

Just buy your way out of trouble, with Mighty Eagle.

Amazon just started testing in-app purchasing, and while it appears that only 2 percent of Android apps offer in-app buying, that really just means it's kind of an untapped market. It's a proven winner, too: 72 percent of revenue from App Store titles on iOS come from apps with in-app purchasing.
So, that's one obvious mixer in the money-making cocktail we're creating here.
The next is retail and leads: a company gets paid because users click on coupons, take advantage of a local deal, or buy things that are aggregated on a mobile site or app. I know Groupon's current stock price would seem to indicate that local deals are a dead end, but I've never seen a busier cul-de-sac. There's still something to the idea of local offers -- maybe not local deals that feel a little off, somehow, but to the concept of letting you know what's around you when you've got your nose glued to your smartphone while you're walking.
Plus, there are in-app commerce opportunities galore. Apps like Karma, which we profiled at South by Southwest, have a simple premise: aggregate products, make it super easy and social for you to buy gifts for people, and then get paid every time you buy one of said gifts. (Why Facebook, for example, doesn't have gift-giving integrated all on its own is just beyond me.) Start imagining a fun, easy-to-use app that's social, offers in-app upgrades, and lets you buy really great curated items either as gifts or based on your interest and location...and you start feeling like you've got a winner on your hands.

Social gift-giving app Karma lets you send actual, real-life tasteful gifts to your Facebook friends.

(Credit: Karma)

Then, of course, you've got the booze in the shaker: ads. Advertising is still the biggest moneymaker in mobile -- it's just had a slow takeoff. You can't blame Facebook entirely for not making any money on mobile (although they should have seen the mobile shift coming and made some alternate plans). Mobile advertising accounts for just 29 percent of mobile revenues because advertisers have been slow to jump in the pool. That means, as Mary Meeker pointed out this week at All Things D, that there is massive growth potential in mobile advertising.
Right now, advertisers are concerned that maybe mobile ad tracking isn't as detailed as Web tracking; publishers are figuring out how one ad in an app or on a mobile Web site can make up for five or 10 ads on a full-sized Web page; everyone is trying to figure out mobile CPMs and targeting that isn't too creepy and how to work with ad networks that can sometimes be more trouble than they're worth.
But as I said earlier this week, these issues will sort themselves out, especially as advertisers and publishers start to see how much money is really on the table. Maybe that money will come in smaller increments, and it will take a creative combination of money-making strategies. But it'll happen; only question is who will get the proportions right first.

New Apple guide details iOS security features

Quietly released guide outlines the security architecture, encryption, and data protection features on the mobile operating system.

Apple has quietly published a detailed security guide for its iOS operating system, suggesting that the company, known more for keeping technical details secret, is embracing a more transparent approach to security.
Apparently released late last week, Apple's iOS Security Guide (PDF) outlines the security architecture, encryption, and data protection features of the operating system that powers iPhones, iPads, and iPod Touch devices.
"For organizations considering the security of iOS devices, it is helpful to understand how the built-in security features work together to provide a secure mobile computing platform," the guide says in its introduction. It goes on to encourage business "to review their IT and security policies to ensure they are taking full advantage of the layers of security technology and features offered by the iOS platform."
Coupled with the App Store submission process, the guide boasts that code signing, sandboxing, and entitlements "provides solid protection" against viruses and malware. Indeed, the guide discusses in detail the process of code signing, which controls which user processes and apps are allowed to run on the OS:

To ensure that all apps come from a known and approved source and have not been tampered with, iOS requires that all executable code be signed using an Apple-issued certificate. Apps provided with the device, like Mail and Safari, are signed by Apple. Third-party apps must also be validated and signed using an Apple-issued certificate. Mandatory code signing extends the concept of chain of trust from the OS to apps, and prevents third-party apps from loading unsigned code resources or using self modifying code.

The document also discusses how address space layout randomization (ASLR) can prevent memory corruption bugs:

Built-in apps use ASLR to ensure that all memory regions are randomized upon launch. Additionally, system shared library locations are randomized at each device startup. Xcode, the iOS development environment, automatically compiles third-party programs with ASLR support turned on.

The guide's publication is important because it seems to be the first time Apple has publicly discussed the aforementioned features. It also seeks to dispel the theory that Apple creates devices for consumers rather than the corporate market.
"Apple is committed to incorporating proven encryption methods and creating modern mobile-centric privacy and security technologies, to ensure that iOS devices can be used with confidence in any personal or corporate environment," the guide concludes.

Google: Chrome's No. 1 (or 2) worldwide

StatCounter, Net Applications, pah. The browser market share figures are weighted, inaccurate and vary day by day. Google, with a firm grasp of its own numbers, gives its assessment.

The global browser numbers race between Chrome and Internet Explorer remains highly contested, but Google has sent the strongest signal yet that Chrome holds the crown as the Web browser leader.
Google Chrome senior vice president Sundar Pichai, speaking at D10, started off noting Chrome's growth:

"Chrome grew roughly 300 percent last year -- we have hundreds of millions of active users. We have many ways of looking at it. You can argue about the data, but in general I think we have gained substantial mindshare since we've launched the product."

Amid the hedging, he went on (emphasis mine)::

"I think it's fair to say that we are number one or number two in all countries in the world. It's fair to say that roughly a third of people are using Chrome; I think it's much more than a third in the consumer space. Most users in enterprise use IE because it takes a long time for that space to upgrade."

Pichai added:

"There are places where our share is over 50 percent today. I think the speed of Chrome is much more notable when you have a slow connection."

What could be seen as a bold statement could also be seen as a Dewey victory. Having said that, only Google knows exactly how many downloads it's had for Chrome, but downloads do not equal installs or active use.
Plus, at least one browser counter suggests Chrome really is in the lead.

StatCounter said Chrome overtook Internet Explorer in May, even after it took into account a pre-rendering adjustment. The research firm said the move did not have any "significant" impact on its statistics.
It currently sees Internet Explorer at 32.12 percent, with Chrome a fraction ahead at 32.43 percent.
It's also worth noting that it is not the first time Chrome has jumped ahead of Internet Explorer, according to the analytics firm. Chrome was the "world's top browser" for a single day on March 18. It's likely the figure jumped on the Sunday because the vast majority were at home and not at the office, where Internet Explorer still dominates the work environment.
But it doesn't mean Internet Explorer can't recoup its losses and claw back the market share it's losing.
On the flip side, Net Applications pegs Internet Explorer at 54 percent with Firefox ahead of Chrome at 19.7 percent and 19.6 percent respectively.

Samsung: We've sold 50M Galaxy S and S II phones

The company is touting 24 million in unit sales for the Galaxy S and 28 million for the Galaxy S II to date.
 
Samsung's Galaxy S II has racked up 28 million in sales since its debut.
More than 50 million Samsung Galaxy S smartphones have been sold since the original phone debuted in 2010, according to the Korean handset maker.
Plugging its achievement in a news release today (English translation), Samsung said that 24 million units of the first Galaxy S phone have hit the sales market since June 2010, followed by 28 million Galaxy S II phones over the past year.
Samsung uses the term "sales." But it's important to note that the company is actually referring to shipments since the numbers point to how many units have been shipped to retail channels. However, the hot demand for the Galaxy S phones means there's likely to be little difference between shipments to retailers and sales to customers.
The news release says that the 50 million in record sales last year was double that of the entire smartphone market. Ironically, the English translation refers to that as a "shame." It's certainly a shame for the rest of the industry, but a high point for Samsung. Collectively, Samsung and Apple have scooped up virtually the entire mobile phone landscape, leaving little but scraps left over for the remaining players.
The company's Galaxy Note has also joined in on the festivities, reaching 7 million in unit sales since its launch last October.
Samsung is probably expecting even hotter sales this year.
The company just released the Galaxy S III phone across parts of Europe and the Middle East, with other regions slated to pick it up early this summer.

Friday Poll: Is Facebook mobile enough for you?

In the shadow of a less-than-stunning IPO, Facebook now faces questions about its long-term viability, especially in the face of the onward march of mobile technology.
 
 Facebook for iPad is an app with a rough reputation.
While Facebook is a pillar of online social media, it hasn't really proven itself to be a moveable feast when it comes to mobile. In a piece this week that got a lot of you talking, CNET Executive Editor Molly Wood looks into how mobile could eventually be the social-media giant's death knell.
Facebook's mobile apps have been notoriously sketchy in quality. It's at the point where I don't even try to download the latest iPad app update, I just use my browser when I want check in on the site.
In IPO documents, the company admitted that mobile is an issue, especially the ability to monetize views coming in from mobile apps.
Facebook is in no danger of immediate collapse, but the trend toward mobile access is undeniable. The IPO documents also included a figure of 425 million monthly active users accessing Facebook on a mobile device in December 2011. That number is only expected to grow.
Facebook may eventually go the way of MySpace. If that happens, a mobile-native replacement may be the hot new commodity that pushes it off the social-media cliff.
This brings us to how you're feeling about Facebook's mobile efforts. Have you given up on the iPad app? Do you use your smartphone's browser to access Facebook rather than tangle with an app?

Google told by EC to play ball or face a trial

The European Commission is warning Google to change its search methods or the company will be forced into court over antitrust issues.
Google has been given an ultimatum by the European Commission: straighten up or we'll take you to court.
The search giant has been under the microscope of the EC over complaints that it has stifled competition in the search market by favoring its own businesses. Several companies have alleged that Google purposely tweaks its search results so that its own sites appear before those of potential rivals.
Up until now, the EC been in no rush to launch formal charges against Google. But now the war of words has been ramped up a few notches.
Joaquin Almunia, the European Commission's head of competition, has given Google a deadline of July 2 to change its search results and ad rules or face a trial and the possibility of a hefty fine, says the Guardian. The deadline and threats were spelled out in a letter sent to Google in light of concerns over the company's dominant position in Europe.
A spokesman for Google told cnet simply that "we continue to work cooperatively with the European Commission."
But the company was a bit more detailed in a statement to the Guardian:
"We operate in over 100 countries around the world, and the Internet is disruptive by its nature. It's understandable that our business should attract scrutiny and sometimes complaints in a few of those countries. We're always happy to answer questions authorities may have about our business."
A Google spokesman also suggested that "we've been co-operating with [the EC's] investigation and that issues can be solved through conversation," the Guardian added.
Almunia has indicated a willingness to settle with Google to avoid a courtroom showdown, but his patience now appears to be wearing thin.
Google is also facing similar antitrust woes in other countries.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has hired hotshot attorney Beth Wilkinson to determine whether the company has violated antitrust laws in the United States.
Some experts believe the FTC is using Wilkinson's reputation as a tough litigator to force Google to settle or wind up in court.

Nano-SIM design gets green light -- but did Apple win?

According to ETSI, it has finally come to an agreement on the Nano-SIM standard. The only issue is, it didn't say which company won.
The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) announced today that its committee has come to an agreement on the Nano-SIM standard. There's just one issue: the organization didn't say which technology was chosen.
According to ETSI, its Smart Card Platform Technical Committee agreed to a new form factor for the SIM card, called the "fourth form factor." The form factor, better known as the "Nano-SIM," will be 40 percent smaller than the current, smallest SIM cards, but will be backward-compatible with existing SIM designs.
The Nano-SIM had become a lightning rod of controversy over the last several months as Apple decided to take on Nokia, Research In Motion, and Motorola to deliver its own technology for the standard. The initial vote to determine whether Apple's technology or that from the other companies would become the standard was scheduled to be held in March, but ETSI decided to delay it so it could "achieve a broad industry consensus."
 
The Nano-SIM will be much smaller than these SIM cards.

To improve its chances of winning the vote, Apple reportedly moved to "significantly" increase its voting power earlier this year by registering six European subsidiaries with the ETSI. According to ETSI rules, any subsidiary with 8 billion euros or more in revenue is allowed up to 45 votes. At that time, Nokia had the most votes in its corner with 92.
In an apparent attempt to ease tensions for the first vote, Apple reportedly offered ETSI member companies the option to use its Nano-SIM standard at no charge. However, in order to receive the freebie, the companies would have been required to offer the "same terms in accordance with the principle of reciprocity" on all industry standards they might own.
Based on the events that followed, Apple's counterparts apparently shunned the offer. Earlier this month, RIM, Nokia, and Motorola instead tried a compromise of their own by unveiling a new design for its Nano-SIM that incorporated many -- but not all -- of the features found in Apple's option. It's not clear if Apple responded favorably to the compromise, thus paving the way for today's vote to go to the other side.

RIAA: Google takedown numbers misleading

Google imposes an artificial limit on the amount of requests a copyright owner can make, which means the data it provides on infringing sites is off, the music industry group says..

The Recording Industry Association of America has claimed that Google's transparency report detailing takedown requests of copyright material is misleading, because the search giant limits the number of notices a company can make.
Google's statistics, since July 2011, show that Microsoft made the largest total number of takedown requests of any company, asking for a total of 2,544,209 URLs to be removed from Google's search results, which contained files or links to BitTorrent files that the company believed to be infringing on its copyrights.
The RIAA fell to third on the list, with 439,546 URLs targeted, behind NBC Universal at 1,054,843.
However, the RIAA believes that this score is misleading. The organization's executive vice president of antipiracy, Brad Buckles, wrote in a blog post this week that the data doesn't represent the total number of infringing Web sites found in Google's search results, because Google imposes an "artificial limit" on the amount of requests a copyright owner can make.

What could Apple have up its sleeve for WWDC?

A new version of iOS and new apps for maps and photo sharing may be among the items announced at this month's developers conference, says a Sterne Agee analyst.
 
Apple will likely unveil a new lineup of Macs at its upcoming WWDC, but one analyst thinks the bigger news will be in the software arena.
The iPhone maker is expected to announce iOS 6 at its annual Worldwide Developers Conference, which kicks off June 11, says Sterne Agee analyst Shaw Wu. Apple announced iOS 5 at last year's WWDC, though the OS didn't reach the market until October.
A new Maps app also has the analyst and other Apple watchers buzzing. Based on industry checks, Wu sees a new in-house Maps app replacing the current Google Maps on all iOS devices. The new app will tap into the power of 3D, offering users the ability to view 3D versions of various locales.
"From our understanding, it is internally developed and will be radically different and better than existing Maps from others," Wu said. "We hear the key reason why [Apple] decided to do this is that it believes it can deliver a much better user experience in Maps, not to mention provide further differentiation for its mobile devices business."
Reported details and photos of the new Maps app have already leaked onto the Internet, courtesy of blogging sites BGR and 9to5Mac. One photo in particular clearly displays an option to switch to 3D mode.
Also on track for WWDC may be enhancements to the iOS camera and photo apps, according to Wu. Users can currently use the Photo Stream feature to share photos via iCloud, but many still rely on third-party apps such as Instagram, the analyst said. The new features would enable better sharing directly through the built-in photo app.
But the new Macs will be nothing to sneeze at. Wu expects the full lineup of Macs to benefit from an overhaul.
The iMac, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and potentially the Mac mini and Mac Pro will likely be upgraded to Intel's Ivy Bridge chipset, offering better performance and superior graphics.
And speaking of graphics, several Mac models are expected to follow their mobile counterparts by sporting high-definition Retina displays.

Asus, Acer, Toshiba to unveil Windows 8, RT tablets

Windows tablets from Asus and Toshiba at Computex should tell us more about the progress of Windows RT.

A Texas Instruments-based Windows RT tablet. To date, all Windows tablets running on ARM chips have been behind glass.

(Credit: Brooke Crothers)

Asus, Acer, and Toshiba will roll out a mix of tablets based on both Windows 8 and Windows RT at the hardware-centric Computex trade show next week, according to Bloomberg.
Windows 8 will run on chips from Intel, while Windows RT is powered by ARM chips from Nvidia, Qualcomm, and Texas Instruments.One Asus tablet uses an Nvidia chip, said Bloomberg. CNET reported earlier in the month that Asus and Lenovo are expected to bring out Windows RT tablets built around Nvidia Tegra 3 chips.
A Windows RT-based Toshiba tablet is using Texas Instruments' silicon, according to Bloomberg.
This jibes with what sources have told CNET. Only a handful of Windows RT devices will be released initially from vendors such as Asus, Acer, Toshiba, Lenovo, and possibly Hewlett-Packard, as Microsoft wades slowly into new Windows waters. Windows RT is the first mainstream desktop-class Microsoft OS to run on ARM processors.
One of the burning questions is whether conference goers will actually be able to use the devices. To date, Windows RT tablets displayed at trade shows and conferences have been inaccessible -- always encased in glass.
Acer, meanwhile, will show a Windows 8 device running on top of an Intel chip, according to Bloomberg. And Asus will show off a second device based on an Intel chip.

We don't have to be stuck in the past. Applications don't have to work the way they've always worked. At least ARM on mobile devices forces efficiency of code. It's good that it requires applications to be re-written with a new mind set.

If somebody really needs x86 power apps, I'm sure somebody can really find a netbook or ultrabook to meet one's need. I'm sure Android and Windows will very quickly run to a competitive device that runs x86, if competitive. What's the difference between an ARM app and an x86. Can't the software be exactly the same if the interface is the same (e.g. mouse and keyboard)?

Whats the difference in ARM and x86 apps???
Take a look. ARM apps have about 10% of the functionality of their x86 counterparts. Usually less!
I get what your saying about code efficiancy, and the x86 platform being bound by legacy restrictions in its instruction set. But seriously, ARM is just as bound by its RISC architecture. It will always take many instructions to perform an instruction that an x86 processor can acomplish in one, and the biggest factor... Intel.
Intel are several generations ahead in their fabrication technology than any other comercial fab plant on the planet. For years they have been pushing the bounds of Moors Law, and they have only recently switched their focus to low power portable devices.
Intels relentless "Tick/Tock" cycle is now pushing the boundries in this direction. 22nm fabtech. 3D transistors. 15nm fabtech.
It is very hard to compete with this. Ask AMD.
Once upon a time, if you wanted to make the fasted desktop computer in the world you would have been using AMD silicon.
In the future, if you want the fastest and most energy efficient tablet, you will be using Intel.
Any questions?

Intel is still several generations behind on power management. Latest ARM SoCs have fifteen to twenty power domains that are actively switched based on current processor load and usage.

There are also fully asynchronous ARM designs that allow each core to dynamically ramp clock rates based on software loads.

Current Intel SoC designs are lacking in both of these areas.

Apple iPhone enters prepaid world with Cricket

The regional prepaid carrier will start selling the smartphone on June 22 without a contract. But it will cost you dearly.
(Credit: Apple)
Apple's iPhone will make the leap to the prepaid world through Leap Wireless's Cricket wireless service.
The regional prepaid carrier plans to sell the iPhone on June 22, although its no-contract plans means a higher upfront cost. The 16GB iPhone 4S will cost $499.99, while the 8GB iPhone 4 will cost $399.99.
The iPhone moving to Cricket marks the continued expansion of the availability of Apple's blockbuster device, highlighting the company's push to get the device in as many hands as possible. The iPhone is an unusual device to hit the prepaid world, since it is such an expensive product relative to other prepaid phones.
The iPhone will be sold with a $55 no-contract plan that includes unlimited calling and text messages. The plan also includes 2.3GB of data, after which the carrier will throttle, or slow the connection down.
Despite a hefty price tag, the iPhone's popularity should help Cricket recapture a bit of momentum lost in recent quarters. The company, as with other prepaid services, has seen growth slow as the larger carriers enter the prepaid business.
"Launching iPhone is a major milestone for us and we are proud to offer iPhone customers attractive nationwide coverage, a robust 3G data network and a value-packed, no-contract plan," Leap CEO Doug Hutchison said in a statement.
While prepaid carriers typically don't offer subsidies, it appears Leap is paying Apple a small subsidy to keep the iPhone somewhat reasonably priced. AT&T and Verizon Wireless lists the 16GB iPhone 4S for $649.99 without a two-year contract.
Prepaid customers are required to buy an iPhone through Cricket; they are unable to bring in an iPhone from another carrier.

That pesky taller iPhone 5 screen pops up on video

Wondering just how much bigger that next-generation iPhone screen might be? A new video of the leaked part shows it getting cozy with an iPhone 4S.
 

An iPhone 4S next to the purported screen part.

(Credit: Macotakara)

What may or may not be the larger screen adorning the next iPhone has been captured on video.
No, you won't see the actual screen. Instead it's the glass panel that your fingers and face grease up.
Japanese Apple blog Macotakara today published a visual comparison of the mystery part that's been floating around for the past few days, putting it next to the existing iPhone to show just how much bigger the screen would be:
The two notable changes, of course, are that the screen is taller, and that the FaceTime camera has been moved to the very top, center of the device -- just as it is on the iPad. It also matches up with the look of the purportedly leaked parts that surfaced last week, as well as the ones posted on Apple blog 9to5Mac this week.
Numerous reports have suggested Apple's moving to a slightly bigger screen with its next iPhone. The change is expected to bring a change in both resolution and aspect ratio, both of which might be new considerations for developers on Apple's platform.

some observations :
     *The video clearly shows a new glass front which shows a larger screen size, and some other tweaks.
I have no idea where you got "the same design from 2010" from. Considering the iPhone has never gotten a screen size change, this is clearly a departure from previous iPhones and their minuscule screen sizes (if the video isn't a fake).
And nobody said this was revolutionary, and Apple hasn't used that tagline to market their products in a few years (but Steve Jobs did overuse the term). 
  *You're expecting a worse design? Given how many components need to be in the unit, the size of the battery to power them, I'm not sure I can think of a better enclosure then antenna as frame then toughened glass front and back. Can you?

Apple design is primarily about being "efficient", the current iPhone design (love it or hate it) is about as efficient as you can get (by efficient I mean small volume with the minimum of extraneous finishing - essentially that's some silver decals on the rear glass and black or white paint).

If there is to be "revolution" (or more likely "innovation") I'd expect it to be in the software. Probably a far better mapping application, Siri out of beta, tighter integration social networking, and if we're getting really innovative, a way to expose OS X style 'services' on iOS.

Oh and some people think it'll be taller too. What do I want out of it? Shipping for October would be nice (contracted till then).
  *"I'm not sure I can think of a better enclosure then antenna as frame then toughened glass front and back. Can you?"

Yes. Actually, just about anything but that. The tough polycarbonate aka "cheap plastic" that Samsung uses, the laminated carbon fiber of the Motorola Droid Razer, the aluminum construction of the HTC Evo series... anything but fragile glass that shatters so easily.
  *I had an Iphone 4 and loved it. I stopped using it because of an insurance problem I had when I damaged the phone. I was offered an HTC thunderbolt at a reduced price and have been using it ever since. Let me tell you what I miss. I cannot seamlessly switch between wifi and mobile networks. When I leave the range of my wifi network at school my device cuts off Pandora and it will stay off until I go back in, turn off wifi and my cellular network will then pick up the signal. Second, half way through my afternoon I have to throttle my phone by turning off 4g and switching to 3g so that my expanded 3100 battery will not die. When I had a stock battery I could not make it 4 hours on 4g. Third, I hate to have to have a kill app switch. I have to remember to use it every few hours so that my phone stays working fast and the battery lasts. Fourth, when I leave New Orleans (4g city) and head out of town I have to remember to turn off 4g if not my phone will constantly be searching for the signal, again draining my battery. Finally, android does not have an eco system worth mentioning. I am in between the Galaxy S3 or the new Iphone. Why, because there is no denying that once you have moved on to a larger screen you cannot go back.
  *I don't mind it being a bit taller. The screen really did seem tiny (especially when I come from using a Droid Razr). From some of the other stories C-Net has published, including the ones about the shape, general design spy shots, I think it will be a great design. I'll be honest, the Iphone 4 is still IMO the most beautiful phone on the market. The shape just seems end-all perfect and the sharp edges and glass are still pretty stunning even with it being a few years old now. I'll welcome the new design which should just cut down on its thickness and make the screen the proper size.

The specs are another story... I'm not banking on huge changes, but hey, Apple follows will eat it up.
  *I think they can squeeze a larger screen just on the current model by making the home button smaller and the speaker area smaller. If they increase the length of the phone it shouldn't be by much as long as they utilize the current space better.

I would also like to see higher data transfer speeds also on the next model. If you have a 5 minute video you know how long it takes to transfer that to iPhoto.
  *I would bet that the iPhone is getting longer to accommodated a bigger battery for the upcoming 4G chipset, and the larger screen is just a byproduct of that happening.

Btw, the one thing I love about my iPhone 4 is the smaller form factor compared to the android competition. If I can't fit it in my pocket than I don't want it. I'll make my judgement when I see the final version, but if the iPhone grows significantly than I'll look at a different model.

Latest iPhone 5 leak teases more RAM, map tweaks

The latest in a series of purported iPhone 5 leaks suggests Apple is doubling up on RAM and boosting its graphical prowess.
While Apple's next iPhone isn't expected to arrive until later this year, details of what the device will look like and how Apple might change some of its key software features continue to trickle out.
The latest comes from 9to5Mac, which earlier this week posted purported photos of the front and back of upcoming iPhone models. Today the blog has a follow-up with details of a development version of the hardware, and iOS 6 -- the next major version of iOS Apple is expected to debut at the company's developer conference in a few weeks.

A purported shot of the new Maps app interface.

(Credit: 9to5Mac)

While Apple's next iPhone isn't expected to arrive
Citing an unnamed source behind the specs, 9to5Mac says the prototype unit is running on an "ARM S5L8950X" processor, a model number that's higher than the ones found on Apple's latest iPhone 4S and third-generation iPad. No details were offered about its speed versus existing chips, short of a mention of a new graphics chip. The outlet also claims the phone will sport 1GB of RAM, up from the 512MB that ships on the iPhone 4S.
On the software side, 9to5Mac suggests "Apple is far along" with iOS 6. That includes another shot of an updated maps app with imagery not from Google, which looks similar to the one posted earlier this week by mobile tech blog Boy Genius Report.
Apple is once again expected to introduce its next iPhone in the fall instead of the summer. The change last year moved up the public unveiling of iOS 5 in time for the company's annual developers conference, as well as timed the iPhone 4S and iOS 5 for a release closer to the lucrative holiday shopping season.

Has the iPhone lost its cool factor?

With the iPhone seemingly everywhere -- including prepaid courtesy of Cricket -- it isn't quite as special as it used to be. That's bad news for the carriers.

Is the iPhone still cool?

(Credit: Apple)

commentary Let's face it: the iPhone just isn't cool anymore.
It's sad, but true that there's a reverse correlation between availability and coolness. The harder it is to obtain something, the more highly coveted it is.
Apple's decision to offer the iPhone 4S and iPhone 4 to prepaid wireless provider Cricket may have tipped the scales away from the cool end. With Cricket in the fold, the iPhone is virtually everywhere (T-Mobile, sadly, is still left outside looking in), hitting a critical mass of availability. The iPhone has gone from a gadget of the tech elite to the safe device you buy for your mother.
The original iPhone was a status symbol that drew in gawkers whenever it was pulled out at bars or parties. Despite all the complaining about AT&T's network, the fact that it was on only one carrier gave it an air of exclusivity that likely fueled its ongoing hype. People stuck on Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel contracts couldn't get the phone, which only made them want it more...

When AT&T's exclusivity ran out, Verizon Wireless managed to stir up some buzz when it got the iPhone, even luring in Daily Show correspondent John Oliver to the press conference for a bit. Then Sprint Nextel got it, and the carrier was feeling pretty good about itself for joining the cool kids' table.
But what followed couldn't have made the larger carriers happy: a stampede of regional carriers such as nTelos, C-Spire, and Alaska Communications that hopped on the iPhone bandwagon too. Cricket is the latest to join the club, which will mark the first time the iPhone will be sold under a no-contract model.
Now, I'm all for getting every product to as many people as possible, and giving folks all available options. There's also nothing wrong with being the safe choice for consumers.
But I wonder if the broad access to the iPhone hurts its street cred. How cool or special is the phone if everyone around you owns one?

Syndrome: Oh, I'm real. Real enough to defeat you! And I did it without your precious gifts, your oh-so-special powers. I'll give them heroics. I'll give them the most spectacular heroics the world has ever seen! And when I'm old and I've had my fun, I'll sell my inventions so that *everyone* can have powers. *Everyone* can be super! And when everyone's super... [chuckles evilly]
Syndrome: - no one will be.
-- From Pixar's "The Incredibles"

There are real implications for the carriers. What was a boon to AT&T as an exclusive has become a heavy financial burden for nearly all of the carriers. The iPhone is no longer a way for a carrier to stand out; it's become an expensive must-have.
That's particularly the case for Sprint Nextel, which placed a massive financial bet on the iPhone in the hopes that the continued buzz and draw would turn the company's prospects around. When it joined the exclusive pool of iPhone carrier partners, there were only three members. Now there are nearly a dozen carriers offering the phone. Sprint stands out with its unlimited data offer, but it remains to be seen how effective it really is.
You saw the impact of the iPhone in the last two quarters, when strong sales translated to heavy subsidy costs paid by the carriers to Apple. Sprint, which is already on shaky financial ground, was hit particularly hard with an $863 million loss in the first quarter following a $1.3 billion loss in the fourth quarter.
For consumers looking to be different, the iPhone really isn't the phone for them. The only real cool factor left for consumers is nabbing the next iPhone. While Apple will certainly benefit from the hype and attention the next iPhone will garner, there is little benefit it brings to individual carriers, especially if all of the carriers get the same phone.
I liken the mass availability of the iPhone to the original Motorola Razr. When it first emerged at Cingular for $399, it was highly coveted for its ultra-slim design. By the time it was available for Verizon Wireless and I was able to pick one up, much of what made it unique had faded away as it became the default phone for everyone.
Of course, there are a lot of key differences between the iPhone and the Razr. For one, Motorola did little to improve the Razr beyond color changes, while Apple has continually updated the look of the iPhone. The Razr's main appeal was its thin design and sexy look, while the iPhone also benefits from a massive ecosystem of apps, as well as a cloud service that links it to other Apple products such as the iPad and MacBook.
The underlying principle, however, is the same. The more accessible the Razr got, the less value it had for carriers. The carriers are beginning to figure that out about the iPhone now, particularly as expenses mount.
For Apple, moving into yet another carrier is a good move and follows its strategy of getting its products in as many hands as possible. More distribution means more revenue and profit.
But the iPhone in its current incarnation has to be losing a bit of its appeal at this point. The phone is certainly looking long in the tooth. Because the iPhone 4S shares the same chassis as the iPhone 4, Apple's flagship phone has looked the same for nearly two years.
The next iPhone isn't expected to be unveiled for another few months.
The iPhone also benefited over the past few years because there were few comparably cool products on the market. That's changing. Samsung Electronics' has spent the past few years building up its Galaxy S flagship brand to the point where the Galaxy S III commands nearly as much attention. After spreading itself too thin last year, HTC has rebounded strongly with the One X. Even Nokia has its heavily promoted Lumia 900, which targets consumers looking for something different.
All of those phones, which feature fresh designs and colors, will turn some heads. Can you still say the same about the iPhone anymore? Probably not.

Obama takes cyberwarfare to new level, report says

The New York Times is reporting today, citing a host of sources, that the Obama Administration pressed forward with Stuxnet's attack on Iran, and has used cyberwarfare extensively.President Barack Obama has been fighting a clandestine cyberwar against foreign governments and Al Qaeda, and his efforts in that space have far exceeded those of his predecessors, according to a new report.

The New York Times today unleashed a wide-ranging report, adapted from an upcoming book, "Confront and Conceal: Obama's Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power," by Times reporter David Sanger, on the Obama Administration's use of cyberwarfare to take on Iran and potentially other countries or entities it views as a threat. Chief among the administration's targets was Iran's nuclear plants, including the Natanz facility targeted by Stuxnet.

According to the Times, the book cites several unidentified security officials who claim that the Obama Administration didn't initiate plans to attack Iran's nuclear facilities -- the Bush Administration did -- but it did accelerate the initiative, known as Olympic Games. And the result of those efforts was none other than Stuxnet.
Stuxnet was first discovered in 2010 after it was found to be attacking the Natanz nuclear plant in Iran. Soon after, security researchers found that it was a highly sophisticated attack designed to attack computers running Siemens software used in industrial control systems. Several countries, including European Union allies of the U.S., expressed extreme concern over the malware. The U.S., however, was relatively tight-lipped on the outbreak.
"The question is where the heck is the Department of Homeland Security?" Joe Weiss, a critical infrastructure security expert, said in an interview with CNET in 2010. "There is no real guidance being given. There is nothing going out to the utilities or other end users talking about the actual compromise of the controller itself."
According to the Times, the seeming disinterest on the part of the U.S. might have been due to the fact that it created the malware. But behind closed doors, according to the Sanger's sources, President Obama was wondering if the country should shut down Stuxnet after it had been discovered due to a "programming error." According to the sources, he was told by his officials to press on, and just a few weeks after it was detected, a new version of the worm took down nearly 1,000 of Iran's centrifuges.
But the U.S. didn't act alone. According to the Times, a special Israel unit collaborated with the U.S. on its attacks on Iran. For the U.S., according to Sanger's sources, working with Israel made sense. For one, Israel has intimate knowledge of Iran, a country it has long viewed as a major threat. The collaboration also helped the U.S. hold off any of Israel's plans to launch a preemptive strike against the nuclear facilities, according to the Times.
If the U.S. and Israel were actually behind Stuxnet and its attacks on Iran, it would confirm rampant speculation dating back to 2010. Soon after news of the attack went public, several security researchers and observers charged the U.S. and Israel with planting the malware -- which was initially delivered through a USB thumb drive -- and taking aim at Iran. Neither country admitted to that, and continue to stay tight-lipped on the matter.
A similar scenario has played out in the wake of the discovery of another worm, Flame. That payload, which was discovered earlier this week, has reportedly been in operation since 2010. Unlike Stuxnet, which was designed to take down physical sites, Flame steals information about targeted systems and stored files, as well as information on the computer display and audio conversations. Iran was the central target for the virus, but it also impacted machines in the West Bank, Syria, and other Middle East countries, as well as Sudan.
Kaspersky Lab, which was first to discover the virus, has said that it believes the malware is "state-sponsored," and fingers have once again been pointed at the U.S. and Israel. Just yesterday, an Israel spokesperson for the country's vice prime minister, Moshe Ya'alon, denied any involvement in the attack. That followed a claim made by an unidentified U.S. official, telling MSNBC that "it was U.S." behind the attack -- a charge the government has not confirmed.
Still, those charges, along with Sanger's recent revelations, seem to confirm that the U.S. is heavily engaged in cyber attacks. Last year, the Chinese government took aim at the U.S. for allegedly attacking its networks, saying that "the U.S. military is hastening to seize the commanding military heights on the Internet."
That followed a claim made by former U.S. national security official Richard Clarke, who wrote in an op-ed piece last year that the U.S. is engaging in a policy known as "active defense," a term that he says the Pentagon uses to mean "offense" in its "daily guerrilla cyberwar."
Looking ahead, Sanger expects more cyber-based activity on the part of the U.S. In fact, one of his sources, a former U.S. intelligence official, told him that the country has "considered a lot more attacks," though many of those have not been initiated.