Do we really need Flash on iPhone?

As one of iPhone developers, I've enjoyed reading about the issue with Flash for iPhone (see "Adobe CEO: Flash on iPhone not easy"). Flash lite is a joke (not compatible with Flash on the web today), but the latest Flash is too big and too heavy for iPhone. 

What is the answer? More memory and faster CPU on iPhone? Re-architected Flash that can take advantage of iPhone's powerful GPU?

I think the answer is 'No'. We don't need Flash on iPhone. 

If you want to develop a serious graphical application on iPhone, get Xcode and write code in Objective C - just like other thousands of iPhone developers do (including myself). It is different from C++ or Javascript and requires a little bit patient at the beginning, but it's really fun and and easy development environment. 

If you want to add some eye-catchy animations on your web site that are also accessible from iPhone. Use Javascript (see our web-site). Latest browsers are powerful enough to handle most of animations you need. The development environment is not as rich as Flash, but it's 100% free and there are a lot of open source libraries out there (such as ianime.js, which is a light-weight animation library optimized for iPhone).

It is important to recognize that Safari on iPhone already takes advantage of its GPU. This is why the Javascript-based animation is quite feasible on iPhone. Flash has a very CPU-heavy architecture, and this is why it is so difficult to run Flash (real Flash, not Flash lite) on iPhone. 

Is this a good time to raise money from VC?

I have started Big Canvas in April 2008. Because this is my second start-up, I have decided to apply everything I've learned from various mistakes I made in the first start-up. 


Here are the basic principles I had.
1. Don't raise money from VC until we become ready. 
2. Stay small so that we can run it for long time.
3. Don't spend too much time in building strategy or writing business plan.
4. Launch the first product quickly, observe customers, learn from it, then build a business plan.
5. Create something valuable for customers, then generate revenue with it.

Here is the scorecard after 11 months.

1. We did not raise money. It allowed us (especially me, CEO) to put 100% of my energy in building products and providing services to customers.  
2. We still have only three people including me. As the result, our burn rate it very low. It allowed us to make mistakes (yes we made many mistakes, of course), learn from those mistakes, and adjust our strategy. 
3. Our strategy evolved over 11 months, and it finally became very clear to us. I finally wrote our business plan this afternoon, for the first time. 
4. We've released our first product, PhotoShare, in July 11th 2008. Observation of our customers helped us to design other products. We've launched five more products after PhotoShare, and additional five more products will be released this month. We are going to have eleven products on the market before our anniversary. 
5. Even though the number is not so large yet, we have many happy customers. As the result, many of them are keep buying our products.

We now have a clear business plan with a decent marketing/product strategy and well-defined value proposition. We have competitive products, happy customers and small but steady revenue stream. 

I think we are ready to raise money from VCs. I am ready to make a pitch - probably a decent pitch, describing my vision passionately ("the Internet is a Big Canvas. Be creative!" vision), explaining why I am so excited with this mobile market and its potential, and describing what we are doing today and how it fits into our overall business strategy.  

I, however, started wondering ... is this a good time to raise money? Once we raise money from VCs, we have to grow rapidly taking many risks - that is their expectation. Is this a good idea to take such a aggressive strategy in this recession? Isn't it much smarter to keep the company small and go for cash flow positive first? 

I wish I know the answer, but I don't. Does anybody have opinion?


Who should own the app store

A couple of recent articles about China Mobile got my attention.



But they had now failed to agree on the launch of Apple’s App Store in China, something that the cellco sees as a threat to its own place in teh value chain. "Wang said China Mobile should operate the application store itself in order to maintain its advantage," the source at CMRI said.



However, the Google platform scored many other points, notably gaining increased endorsement from China Mobile, the world’s largest mobile operator by subscribers, which announced plans to adopt a more open business model. 


While I understand why China Mobile wants to control the application store (they don't want to become a dumb pipe), this business model is too expensive for third party developers to distribute their applications world-wide.


It is very important to recognize that there are two reasons why mobile-Java application market is not growing - device compatibility issues and expensive business development cost. The first problem is technical problem, and the second problem is business problem. Both problems are very expensive (software development cost and business development cost), and are making very difficult to create profitable business. 

Google may be able to solve the first problem (although it may be difficult because of the nature of open source), but Google is not interested in solving the second problem. 

Unlike Apple, Google is going to let wireless operators to control the application store. While this business model is much more attractive to wireless operators like China Mobile, this is going to be very painful for third party developers like us, because they need to spend a lot of money and time to convince those wireless operators sell their applications one by one - spending a lot of time and money in flying, meetings, writing proposals, dining and entertaining. 

On the other hand, selling application for iPhone is quite easy. We just need to develop an application and submit it to Apple. Once it passes Apple's test (which takes a week or two), Apple will distribute it to all the iPhone users world wide regardless of wireless network users are using. There is no business development cost!

The biggest contribution Apple made with iPhone to this industry is neither the innovative device nor the iPhone OS, but this elimination of this business development cost. Once developers experience this simple and easy process to distribute their applications over Apple's iTune store, it is going to be very difficult to convince them to support the other model.

Why I am so excited about developing applications for iPhone

Many people ask me why I am so excited about iPhone, and why I am working so hard. The answer is very simple. This is one of rare opportunities for software engineers (like me) to participate -- a really big opportunity to change the lifestyle of millions of people (if not billions). 

Let me explain what this "opportunity" mean to me, using similar experiences I had in the past. 

First opportunity: Windows 95

This opportunity came to me in the middle of '89. I was looking for a position in Microsoft Redmond (I was in Tokyo office at that time, and was making a request to transfer myself to Redmond), and Bill Gates suggested me a couple of positions. One of them was a position in "object-oriented shell" team, whose mission was to create the "user interface of next generation of operating system", and there is no question to me that I "have to" take this opportunity. 

It was still in the very early stage of GUI-OS era (Microsoft was working on Windows 3.0, and OS/2 project was still alive), and Apple was a clear leader but Microsoft was in very good position because of the success of MS-DOS and the partnership with IBM. It was very clear to me that this is one of rare opportunities to participate in this kind of big innovation. 

The actual development was not smooth at all because of various internal and external issues (unexpected success of Windows 3.1, break-up with IBM, politic between Cairo and Chicago projects), but I have managed to hang on to this opportunity and was able to participate the development of Windows 95. It took five and half years to achieve this, but the reward was huge. The release date of Windows 95 was clearly one of the most exciting days of my life. 

Second opportunity: Internet Explorer 3.0

Right after Windows 95, the opportunity to participate in the "Internet evolution" came to me. While other engineers in the Windows group were either taking vacations or working on incremental feature for Windows, I became very passionate about the Internet. I was inspired by a couple of white papers written by Marc Andreessen, CEO of Netscape - despite I was in Microsoft. It became so clear to me that Internet will change the lifestyle of millions of people, and turn the operating system into a commodity. I immediately lost an interest on working on Windows, and determined to participate in this Internet innovation. 

First, I created a peer-to-peer web server for Windows desktop machine (so that every desktop machine in the world become a web server), but this project was killed because of politics. So I injected myself into the Internet Explorer team (even though my official position was still in Windows), and started rewriting its user interface (everything but HTML rendering engine) from scratch. The result was IE3.0 and 4.0, and Windows 98 (which integrated IE into Windows Explorer). 

Third opportunity: iPhone, PhotoShare and PhotoCanvas

From my point of view, iPhone represents one of rare opportunities very much like those two opportunities described above. It is so clear to me that this is the beginning of real "mobile computing", and I "have to" be a part of this innovation. 

I don't know how long does it take, but I am so sure that mobile phones will eventually become the primary communication device for hundreds of millions of people. The communication medium will shift from just voice calls and text messages to something much richer, including pictures or video taken by built-in camera. This is exactly why I built PhotoShare for iPhone and keep improving it based on feedback from those early adaptors.

Even many creative activities, such as writing and image editing, will shift to mobile phones. I am so sure that the number of mobile users who edit photos on their mobile phones will eventually  exceed the number of PhotoShop users. This is why I am working on PhotoCanvas, photo/image editing software for iPhone. It is impossible to match all the feature set of PhotoShop at this moment because of various limitations, but it does not stop me to focus on key user scenarios and build an application specifically designed for such scenarios. 

When I see this kind of opportunity, I really want to participate it. I have a very strong desire to become one of key contributers of such a life-style-changing event. This makes me a software engineer. This makes me an entrepreneur.    

Should Microsoft sell their own cell phone?

I know that this is a very difficult question, but one thing is so clear. If they want to see developers like us building a lot of applications (like Apple iPhone), they have to (see Nancy Gohring's article on PCWorld, which has several quotes by my). 


As everybody in the wireless industry knows, both Microsoft and Nokia have done virtually nothing to help developers to sell their applications for their platforms. They completely missed the opportunity to create the "eco-system" around their platforms, which allowed Apple to steal developer's mind-set over night. 

There is a reason why my second mobile start-up, Big Canvas Inc., strictly focuses on iPhone market - not because iPhone is sexy, not because of its touch screen -- because of iTune store. 

Regardless of the business model (free or not), developers need a channel to distribute our software. In my previous startup (UIEvolution), we've tried to distribute our mobile applications for variety of software platforms - J2ME/MIDP, J2MD/DoJa, BREW, Symbian, DangerOS, and PalmOS. We had a very good technical solution to overcome the challenge of technical differences among those platforms, we were not be able to solve the problem of complex, fragmented channels - negotiating with every single wireless operators in the world.

This is why Apple's iTunes store is such a remarkable innovation. Apple eliminated the needs to convince wireless operators in the world to sell our applications on behalf! 

As long as Microsoft keeps the current business model (licensing software to device manufacturers), they are not be able to control the application distribution channel - there is enough tension between device manufactures and wireless operators (about who controls the user experience), and it is going to be so hard for Microsoft to sort out those various issues and controls the channel. 

Unless they control the application distribution channel, the fragmentation continues, and it will not be attractive to developers.

This is why I believe Microsoft should offer their own device -- at least to consumer market -- just like they did with Xbox. If they can't, they should forget the consumer market and stick with the enterprise market, just going after Blackberry.  



Successful launch of OilCanvas

We have released our forth iPhone application, OilCanvas, last week. It was accepted very well in Asian market initially (we quickly became the most popular application in Japanese app store). The take-off in U.S. market is slower, but we see a solid growth.  

Many OilCanvas users also joined the PhotoShare community and started posting their paintings to our PhotoShare server. Over a thousand of paintings were posted in a matter of few days after the launch of this product. This is really amazing! iPhone users are having a lot of fun with this always-connected lifestyle. 

Here are some examples, I've gathered over the weekend. 

Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
11 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| December 1, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
65 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
3 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
Public
 
| November 30, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 30, 2008

Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 27, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 29, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
3 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
3 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
4 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
3 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
2 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 27, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
5 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
1 Comments
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public
 
| November 28, 2008
Public