Public vs. Private Information on the Internet

Does Hardware Drive Software, or Vice Versa?

Why Have Past Consortia for Compatibility Failed, and Why Would DECE Now Succeed?

So Are Device-Content Systems Moving Toward Compatibility or Incompatibility?

There are two trends occurring in the digital world that seem to be at odds with one another.  The first is that towards incompatible hardware/device – software/content ecosystems and the other is towards compatible ecosystems.

The first trend, the “splintering” of the Internet into multiple, incompatible ecosystems, is detailed in “Apple, Amazon, Google Wage Content Wars” by Ben Kunz, NYT: 

A battle looms, and it's not about selling new gadgets—it's about using devices to lock you into a content ecosystem. In an ironic evolution of the World Wide Web that once promised consistent access to all of the globe's information, corporate giants are now striving to wall off sections of content and charge you for access.

In a few years, the online landscape will expand to thousands of device formats. Morgan Stanley (MS) analyst Mary Meeker thinks the world will soon contain 10 billion web-enabled gadgets…

The Internet is splitting into a series of content portals... Forrester Research (FORR) analyst Josh Bernoff refers to this brave new multiplatform world as "the Splinternet," where the common Web browser experience of the past 15 years is shattered into systems of incompatible content formats.

We will all have to adapt to a world where gadgets are the new marketing medium. The device-portal tie-up isn't necessarily bad for consumers, who have plenty of choices for media consumption. But it creates a thorny puzzle for businesses striving to build audiences … Just as businesses today might create an ad campaign that can be customized for hundreds of different print formats, a marketing message must now fit into numerous technology interfaces.

The second trend is that towards multiple, compatible ecosystems in the sense that digital content can be accessed from any device, as described in “Entertainment, Tech Titans Aim for Digital Compatibility” by Anick Jesdanum, ABC News and “Digital Content Wherever You Want It” by Cliff Edwards, BusinessWeek:

Leading entertainment and consumer-electronics companies … have formed a consortium, the Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem [DECE], to come up with technical specifications that content distributors and manufacturers can follow to ensure compatibility…

Notably absent is Apple.

The consortium … ha[s] been working since May [2008] to create rules that will let consumers share their purchased content on a number of devices in the home, or stream them over the Internet to laptops, cell phones, or other electronic gear. "No matter where you are in the world, if you previously purchased Spider-Man 3, you should be able to access Spider-Man and stream it"…

This isn't the first attempt to create standards and a set of devices where a consumer is guaranteed interoperability. Microsoft established its PlaysForSure rights scheme for digital music players as an alternative to the iPod ecosystem from Apple ... And consortia such as the Digital Living Network Alliance and Coral have been trying for years to create a framework of minimum technical specifications for devices in the home. Even Intel … flopped with its Viiv brand to get manufacturers and content providers to adhere to a specific set of guidelines.

Apple's growing dominance in the digital world has changed all that ...

I put these two sets of ideas together and came up with a seeming contradiction in trends.  After trying to figure out what’s actually going on, I came up with three separate issues that need to be understood before I can address the compatibility vs. incompatibility question:

1. There's an important distinction between being able to access public vs. proprietary information
2. Does hardware drive the creation of software, or does software drive hardware?
3. DECE-like consortia are not new, but previous consortia have not been very successful.  Why have such consortia failed in the past, and why would DECE succeed now?