Skip to main content

The Failure Of Standards And Why Apple Is Right To Ignore Them

 
DLNA, Mirrorlink, Miracast. These should be household names, technologies which allow us to easily connect our phones and tablets to media storage, TVs and car audio systems with a minimum of fuss and completely independently of the brand of storage, phone, tablet, computer, TV or car that we purchased.
 
They are, in short, standards. And they suck.
 
DLNA is the oldest and, probably the most likely to work without problems. It wasn't always the case and in the early days it was touch and go whether you could get access to media stored on your box, whether it was DLNA-compliant or not.
 
That's nothing compared to the mess that Miracast has turned out to be. The concept is blindingly simple. A standard for display over Wifi that allows any device to connect to any TV.
 
Wrong. What you actually get is a bunch of TVs with poorly implemented Miracast capability and a bunch of devices that may or may not support an implementation that will allow you to connect to a particular TV. Chances are that if the brand name on your TV and device are the same they'll work, but even that isn't guaranteed.
 
Perhaps Miracast will mature, in the same way that DLNA has started to do, but by the time it does we'll no doubt be talking about a new and more exciting way of transferring video content from our devices to our TVs.
 
Lastly, Mirrorlink. Again, a blindingly simple way (in theory) of connecting your smartphone to your car and taking control of it through the car's interface. Supported by practically nobody. Car makers have shipped close to no cars that support the standard and hardly any phones do so either.
 
Which has resulted in the rise of Apple and Google's in-car systems, which most car makers are going to have to integrate into their cars simultaneously, because the last thing a salesman wants to hear is 'I was going to by your car but it doesn't support my phone, sorry'.
 
Mirrorlink is basically dead. I'm not even sure it was ever alive. When I hear of companies like Porsche complaining about the data that Google wants to access in its car implementation, the only sound I hear is that of a stable door slamming when the horse is halfway down the road.
 
Is it any wonder that when Apple delivers proprietary connectivity, whether that be Airplay, Apple TV or Apple Car, customers race to embrace it. After all, if you're going to go proprietary, you might as well go with the company that does it best.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…

WhartonBrooks Indiegogo Windows 10 Mobile Even More Doomed To Failure Than Usual

WhartonBrooks is currently crowd-funding its latest Windows Mobile smartphone on Indiegogo. If crowdfunding isn't already a bad enough idea, a company trying to crowdfund a Windows Mobile device should be warning enough for you.
Not that anyone seems to be taking the project too seriously. With a few weeks left to run the campaign has managed to ensnare just 2% of its $1.1m target.
If you want a better indication of how few Window Mobile loyalists remain I doubt there is one. Of 3,900 Windows Phone enthusiasts Wharton Brooks was seeking for its new phone, it has managed to entice just 50.
Windows for Phones is dead, even if the corpse hasn't stopped twitching yet.