Apple hadn’t wanted Cook to testify, writing in a letter to the court on Monday (PDF) that the government’s original complaint didn’t mention him (it only refers to former CEO Steve Jobs) and that Cook — who was previously the company’s chief operating officer — doesn’t possess any “unique knowledge about Apple’s decision to enter the ebooks market and recalls no relevant ‘private conversations’ with Mr. Jobs.”

However, according to Reuters, Judge Cote said in a teleconference Wednesday that because of Jobs’ death, “I think the government is entitled to take testimony from high-level executives within Apple about topics relevant to the government case.” Court documents supporting her decision have not yet been posted to PACER.

The DOJ sued Apple and five book publishers last April for allegedly conspiring to set ebook prices. All five publishers in the case have settled.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Takeaways from connected consumer’s second quarter
• Controversy, courtrooms and the cloud in Q1
• The evolution of consumer-media cloud storage

Class action lawyers had earlier demanded that Isaacson provide evidence, based on his interviews with Steve Jobs, about why Jobs asked publishers to sell books on Apple’s iPad device. Isaacson refused to hand over his notes and invoked a New York law that allows journalists to shield their sources in many situations.

The lawyers, who want Apple to pay for allegedly fixing book prices, had subpoenaed Isaacson and said the reporters’ shield did not apply. Last week, however, court documents show the parties agreed to drop Isaacson from the case.

The Isaacson dispute comes at a time when Apple’s antitrust showdown with the Department of Justice and class action lawyers is coming to a head. While the five publishers who were also named as defendants decided to settle, Apple is rejecting the accusations that it acted as the hub for an illegal conspiracy to raise book prices and thwart Amazon. Meanwhile, Amazon executives are poised to testify against Apple.

Even though the Isaacson biography is no longer part of the case, a court transcript shows Steve Jobs will remain a central figure. In response to a question about who decided to sign contracts with book publishers, Apple executive Keith Moerer said, “Ultimately, I would say it was — Steve. But working closely with — with Eddy, Mr. Cue.”

Meanwhile, other recently filed court documents identify one recipient of a highly publicized Jobs email about Amazon and pricing — the recipient was James Murdoch, a senior executive at News Corp, parent company of HarperCollins. The other recipient(s) are still redacted. You can see the email below:

Steve Jobs Emails by

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Research In Motion: future scenarios for its fate
• The evolution of consumer-media cloud storage
• Facebook’s IPO filing: ideas and implications

There’s an obvious reason they’re concentrating their energies, too. Technology companies are incredibly powerful, which draws a lot of attention, and a lot of anger in many cases. Unfriendly administrations can be powerful enemies: from Microsoft’s drawn-out conflict with European officials — effectively running for 20 years — to the vast fines levied on companies like Intel who break competition rules, conflict with governments can be costly and distracting. So what better way to try and smooth the path than try to head off that conflict earlier in the process?

But lobbying is furtive, and tends to happen behind closed doors: only dragged into the open when big issues emerge, such as the recent furore over American tech companies paying little or no tax in the U.K.. The European Commission does run a transparency register that companies are meant to report for, but the truth is that many — including, for example, Apple — have not signed up. Shouldn’t the extent of lobbying be more visible?

What follows is a short overview to some of the power players working to influence Brussels, or other governments in Europe, on behalf of the world’s big internet and hi-tech companies. It’s not meant to be comprehensive — there are lots of companies missing, and lots of individuals not named. But consider it more of a starting place: If you know more lobbyists, and their roles, then please leave them in the comments. Eventually, maybe, we can produce a map of their activities.

Google

Google has one of the most complex European lobbying operations among Internet companies. It operates a significant team in Brussels, but also has staff in most other major European capitals — including Berlin, where it opened a new office housing seven lobbyists. Their job? To try and influence the German government over issues like privacy and copyright, where it is far stricter than most other nations.

Key players:

Antoine Aubert, head of Google’s Brussels policy team, is listed in the transparency register as the liaison between EU and Mountain View. He is a policy wonk who previously spent three years working for the Commission itself.

Simon Hampton, the company’s director of public policy in Europe, is a former AOL and Time Warner policy chief. He took up the role with Google four years ago, which he describes on his LinkedIn profile like this: “His team of 45 evangelise the economic and social potential of the Internet, and work on the regulatory agenda to help Europe tap the full opportunities of the Internet.” The transparency register claims seven people working at European level.

Annette Kroeber-Riel, European policy counsel, heads up the German lobbying effort, which has built a network of operations, including think tanks and a research institute. Her background includes VeriSign and Jamba! (the company behind Crazy Frog, which was notorious Samwer brothers).

Peter Fleischer, global privacy counsel based in Paris, is a long-time hand at the company who works on international policy efforts around data and privacy. Largely operating behind the scenes, Fleischer’s profile was raised when he was one of those named, tried and convicted in an Italian court over a YouTube video of a boy being bullied. (The ruling was overturned just before Christmas.)

Sarah Hunter, head of UK public policy, was a senior policy adviser to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Facebook

Facebook’s rocket-like trajectory in the last few years has rapidly increased its interaction with governments — rarely positive — and it is staffing up its lobbying efforts to reflect that. It seems keen to pick those with inside knowledge of the system gained from active political positions, rather than from the academic or bureaucratic side like most of its peers.

Key players:
Erika Mann, managing director of public policy (pictured) has helped build Facebook’s Belgian lobbying engine since joining in 2011, but knows Europe very well: the German was a Member of the European Parliament for 15 years.

Richard Allan, the director of policy in Europe, also has political ties. He spent eight years as a Member of Parliament in Britain (and then acted as campaign manager for Nick Clegg, the current Deputy Prime Minister) and sits in the House of Lords after being made a Baron in 2010. Before moving to Facebook in 2009, he worked as a lobbyist for Cisco.

Apple

Apple is one of those companies which has no presence in the transparency register, but clearly has a lobbying operation in Brussels. Steve Jobs himself was known to join meetings with European officials, and EC documents show he took part to get regulatory approval of Europe-wide pricing for iTunes. Still, its lobby effort does seem underpowered compared to rivals like Google.

Key players:

Claire Thwaites, director of Apple’s EMEIA government affairs previously helped lead Vodafone lobbying in Brussels and Washington.

Jaymeen Patel, senior government affairs manager (pictured), is another telecoms veteran, with five years at Telefonica.

Amazon

Amazon is one of a number of American technology companies that is lobbying Brussels in order to weaken restrictions on data collection. It is not listed in the joint transparency register. And yet it does have a Brussels presence to help try and secure itself a good deal across the single market.

Key players:

Andrew Cecil (pictured) has been Amazon’s director of public policy in Brussels since 2009, after he jumped from the same role at Yahoo!. Became temporarily notorious for refusing to answer a range of questions when when giving evidence to British MPs over Amazon’s tax avoidance strategies.

Saskia Horsch, the company’s senior public policy manager, previously worked for the European Casino Association.

Microsoft

Unsurprisingly, Microsoft has put a vast amount of effort into Europe over the years. according to the transparency register, it currently has 17 lobbyists working in Brussels, spending at least €4.5 million ($6 million) last year — though experts suggest that few companies accurately report their true lobbying spend.

At a national level, it operates governmental lobbying of various kinds — such as warning the British government over the adoption of open standards. And it has also funneled some of its lobbying effort through Burston Marsteller, the PR consultancy: opposing the purchase of DoubleClick by Google in 2007, for example.

John Vassallo, a former Maltese ambassador to Europe, has been vice president of EU Affairs for more than four years. He also worked in a similar position for General Electric.

Stephen Collins, the head of EU policy, recently gave evidence to British parliament over plans for a new communications bill.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012
• Connected world: the consumer technology revolution

The Verge has posted all the emails, and it is worth reading them for yourself. A sampling of some of the quotes from the heads of Apple, Google, Intel, Pixar, Intuit, Adobe and Lucasfilm:

• Jobs didn’t mince words when it came to defending his employees from poachers. When he found out Google was heavily recruiting from his iPod team, he asked then-CEO of Google Eric Schmidt, “Can you put a stop to it? Thanks, Steve.”
• Jobs wasn’t above threats. As he told then-CEO of Palm Ed Colligan when complaining of Palm recruiting Apple engineers: “I’m sure you realize the asymmetry in the financial resources of our respective companies when you say: ‘We will both just end up paying a lot of lawyers a lot of money.’”
• It’s clear they knew this was wrong and did it anyway. Intel CEO Paul Otellini said of his arrangement with Schmidt and Google, “We have nothing signed. We have a handshake ‘no-recruit’ between Eric and myself. I would not like this broadly known.”
• Jobs was signing off personally on some employees’ recruitment. He was asked by current Pixar VP Rob Cook about a particular Apple employee he was recruiting to the animation studio, to which Jobs replied, “Yea, it’s fine.”

The Department of Justice investigation into this same matter was settled in 2010, but the civil suit is continuing. Apple CEO Tim Cook, who was COO when these emails were being sent back and forth between Jobs and others, has been ordered to sit for a deposition. Otellini will be deposed later this month, while Google Chairman Schmidt will give one in late February.

Image courtesy of Flickr user acaben

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• Research In Motion: future scenarios for its fate
• The evolution of consumer-media cloud storage

1. What major U.S. mobile carrier is still operating under its original name?

A: AT&T
B: Verizon Wireless
C: Sprint
D: T-Mobile

2. In April, the Department of Justice and 31 states sued book publishers and Apple for allegedly colluding to set ebook prices. Which of the following did NOT APPEAR in the DOJ and states’ original complaints?

A: A “decisionmaker” was quoted as saying “F*** Amazon.”
B: A publishing executive was quoted as instructing someone to “double-delete this email.”
C: Publishing CEOs were described as meeting in “‘The Chef’s Wine Cellar,’ a private room at Picholene,” where “business matters were discussed.”
D: Publishing executives referred to themselves in an email as “the Club!”

3. Just as Twitter launched its own photo editing and filters service, Instagram released updates to its popular app, including the addition of a new photo filter. What was this filter called?

A. Wander
B. Willow
C. Wrestle
D. Tousle

4. We’re producing and consuming data at the same rate your kids attack the bowls of holiday M&Ms left around the house this time of year. But as we move past petabytes and exabytes to the even more esoteric zettabytes and yottabytes what comes next?

A: Googolbytes
B: Brontobytes
C: Gegobyte
D: Mondobytes

5. What was one of the big secrets about Apple revealed during executive testimony at the Apple-Samsung trial?

A: Jony Ive had been lobbying for years for an iPhone with a 5-inch screen
B: Scott Forstall was not Steve Jobs’ first choice to run the iPhone team
C: Steve Jobs was not against the idea of 7-inch tablets after all
D: Google’s Eric Schmidt had helped convince Jobs to build the iPad

6. Long before the iPhone, Androids and Windows Phone, Microsoft did have a sizable percent of the personal digital assistant (PDA) market. These devices eventually turned into Windows Mobile smartphones and at one point, the platform was forecast to surpass that of Symbian. Which of these companies did NOT make a Microsoft-powered PDA:

A: Casio
B: Handspring
C: Toshiba
D: Compaq

7. What event set the new world record for the most simultaneous tweets per minute in 2012?

A: The closing ceremonies of the Summer Olympics
B: A live Twitter interview with Justin Bieber
C: Pope Benedict’s first Twitter conversation
D: The night of the federal election

Click through to see the answers.

Feature photo courtesy of Shutterstock user Shawn Hempel; Tim Cook/Dave Grohl photo courtesy of @tim (Tim Bradshaw)

Go to page 2 (of 2) on GigaOM .

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• Who and what to watch in the new era of the living room

User research doesn’t produce user-centered design.

At IDEO, a team conducts “unfocus groups” where consumers were given a buffet of prototyping materials to build their perfect running shoe

Traditional quantitative user research does not help you envision the future. As Henry Ford famously said, “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Using focus groups and surveys to measure and predict what consumers need and want are incremental at best because they’re focused on present realities.

User-centered design is something entirely different. It’s a way to run your company — with users at the center — where you uncover, understand and are inspired by people’s needs, wants, hopes, and aspirations; what they say, feel, do (and don’t do). So asking a focus group to imagine the future is akin to asking them to do the designer’s job themselves. It’s nonsensical.

Steve Jobs introduces the iMac, or “what [computers] will look like from today on.”

Design and engineering don’t make great bedmates.

Hundreds of logo studies were done before converging on the final Mailbox identity.

The traits that make for a good engineering culture are rarely the same as those that make for a good design culture. Design teams thrive in the experimental, the quick and dirty, in taking leaps and being daring, and they aren’t afraid of failing as a means to learning. Engineering teams, on the other hand, thrive in understanding, in the elegant solutions that account for edge cases, in heads down and focussed spaces, and the engineers I know aren’t too keen on failures of any kind.

IDEO’s San Francisco offices have an open layout for cross-pollination of ideas through conversation.

During this past year I worked in an office that was modeled after IDEO — big communal tables, no walls, and lots of team space. You’d think this open format would foster discussion, keep the designers and engineers in lock-step and promote visibility across the company. But that just wasn’t the case. The designers were noisy, they liked their music at full volume, and they hashed through design reviews passionately. The engineers were cranking and found the noise and activity distracting.

So instead of trying to convince the engineers to be more like the designers, or for the designers to be more like the engineers, we went to Home Depot, bought some giant sheets of foamcore and built a wall. Suddenly, the engineers had a coding cave that was quiet and took over two-thirds of the office, while the designers had the other third of the space to pump their music and debate over button styles as loudly as they wanted.

The result? On the day-to-day level, people were suddenly excited for weekly meetings instead of being at one another’s throats. And at a deeper, cultural level, a respect began to emerge between the teams.

Embrace the fact that design and engineering cultures are different. Design is really well-suited to answer the “How might we?” questions, while engineering is really well-suited to consider all of the details that go into making a concept real. And if you want to build a world-class product, you have to surround these two unique cultures with the tools, space and support that will get them there. They’re complementary – you need both. It’s where 2 + 2 adds up to 5.

You can’t add back in design at the end.

Design thinking touches all aspects of your company.

A startup expresses the values of the founding team. Period.

If the founding team isn’t made up of designers or design-thinkers, design will have a hard time offering much more than window dressing. The founders represent the heart and soul of the company: What the founders burn for will be what the company burns for, and when a company is run by a team that loves product, the results are magical. Because a design-led startup is going to design not only their product, but also their culture. (It’s this mission that started The Designer Fund — a group solely dedicated to investing in designer founders.)

Dropbox’s product helps you upload and share your photos, documents and videos simply and easily.

Take Dropbox, for example. It has only three official designers and the founder, Drew Houston, is a self-professed software engineer. But the Dropbox team has obsessed over the design of their product: It is a wonderfully simple, easy-to-use, intuitive product that serves a clearly defined, core need. It is magical. And this is because — even though he doesn’t call himself a designer — Houston is a design-thinker, which is expressed through the entire product. Dropbox is clearly the result of design thinking operating at the core of the company. So for design to be effective in a startup, it has to be at the center of the organization.

But design isn’t just about product; design is a way of thinking about everything. It’s how you handle the unknowns when talking to investors; it’s how you approach ambiguity within your earliest ideas and explorations; it’s how you critique — not criticize; it’s how you talk through those ideas that could potentially alter your engineering schedule by months; it’s how you know when to keep pushing past “good enough” and on to great;  and it’s how you get from why you’re solving a problem to what you’re building and putting out into the world.

Let’s call a spade a spade here and reframe the role of the designer — design isn’t simply making things look pretty, design is about creating a vision for tomorrow. And it’s difficult — if not impossible — to dream, create and ship amazing new products when the foundation of the company isn’t set up to solve really complex problems, deal with uncertainty, and align on a definition of what “good” looks like.

Since the designer’s role is to envision tomorrow, and the startup exists to bring tomorrow into existence, that fundamental partnership is what’s really needed for a designer to effectively do their job in a startup. So if you’re interested in building a design-led startup, do it fully. Be bold in designing the future. And make that vision a reality.

Elle Luna is the Design Lead at Mailbox — a mobile email app. You can find her on Twitter at @elleluna.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Interview: Tim Brown, CEO and President of IDEO
• How emerging technologies will influence collaboration
• The evolution of consumer-media cloud storage

After the news hit, I actually considered buying an iPad mini with cellular connectivity since many of my contacts use iOS. I bought a Wi-Fi model of the mini — it’s replacing a Retina display iPad 3 for me — and I can still return it for a different model. That idea went out the window once I realized that FaceTime is still a silo, even though at launch, Steve Jobs said Apple would work to make it a standard notes a 2010 Computerworld article:

“Apple will ship tens of millions of FaceTime devices this calendar year, so there’s going to be a lot of people to talk to. FaceTime is based on H.264 video … and a bunch of alphabet-soup acronyms. We’re going to the standards bodies tomorrow and making FaceTime an open standard.”

As one who follows some standards boards, particular those in the wireless industry, I realize that such things take time. But remember: FaceTime was introduced in June 2010 and since that time, not a single piece of information suggests that Apple is working with any standards body to open up FaceTime for use on anything but iOS or OS X. Contrast that to my other heavily used video services, which are Google video chats now done through Google+ hangouts, and Skype.

Both of these services run on every device I own, regardless of platform. That means I’m accessible at any point in time, no matter where I am, what network I’m using and what device I have. Isn’t that the point of instant communications? It’s for these reasons that I use such services. In this day and age, we all want to be connected to our friends and peers without having to worry what device those people are using.

Listen, I love FaceTime. I find it to be one of the better performing video services out there and until my son moved in with me, it’s what I used to communicate with him daily. Two-and-a-half years after FaceTime was introduced, however, I don’t want to ping him on FaceTime, hoping he has his iPod touch with him only to see no response because he’s instead using his Android phone.

I know I’m oversimplifying here, but this is akin to limiting voice calls only to work on phones made by the same company. It’s a huge step backwards in an age where we’ve seen so much forward progress and the removal of communications silos.

If I could make one request it would be this, in my best Ronald Reagan impersonation: “Mr. Cook; Tear down this wall!” Let’s get FaceTime support through open standards and let the video calls flow on all platforms and devices already.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Carrier IQ and the continued erosion of operator trust
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era

It’s a serious question.  A day after Harvard Business School’s Cyberposium 18, I remain struck by the concern attendees seemed to feel about what their advanced degree will mean in a tough economy and in a tech business that elevates technical prowess above everything else. After all, college dropouts Paul Allen, Michael Dell, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, and Mark Zuckerberg all built hugely successful tech companies — Microsoft, Dell, Apple, Facebook —  without a degree among them.

One Cyberposium panelist basically told MBA candidates interested in big data opportunities that they need not apply unless they also had technical chops.  I’m simplifying here, but that was the gist.

Dropbox founder Drew Houston — who does hold a bachelor’s degree in computer science from MIT  – was gentler but still not all that encouraging. Asked what he wanted in an MBA he said … um pretty much the same thing he seeks in any hire. “What we look for in any candidate is that they’re smart and passionate and not just chasing money. We look for a cultural fit,” Houston said in a Q&A session. ”The guy who runs most of the business side [at Dropbox] has a Harvard MBA but what we look for isn’t that different from what we look for in other areas,” Houston said.

The underlying theme was that business skills and teamwork are valuable and much desired. Attitude and a sense of entitlement are not.

Hunter Walk, director of product management at Google (and a Stanford MBA) must be hearing the same concerns. Yesterday, he shared a great post on the topic: “It’s fine to get an MBA, but don’t be an MBA.”

One of his points:

Getting an MBA means you shoot out of school wanting to prove yourself and see what you can contribute to others. Being an MBA means thinking the world owes you something and that your value 10x’ed just from spending two years on a campus.

Given the economic climate, it’s natural for students to worry about the worth of their degrees. And this topic crops up periodically in the sort of “builder versus spreadsheet guy” debates that get heated. Last year, auto executive Bob Lutz’ book “Car Guys vs. Bean Counters: The Battle for the Soul of American Business”  stoked the debate anew. Lutz’ argument, according to the Time Magazine review was: ”To get the U.S. economy growing again,  we need to fire the MBAs and let engineers run the show.”  Harsh, But I would bet lots of people who watched the decline of US industry in the 70s and 80s under the tutelage of MBA CEOs would agree with that sentiment.

Still, promising business students should take heart. Every tech company needs people with business and financial management expertise.  As one commenter to an earlier Cyberposium story put it:

Harvard Business School was where the concept of the spreadsheet developed. Don’t be dismayed … fellow MBAs. Your day will come… Take the Disruptive Innovation courses, and pick up some Advertising while you’re at it.

And, let’s face it,  there are many times when the best technology in the world won’t win unless it’s accompanied by real business savvy.

I would love the discussion to continue, so please post your thoughts in comments below.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Facebook’s IPO filing: ideas and implications
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012
• The 2013 task management tools market

Ok, so I really didn’t have that conversation with my iPad 3. At least not out loud! But it is true: The new iPad mini is replacing my iPad 3; lack of Retina display, be damned! Before I share more thoughts on the two tablets and what led me to the decision, let me bring back some salient points I made nearly two years ago on Apple missing out on the small tablet market. That post, along with the great reader commentary, was read by Apple executives who then decided to enter the small tablet market.

What’s the big deal about small tablets?

Here’s my summary from back then when describing the experience with my 7-inch Galaxy Tab:

“I’m not suggesting everyone dump their iPads; I’m simply explaining my own decision making process to help you make your own. And aside from our own Darrell Etherington at the GigaOM Apple channel who tried, and then returned a Tab, I’ve heard from at least a dozen Tab owners who are also finding less use for the iPad (and other devices) based on the 7-inch form factor. Darrell’s experience with the Tab ironically made him realize that he wants a 7-inch iPad. I’m inclined to agree and would consider dumping my Tab if Apple were to sell such a device. It would be the best of both worlds, regardless of Steve Jobs’s insinuation that it will never happen.

Darrell’s sentiment highlights a key point I’m trying to make here: We often look at the features of a device, but I contend that form is just as much a feature as the CPU clock cycle or the amount of memory in a mobile device. Of course, you never know that until you try a new form factor to see how it fits in your lifestyle. I’m glad I did that with the Tab.”

Perhaps the most important point here is that without the experience of using a small slate, it’s easy to miss its biggest benefit: portability.

But it doesn’t have a Retina Display!

Dooming the device without experience is of using it has already been seen: iPad mini naysayers were decrying the device for its 1024 x 768 display before the device even shipped. I can’t argue with them that the Retina display on the recent iPads are outstanding. But the screen on the iPad mini isn’t as bad as the ones found on the first two iPads.

“Wait, aren’t those all 1024 x 768 resolution? How can the iPad mini screen be better than the first two iPads?” I’m glad you asked, and it’s a pretty simple answer really. Because the same 786,432 pixels of a display with this resolution are crammed into a smaller screen, the pixel density is greater. That means, all things being equal, things on the screen will look clearer. Not by much, but enough to see a difference. So no, the iPad mini display can’t compete with the screen on the newest iPads, but it’s better than the iPads from two or three years ago.

Just as I said when I dumped the first iPad in favor of a 7-inch tablet, I don’t expect everyone to follow suit. After all, thanks to a myriad of applications, the iPad is used differently by everyone. For example, I actually don’t create much content on an iPad, outside of emails and social network updates, that is. If I actually used my iPad to write my daily blog posts, I might feel differently as I find that activity better on a screen larger than 7 or 7.9 inches.

Instead, I do far more content consumption: ebook reading; web browsing; watching TED videos, television episodes and movies; using various apps and games. All of these activities fit nicely on the iPad mini and I’m already doing them in more places: my “large” iPads always tended to stay at home, but the iPad mini can easily go anywhere. And as I noted in early 2011, the best tablet is the one you have with you.

A full iPad experience in a smaller package is a huge selling point

As far as the iPad mini’s usage, performance and feature set, I feel like I’m getting the full iPad experience in a package more suited to my particular needs. Based on a visit to the local Apple Store in King of Prussia, Penn. over the weekend, I suspect many others are starting to see the light. I watched person after person enter the store and walk up to the iPad mini display units with a quizzical look on their face, as if to say, “What’s the point of this smaller iPad?”

More often than not, those looks melted away after a few minutes and it was as if I could actually see the light bulbs going off over people’s heads. Between the portability, the lower price and the full iPad experience, I suspect Apple will sell more iPad mini tablets this holiday season than any other iPad model.

So, goodbye, iPad 3. You were great; whenever I had you around, that is. The problem is a slimmer, lighter model provides the same utility in more places for me; even with that lowly 1024 x 768 display.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Controversy, courtrooms and the cloud in Q1
• A look back at mobile in Q1
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016

And since we are talking about Scott Forstall, senior vice president of iOS and someone who had worked with late Steve Jobs since NeXT, the news is getting dissected in countless ways.

A lot has already been reported – the New York Times has a fairly good summary and behind-the-scenes color. John Gruber’s analysis of the situation can be summed up in two words: Ive Up. And Gdgt’s take is pretty spot on. Now here is what my sources deep within Apple are telling me.

• There has been a lot of talk about Scott Forstall being asked to sign an apology letter for the Apple Maps debacle. He refused. None of my sources were able to confirm this bit of news, though The New York Times reported that is indeed the case.
• Forstall’s firing was met with a sense of quiet jubilation, especially among people who worked in the engineering groups. Or as one of my sources quipped: there are a lot of people going for celebratory drinks, even if there is a little bit of doubt about their roles in the future.
• While the now-rescinded resignation of Bob Mansfield was masterfully planned, my sources say that Forstall’s exit was fairly last minute and not something he initiated. Many within the iOS and OS X teams only heard about it minutes after the news went out. Engineers were caught off guard, a source told me.
• Many feel that Craig Federighi, who is taking over Forstall’s job in addition to overseeing the Mac OS X software business, is someone who needs to prove himself. He is not as decisive and divisive as Forstall.
• There is a sense of excitement around Jony Ive taking over as head of the newly created human interface group. The reason for the excitement: hope for a new design direction for many software products. Most think Eddy Cue taking over Siri and Maps is a smart and natural thing to do.
• According to my sources, there have been fissures in the management team for a while. Steve Jobs and Forstall were close, but none of the executives really cared for the deposed iOS chief. He really built a reputation by executing on Steve’s vision and acting as Steve’s mouthpiece.
• Forstall had less-than-pleasant relationships with many senior executives, including Cue and Mansfield. My sources confirm what the Times reported earlier – Ive and Forstall had a rocky relationship .

Schedule-driven follies

In conversations, I learned about something that is troubling from a long-term point of view. Unlike in the Jobs era, when the company would ship features when they were ready for primetime, a culture of schedule-driven releases has become commonplace.

The time-based schedule is one of the reasons why Siri and Maps arrived as half-baked products and were met with derision. Many engineers inside Apple could foresee problems with Maps. Why? Because Maps were driven by a time schedule.

Maps and Siri are complex products whose dependencies (for the lack of a better word) go deep into different parts of the phone and even the network. The schedule-driven release culture makes folks less daring — why take arrows in your back for failing to deliver a radical new feature on a pre-dictated time? If this cultural warp continues, Apple might have a bigger headache on its hands. Ive’s appointment as the Human Interface honcho means that more risk-taking needs to come into the products. Ironically, the news that should garner more attention has flown under the radar.

Bob Mansfield will lead a new group, Technologies, which combines all of Apple’s wireless teams across the company in one organization, fostering innovation in this area at an even higher level. This organization will also include the semiconductor teams, who have ambitious plans for the future.

In other words, Apple understands that in our cloud-centric connected future, the company needs to not only care about the “human interface” and the “industrial design” but that all of those pieces have to work seamlessly with the guts and nerves of digital devices — chips and the networking technologies. With Cue, Ive and Mansfield, Cook has ensured that Apple is putting its best foot forward. Forstall is no longer part of this future.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Facebook’s IPO filing: ideas and implications
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012
• The state of cross-platform media measurement