Even after the stores opened and the customers have packed home with their lawn chairs, the disaster that has been the iPhone’s launch in Canada continues to ring (pardon the pun) in the ears of consumers. I took a spin around Vancouver on my motorcycle (sorry, going too fast for photos) this morning at 7:30 and counted 250-300 people at the Broadway & Arbutus Rogers store, some TV trucks, and some balloons but otherwise not much fanfare. The smaller stores had maybe a dozen or so people hanging around at best.

I was concerned that the media were going to get taken on a ride by Rogers with this launch. Fortunately, the CBC is reporting that desperately few of the customers who were encouraged by Rogers to go to Rogers flagship stores in 6 Canadian cities have walked home with the prize, while still others are getting denied the purchase because some Rogers outlets are showing preference to new customers (and thus, highly-spiffed new activations) over existing ones. The CBC has thus far been on the money on this issue I hope this REAL story is echoed in other media over the course of the day.

As Daniel Smith reported, Apple may have heard the more than 63,000 voices at RuinediPhone.com and diverted shipments destined for Canada to elsewhere. Plausible, but this clear internal “leak” might actually be a way for Rogers to blame the lack of supply on Apple in a very subtle way.

This is what happens when big, arrogant service providers who fail to remain customer-centric come into contact with a mass-market trend. The launch of the iPhone in Canada could (should) have had a huge impact on subscriber loyalty and shareholder value for Rogers, but today even those few folks lucky enough to actually have paid through the nose and signed their lives away on a 3-year contract to get an iPhone are embittered by the experience.

It seeps down from those obnoxious gouging prices and the three-year lock-in (in an industry where the life cycle of a phone is less than 2 years) all the way to the flagship Rogers store passing out Granola Bars from Costco instead of paying the overnight campers the respect of some eggs or pancakes (they promised ‘breakfast’).

Somewhere in between those two offences is the fact that, with diminished supply on hand, Rogers store managers failed to tell those in the lineups that there weren’t enough devices to go around. Moreover they failed to give those people any promise that they might get one sometime in the future, so as a result many fan boys have now sat on their asses outside a store all morning for nothing.

Rogers created a media event around the iPhone launch.. great for free marketing, bien sur. They made promises about special promotions and breakfasts and early openings for these stores, and encouraged crowds to concentrate at specific stores to make sure they’d be part of the media frenzy and make the event seem much larger in scale than it actually is. It’s an even trade, I guess, when the consumer ends up getting what they went there for. But with the biggest stores having fewer than 100 units on hand you can do the math: of those 200-400 people who waited at each of the flagship stores, as many as 75%-80% did it for nothing.

In essence, Rogers exploited them to generate buzz and get some free marketing, and gave them nothing in return. So let’s do the math: A Triple-Lock for the lucky few, a lost night’s sleep for many, and for everyone a granola bar.

Yeah, screw you too, Rogers.

The next thing I’ll line up for is to be the first subscriber on the nation’s next GSM wireless carrier.

SMS costs in Canada are already disproportionately high versus the unrealistically high costs for SMS across the entire wireless industry. This article suggests that SMS costs are, in the aggregate, 4x higher than getting data from the Hubble space telescope. Global SMS revenues are larger than the Hollywood movie, music and video game industries combined.

The quote from the Telus spokesperson is hilarious:

“The growth in text messages has been nothing short of phenomenal,” wrote Telus spokeswoman Anne-Julie Gratton in an e-mail to The Globe and Mail, “This volume places tremendous demands on our network and we can’t afford to provide this service for free any more.”

The same article refers to the latest statistics from the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association that pegs the number of text messages sent in Canada at more than 45.3 million per day. According to recent reports from IEMR the number of wireless subscribers in Canada was 20.4 million in 2007, and wireless subscribers in the UK (which has roughly double the population of Canada) for the same year numbered 71.7 million. Sweden, with a third of the population of Canada’s has better than half as many subscribers. Canada is trending remarkably behind nearly every comparable western nation.

These stats are great, in that they illustrate the problem with subscriber growth that shareholders and analysts are presently appreciating. There’s clearly something wrong with the wireless business in Canada, and it’s not something that the recent spectrum auctions are likely to quickly address.

Allow me to translate Ms. Gratton’s TelecomSpeak in a way that more accurately reflects what went down in the boardroom:

“The growth in text messages has been nothing short of phenomenal,” said Telus’ Business Development Manager, “This is an unprecedented opportunity to exact greater revenue from the customer base without spending a penny on service development!”

The Canadian wireless market has been infantilised by the greed and short-sightedness of our wireless carriers and the mismanagement of our asleep-at-the-wheel regulators. Whereas (according to Wikipedia) the average user in the Philippines sends 10-12 text messages a day, doing some quick math from the stats above reveals that the average Canadian use of text messaging is far lower at 2-3 messages per day.

Still, this 45.3 million SMS messages per month business must be creating a stress on the Telus service network, you’d think. Right?

Well, if you send 45.3 million SMS messages all at the maximum size of 140 characters, you’ll get almost 6 Gigabytes in total storage volume - or, roughly the size of the hard drive I had on my IBM Thinkpad in 1999. That’s a lot of data to store (in 1972, that is). At the end of the day, this means that the entire Canadian SMS relay network has to be able to sustain about 144Kb/s of data transfer (thanks to Gersham for helping me with the math). My Mac Mini has a 1GB/s ethernet interface and is ultimately connected to a (for Canada anyway) smokin’ 30MB/s internet pipe this means that I could personally store-and-forward all of Canada’s SMS traffic myself via my Novus broadband in Yaletown, and it would have limited impact on my BitTorrenting.

SMS uses the signaling overlay path of wireless carrier networks, and from the wireless perspective SMS messages ride in the carrier byte packet. As such it costs the network exactly nothing and uses no bandwidth that isn’t already in use — traffic load is the same on the network even if no SMS messages are being transferred. The networks themselves need to invest in this infrastructure anyway, so there is perhaps an added provisioning and data processing impact created by SMS for wireless carrier network planners, but it is not substantial.

For TELUS to suggest that this traffic is in any way meaningfully impactful to their operating costs suggests that either they’re lying, or perhaps they should go back to operating mechanical switches.

This is a cash grab. Pure and simple. But then, you knew that…

This is a critical opportunity for you to vote against Rogers with the only ballot that counts: your wallet. You too will be able to purchase unlocked 3G iPhones from him on eBay about a week later.

Why go to the trouble? Well, let’s just say I’m conflicted. I want the new iPhone (love my old one) but I don’t want Uncle Ted taking my purchase of one as an endorsement of his brutal pricing plan. The Globe & Mail makes the following comparison:

“For example, for $75 a month, Rogers provides 300 weekday voice minutes, 750 megabytes of data and 100 text messages. In the United States, a customer gets 450 weekday voice minutes, unlimited data and 200 text messages for the same price.”

750MB for a frequent iPhone user, particularly one who uses the navigation and web browsing tools, is nothing. But in particular it’s the three-year lock-in that requires the greatest consideration. At that end of the deal, Rogers has you by the short-and-curlies. And your obligation to them will almost certainly outlast your 3G iPhone. Needless to say, many of us are pissed.

So how does it work? Well, let’s just say that you can finally thank the French for something.

Thanks to French law, it is illegal for Apple (or any mobile phone handset maker or carrier) to sell a locked phone in the French marketplace without also making the same device available in the popular pay-as-you-go mode, fully unlocked and portable to any carrier.

This puts a stick in the mud for Apple’s lock-in plan and means that France will likely be selling a substantial number of 3G iPhones, until ZiPhone learns how to software unlock them, to eBay resellers like my friend.

So yes, please go and sign the petition at RuinediPhone.com but, since I know you’re going to buy one anyway, get the French iPhone instead of buckling under peer pressure to lock into Rogers’ data plan. It might cost you more in the short run (ironic) but in the long run you will force things to change.

Software unlocking has already forced several key changes in Apple’s strategy that favour the consumer. But a flop of Rogers’ package pricing on the Canadian market can send a clear signal to both companies, and their shareholders. Industry Canada, which should be paying attention, can and most definitely should censure Rogers, and its wireless competitors for a long history of market-limiting pricing (not limited to the iPhone launch in Canada) that has rendered our country a wireless backwater.

Of course, Microsoft can afford to write these cheques practically ad infinitum, but if your tools are so lacking in perceived utility that you need to bribe people to use them (even if the graft is partially subsidized by affiliate fees), perhaps this is not really the best you could hope for from your marketing team.

You can’t take on Google by trying to buy, or even out-feature, your way into the blank-text-box Search Engine arena. Except for some regional players, like Russia’s Yandex, they’ve won and will not soon be replaced.

What Ballmer, and lots of other people, are missing is that the Search marketplace as we know it is poised for a change. Much of this change emerges from the fact that Google fundamentally owns the global Search Market, but much of the opportunity extant in this space comes from the fact that the technology behind search, and how people will make use of search engines in the future, will be a whole lot different than what you see when you type in www.google.com today.

…. but, there is light at the end of the tunnel for folks who are on the outside looking in at Google’s substantial (and impossible to dislodge) market share:

For most people, web search is a kludge.

Think about how you use Google today. Think about why you type things into that blank text space beckoning to you on your Firefox browser, or why you surf over to Google.com and enter a few snippets of text into that empty area amidst the sea of clutter-free Google whiteness ten, twenty, or maybe many more times per day.

In some cases, you overheard something being discussed in a coffee shop. Or you saw a billboard ad. Something offline motivated you to head to the blank text box and ask it to do your bidding. That is Google’s fundamental market opportunity and has remained largely unchanged since the first search engines began emerging in 1995.

This is, however, just a fraction of the reasons why many of us head to search engines. Often the reasons are as much motivated by inadequate information at one site as by anything else. An example: You’re reading an article from a wire service like Reuters, which rarely include photos, about a car or a submarine or a mountain. You’d like to see what that looks like, so off to Google you go. Or you’re looking at a new LCD on eBay, but the seller hasn’t listed the number and type of inputs that come with it; so off to Google you go to try and find the specifications.

In short, most often we go to Google to search for things because our browsers aren’t good at building pathways between like objects on the web. These types of Searches are what I call context-driven. You shouldn’t need to do this. You shouldn’t need to interrupt your surfing to drop off to a third-party site in order to add flavour to the web objects which have already garnered your interest.

What if you could press a button and instantly be delivered relevant information that is contextual to that which you are/were looking at? What if sites displaying articles from wire services (notable for their sparseness) were able to draw in information - in realtime - which added relevant photos, videos, or related stories?

Some of this is already happening, albeit rather jerkily. One of the leaders which started doing this some time ago was Sphere, which was recently acquired by AOL. It took them some time to draw the same conclusions as I have, and they had a difficult time monetizing these services. But on a great enough scale the same technologies which make relevant content possible also make relevant advertising possible. And while click-thrus will be fewer in quantity they can be greater in quality and therefore infinitely more valuable, thanks to much more accurate targeting.

Being accurate in driving these sorts of searches is hard. Whereas Google relies on its users to sift through its top 30 or so recommendations to find the most relevant information, contextual search engines need to be able to do that with high accuracy on the first few matches with little to no meatware — sorry, Mahalo. Many of the current buzzwordy trends such as the Semantic Web initiatives, Social Search, the shift from RSS to Atom, and API-accessible semantic processing are key enablers to make this easier, but there’s still a considerable amount of R&D necessary to beat Google’s current level of accuracy in this regard.

As a result, you need a long lead to get there, and few of the companies dabbling in the Vertical Search space have raised enough capital or have investors who have committed to developing these opportunities. But in the long run, this will augment Web Search and replace much of the traffic that is today driven by Google’s simple, primitive, empty text box.

What’s clear is that Microsoft’s desperate attempts to lure users to its essentially equivalent service to Google’s can only cost its shareholders. A new paradigm is necessary and, fortunately, the opportunity is ripe for the picking, right in front of us all.

This is a rare opportunity where the solution lies in good, solid R&D and product realization — not in leveraging semi-monopolistic product integration or in brute force advertising spending. Is Microsoft bold enough to understand, and embrace, the fact that Search is shifting? Do they have the product and engineering people to make this happen?

— Confucius

Finally!

I’m not sure he can take credit for that one, but that didn’t prevent him from trying when interviewed by Ron McLean on last night’s Hockey Night in Canada.

Ron hit him with some pretty tough questions, and it was fascinating (though not unusual) to watch him squirm. He claims that viewership of the Stanley Cup Final is up this year over last year… despite the NHL’s disastrous deal with NBC/Versus. Of course, last year’s Stanley Cup Final featured the Anaheim Ducks, not exactly a hockey-rabid market; and this year pits two of the top 5 US hockey markets, Pittsburgh and Detroit, against one another. Of course the numbers are up!

Bettman continues to cite the symptoms of the NHL’s malaise as though they were evidence of a cure. And that, kids, is exactly the problem. The NHL remains a league which makes its bones in, and thus rises and falls on the flowing tides of, Canada. It has failed to develop significant followings outside of Canada and the Northeastern US, and it really has failed as a global commodity despite numerous foolish attempts in the past.

Gary Bettman has now toiled for 15 years as commissioner of the NHL to product exactly nothing. Meanwhile the NHL’s status as one of the so-called “Big Four” is as tenuous as Canada’s status in the G7.

At a certain point, the blame for the continued languishing of the league must be put squarely on the shoulders of the GMs, who for some reason continue to endorse this buffoon. It’s not his fault he’s incompetent. It’s their fault that they’re rewarding his incompetence.

Like a lot of folks, I’ve never been a fan of Dominic Hasek. Whether it’s his refusal last season to wear his shoulder pads and chest protector while riding the pine backing up other goalies with the Red Wings, or whether it’s his insane attitude when he is on the ice… there’s just so little to love with him. This morning I read a snippet that really said it all for me about his character:

“Sources tell ESPN.com only one player has ever had his stay with the Cup cut short because of inappropriate behavior. Detroit netminder Dominik Hasek, in spite of warnings, tossed the Cup into his pool in the Czech Republic. The Cup was fished out, dried off and taken away in the middle of the afternoon.” [link]

… what happens if Detroit wins the cup again this year, I wonder?

When I get to these moments I invariably go back to Firefox. Firefox and Safari are different in as many ways as they are the same…

Here’s the really basic lowdown: While Safari is faster, Firefox is multi-threaded, so you can actually do other stuff with it while a page is loading (Safari can’t).

Firefox also doesn’t spontaneously “forget” the login information I have stored in the browser for the various sites that I use on a daily basis the way Safari does. It doesn’t seem to randomly delete stored cookies the way Safari does. It doesn’t look as nice as Safari does, though, and I’m surprising myself by saying that that actually matters.

I mentioned Safari’s inability to do ANYTHING else while loading a page. This is frustrating. It’s not at all uncommon when debugging a server issue to have pages loading at idle for a minute or more, thus holding your browser hostage during the process. It seems that Safari’s performance comes at the expense of the ability to perform multiple simultaneous operations. This won’t change for the near-term I don’t suspect.

I’ve never seen Safari’s “forgetfulness” issue discussed anywhere online, despite months of googling. Yet at geek parties and among friends it’s constantly discussed. I can’t believe that people just put up with it. Therefore I am convinced that it’s not me. It’s you, Safari.

Sayonara.

Still, a couple of years ago I recommended that we deploy a Drupal site for EQO, where I was the VP Marketing. As seems to be common with a lot of Drupal projects, there was much forking of code and a great deal of customization required to make the thing feel like a true web interface. As a result it’s been a challenge for EQO to keep their site up-to-date with the latest versions and to reconverge with the growing Drupal codebase.

Daniel’s most salient point is this:

The belief in the Drupal community is clearly that it’s all about the… community. That is, the power of a disparate community will be harnessed to deliver the features and usability desired by end users. But the fatal flaw in the Drupal community model seems to be that its community consists entirely of developers and not publishers. Or worse still development shops who make money by customizing Drupal.

… whereas WordPress is guided by the steady hand of Matt Mullenweg and supported by a company which just raised $29M to further the cause. Not to mention a vast community of artists, designers, publishers, and software geeks who contribute widgets and extra features via a powerful API and a stable code tree.

I think that there will always be a place for Drupal and for the customization shops that support and enhance the platform (a number of whom are Vancouver-based). But it must be assumed to be true that while WordPress is more of a mass-market, easily-accessible platform, Drupal is its antithesis: a platform created by geeks for use by other geeks, and not something indulged in lightly.

In much the same way that The 250 are very good at promoting themselves within, well, the 250 the Drupal community has done a good job of promoting itself within the the Drupal community. Meanwhile, Wordpress has even managed to reach out to and impress My Dad (definitely not one of the 250). While there is much possibility for grift in the Drupal market, selling a lot of stuff to a few people, I’m a guy who tends to bet long on selling a little bit to a lot of people.

Talk to a Drupal user (who is likely also a Drupal developer) and you’ll get a lot of detail about why Drupal is more powerful. Talk to a WordPress user (which is just as likely to be your mom) and you’ll get a lot of detail about how easy it is to use, extend, and modify.

While Gersham and I are playing with his Rails-based blogging engine, Orangutan, I still find myself constantly comparing it to WordPress.

This appears to be the same ensemble cast behind the Ned Buckle, Jr. File Clerk commercials, created by Ad Firm BENSIMON BYRNE for the Ontario Lottery Commission, and which won the 2006 Cassies.

Great creativity and brilliantly acted.