In our business, we’re constantly looking for the next innovative product, the next turn in the road that will bring about creative innovations and propel us off the current plateau and on to new heights. Clearly one of those innovations is the AVB protocol, but perhaps more important and already more ubiquitous are the innovations permeating our industry from the consumer market.
Paradigm Shift for Control Devices
Recently a customer expressed some distrust when it came to installing an iPad as a controller in his boardroom because he was afraid that people would steal it. It occurred to me that this was counterintuitive of what the iPad is all about. Unlike a traditional control system that has to be confined to one boardroom in one office in one building, the iPad goes with you everywhere. It’s a personal remote – not a system application. It’s also customizable, so each user can create a device that best suits their personal needs. At home I use my iPad to control my music library, while my wife uses her iPad to control her own separate music library. We can do that from any room in our house. I can then take that same iPad with me to work and use it for email, design or Skype. It’s a controller for my personal and my professional lives. If I don’t have my iPad, then my iPhone provides the same connectivity.
System controls no longer need to reside permanently in a boardroom. Personal electronics now allow us to customize them for our needs and integrate them in to our lives (address book, email, contacts, schedule, etc.) and be truly connected no matter where we are.
The Rise of Generic Hardware
Just as the iPad allows us to move between rooms and settings maintaining a familiar control layout, so too does it enable companies to move seamlessly between the silos that used to dictate our lines of business. We used to be an audio company that worked alongside video companies and relied on control companies to allow end-users to access the benefits of our products. Consumers and consumer product manufacturers don’t think this way. Consumers now expect audio and video to be built directly in to a single device. Why should our industry continue to hold fast to an archaic design philosophy? Mobile devices connect with technology, not just niche aspects of technology. So as these lines blur, companies need to get smarter about how they incorporate all of these different facets of technology in to their design strategy. In the past we never even thought about doing a control product, despite numerous requests from our customers. Doing so would have meant a line of interface units with different finishes, UI colors, mounting positions, wiring options, etc. What’s clear now is that control is taking a whole new turn. The touch panel is everywhere, and it’s really, really useful. As the price point continues to come down, the front end of an AV system becomes your personal tablet or wireless device and your backend is a computer with a network connection.
Incremental Software
Which brings me to my final point – software will be the most important element of our business moving forward. I have nearly 100 apps on my iPad and almost none of them cost more than $10. That has allowed me to customize my iPad in small increments so that it does exactly what I want it to do. This is a very different approach from when I bought an Adobe software suite for $1900 that had discs I don’t think I’ve ever used. Adobe Ideas on the iPad was $5.99. On my Mac desktop I can purchase Lion OS for $39 in the app store. Even desktop software is becoming more specific and cheaper and you’re able to buy only the parts you need instead of the box of 10 CDs. All of these issues have affected and will continue to affect change in our industry’s design philosophy. The smart companies have embraced this change. What has your company done?
3 Responses to The Three Biggest Impacts Consumer Products Have Had On Our Industry
I think there will always be all-encompassing control systems which can be completely customized and control every endpoint exactly as desired, with scripting, unlimited customization and the high amount of revenue they bring to those that integrate them. The two main control system manufacturers who we all know well, will eventually provide this for iOS (and other platforms if they want or find the time to do it), as well as continue to sell their own control surfaces, and although this will be many times more expensive than what might be termed “micro apps”, the cost isn’t really the prohibitive factor here. And these companies will likely still continue require some sort of centralised proprietary hardware interface, for as long as they possibly can (hardware, after all, is something that people will fork out thousands of dollars for). The analogy is, there will always be the Photoshop option because there will always be a group who need it and are prepared to pay, but it’s going to shrink slowly as time marches on, to become even more niche than it is currently.
I personally believe the majority of people (just like me, I’m guessing Graeme as well!) who would have never dreamed of centralized, wireless remote control of their entertainment, hvac, energy management and lighting, implemented by a system integrator, a few years ago and will have no problem with flipping between the various apps which are published by their respective manufacturers or by third party developers. The main advantages are there – very little configuration (if any) and frequent app updates pushed directly to the end user allowing baby-step feature enhancements, both of which contribute to the main factor which drives growth – a quality user experience. Of course the fact that a $5 app is now considered “expensive” really helps getting my wife to agree (she let’s me buy any app under $10 without even asking now!).
Now think of what I’ve described and apply it to something more familiar to most people reading this blog: commercial AV. Think of the installations who currently settle for direct and simple control of devices (they are the ones where the projector infrared remote, or the codec infrared remote actually gets used as the primary control (until the batteries go flat, then it’s the broom handle projector controller) instead of being thrown away with the carton and instruction manual).
A great example is education. Think of teachers who are issued with iOS devices for their day-to-day work, (or they have their own!) which can easily act as a classroom controller. Oh, and it can natively stream both web and content stored locally in the device to displays installed in the classroom. The concept of switching apps, which they will be very familiar with and has been proven due judging from the adoption rates of these devices will not only be immediately accepted, but also welcomed due to the benefits that micro-apps bring in simplicity of configuration and management. Those apps can be gifted by the IT department to the teacher via email, and no doubt Apple is working on a way that IT departments can push apps to any device based on serial number, as well as pull them back when they want to, without any action by the owner of the device.
Both of these scenarios (residential and commercial) now enjoy a far enhanced user experience. The broom handle is relegated back to it’s original purpose. The big control guys shouldn’t be concerned, they weren’t in either of those markets anyway.
If anyone should be concerned, it’s the high end (I’m taking the $300-400 point) universal remote companies. Their days are seriously numbered.
Wise words from a free mind, as always, thanks for the post.
As much as I agree with most of your post there is one important fact of these (micro)-apps, which tends to be ignored/forgotten: They mostly dont talk to each other! So, yes one huge monolithic application might be so old fashioned but it does ensure that the components talk to each other. This is for sure not yet the case in the iworld. iPeople tend to glorify the fact, that their apps can indeed access a single central address book but this is just a fraction of the communication channels available. The Web on the other hand provides a huge amount of protocols to let applications talk to each other and yes, this will be the future.
When instead of tightly enforced (and very narrow!) communication channels, which are strictly guarded by the manufacturer new protocols arrive then your vision is right.
But’s its still a long way (and maybe a dramatic shift in the player’s business models!) till these protocols finally arrive at the consumer.
Till then we have to open the Pioneer iPhone app to switch on the Receiver, close it and open the Squeezebox app to select the music followed by switching over to the Toshiba app to turn off the TV. 😉
Hi Harold
Sorry that I’ve taken so long to answer. As always, you make very good points especially about tying together micro-apps. I think that some policing of app markets is necessary to prevent some of the issues that the android apps have had (although I’m a big admirer of Goggle and their general philosophy).
Finally regarding the remote control of AV devices in our home … you could always use the Crestron app! Or one of a number of other universal remote apps. The biggest problem however is the lack of an IR emitter on an iPhone (or Android phone)!
Comments are closed.