The Wall Street Journal tech conference’s star attraction was giving nothing away, but what did people expect?
I’m back from D11, the 11th yearly edition of the Wall Street Journal’s tech conference.
I’m back from D11, the 11th yearly edition of the Wall Street Journal‘s tech conference. The conference site gives you the complete speaker roster, commentary, and full videos of the on-stage interviews as well as demos and hallway conversations.
With such a complete and well-organised reproduction of the event, why even go?
For the schmoozing, the in-the-moment impressions of speakers, the audience reactions … This is the only conference I attend (I’ve only missed it once). I enjoy rubbing scales with aging crocodiles and watching new and old saurians warily eying one another.
Speaking of attendees, I’m struck again by the low, almost non-existent European participation. Most pointedly, Fleur Pellerin, France’s Minister in charge of the digital economy, wasn’t there … even though she will be in the Valley this week.
Had Pellerin spent a day or two with us in Rancho Palos Verdes, she would have seen, heard, felt, and learned more than in the half dozen limousine hops she’ll make from one Valley HQ to another where she’ll be subjected to frictionless corporate presentations that have been personalised with a quick search and replace insertion of her name and title.
At D11, the rules of Aristotelian Unities apply: unity of action, place, and time. The entire ecosystem is represented: entrepreneurs, investors, CEOs of large companies, consultants, investment bankers, journalists, headhunters. What better place to contemplate the knowledge economy’s real workings, its actors and its potential to lift France out of its unemployment malaise?
(Of course, Pellerin might also be looking to mend fences after Yahoo’s attempt to acquire DailyMotion was blocked by another French minister. My own view is that the French government did Yahoo a favour. From what I think I know about the company and the political climate surrounding it, Marissa Mayer and Henrique De Castro, her COO, probably had no idea what awaited them.)
The conference formula is refreshingly simple: Walt Mossberg, the Journal’s tech guru, and Kara Swisher, his co-executive, sit down and interview an industry notable (or sometimes two). No speeches allowed, no PowerPoints…
In the early days, I felt the questions were a little too soft – with the regrettable exception of Kara’s condescending grilling of Mark Zuckerberg four years ago. She clearly didn’t take him seriously. But Uncle Walt once told me he trusts his audience to do our job, to correctly decode the answers, the body language – and to look at one another and roll our eyes on occasion.
Once again, we were treated to phenomenal speakers. I liked Dick Costolo, Twitter’s witty, deeply smart (and best-dressed) CEO; and was impressed by Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s deft handling of questions about business, gender, and politics.
Sandberg is a veteran of Washington, where she worked for Treasury secretary Larry Summers, her thesis adviser at Harvard, and Google – where she worked for another Larry. Reading her best-selling and inevitably controversial Lean In doesn’t replace seeing her on stage.
Another highlight was the one exception to the No PowerPoint rule: Mary Meeker’s high-speed walk through the freshest version of her rightly celebrated Internet Trends deck. And, while we’re at it, take a look at this astounding (no exaggeration, I promise) zettabyte (1 billion terabytes, 10^21 bytes) Internet traffic projection by Cisco.
Then we have the perplexing interview with Dennis Woodside and Regina Dugan, CEO and senior. VP, respectively, of Motorola Mobility, now a Google subsidiary. (Regular attendees will recall that Dugan was on stage at D9 as director ofDARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that gave birth to the Internet).
Woodside stated that Motorola would deliver a range of new phones later this year, including a “hero device“with better integration of sensors into the user interface, as well as class-leading autonomy. He also added that Motorola would sell it for much less than the various $650 smartphones available today, probably meaning no-contract Samsung, HTC and Apple top-of-line phones at Verizon and other carriers.
A smarter-but-much-cheaper phone … it’s a bold but credible claim. Keep in mind that Motorola doesn’t exist to make money for itself. It’s part of what I call Google’s 115% Business Model: advertising makes 115% of Google’s profits and everything else brings the number back down to 100. The smartphone market could become even more interesting if, after making a free smartphone OS, Google subsidises the hardware as well.
Less credibly, however, Woodside insisted that Google has not and will not give its captive Motorola special access to Android code, because this is something Google simply doesn’t do. Perhaps he doesn’t recall that Google gave advanced access to upcoming Android builds to chosen partners such as Samsung, HTC, and, if memory serves, LG.
Just as interesting, if a bit troubling, Regina Dugan gave us insights into individual identification research work at Motorola. She proudly displayed a tattoo on her forearm that incorporates an RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) antenna that lets you log onto services without the usual annoyances. Or you can swallow an “authentication” pill that’s powered by digestive acids. As Dugan puts it, “your entire body becomes your authentication token.” Hmm …. a tattoo on one’s forearm, a pill that emits an ID signal that you can’t turn off (for a while) …
Last but not least, Tim Cook’s interview. The low point in the Apple CEO’s appearance came during the Q&A section at the end (it’s around the 1:10:35 mark if you want to fast forward). A fund manager (!!) plaintively begged Cook to make him dream, to tell him stories about the future, like Google does. “Otherwise, we’ll think Mike Spindler and Gil Amelio ….” (I’m paraphrasing a bit).
Cook refused to bite. As he’d done many times in the interview, he declined to make announcements, he only allowed that TV and wearable devices were areas of “intense interest”. And, when asked if Apple worked on more “game changers” like the iPhone or the iPad, he had no choice but to promise more breakthroughs. Nothing new here, this has been Apple’s practice for years.
Which raises a question: What was Apple’s CEO doing at D11 less than two weeks before the company’s Worldwide Developer Conference where, certainly, announcements will be made? What did the organisers and audience expect, that Tim Cook would lift his skirt prematurely?
Actually, there was a small morsel: Cook, discussing Apple TV, claimed 13m current generation devices had been sold to date, half of them in the past year … but that’s food for another Monday Note.
Audience and media reactions to the lack of entertainment were mixed.
For my part, perhaps because of my own thin skin, I find Tim Cook’s preternatural calm admirable. Taunted with comparisons to Spindler and Amelio, dragged onto the Senate floor, being called a liar by a NYT columnist, constantly questioned about his ability to lead Apple to new heights of innovation … nothing seems to faze him. More important, nothing extracts a word of complaint from him.
This is much unlike another CEO, Larry Page, who constantly whines about “negativity” directed at Google, a conduct unbecoming the leader of a successful company that steamrolls everything in its path.
I have my own ideas about Cook’s well-controlled behaviour, they have to do with growing up different in Mobile, Alabama. But since he’s obviously not keen to discuss his personal life, I’ll leave it at that and envy his composure.
New Apple products are supposed to come out later this year. You can already draft the two types of stories: If they’re strong, this will be Tim Cook’s Apple; if not, it’ll be We Told You So.