With few quality core apps, a fragmented app platform (QNX, Adobe Air, HTML5 and Android) and important features that require pairing with a BlackBerry to access, the device would seem to be a non-starter in the consumer market. Which is bad news when consumer preferences are playing an increasingly larger role in enterprise purchasing decisions.

Sure, RIM has well-established relationships in the corporate market. And those certainly count for a lot. But as a massive new report from Goldman Sachs notes today, the “consumerization of IT” is eroding them–perhaps more quickly than you’d think.

“Despite RIM’s enterprise-friendly architecture, including running its own secure network and only allowing email access on the PlayBook by tethering it to a BlackBerry smartphone over Bluetooth, early indications are that CIOs significantly prefer the iPad and Android tablets over the PlayBook,” Goldman’s analysts explain. “We believe this is largely due to CIOs following the individual consumer preferences of their employees, similar to the dynamic that has unfolded in the smartphone market.”

In other words, the consumer market is beginning to determine IT purchasing decisions. Broad consumer interest in the iPad, for example, has accelerated corporate adoption of the device. Employees are buying iPads–and other mobile devices as well–and enterprise is increasingly supporting them on the back end or subsidizing them outright.

Which is great if you’re winning in the consumer market, as the iPad is. But lousy if you’re not.

And while it’s far too early to tell how the PlayBook will fare with consumers, early reviews suggest it may have a tough time winning them over.

And that’s unfortunate for RIM, particularly if a loss in the consumer market translates into a loss in enterprise as well.

[Image credit: Illustration by Joy of Tech, tables by Goldman Sachs]

Nokia faces some very significant challenges. The game has changed from a battle of devices to a war of ecosystems, and competitive ecosystems are gaining momentum and share. The emergence of ecosystems represents the broad convergence of the mobility, computing and services industries. In short, our industry changed, it’s time for Nokia to change faster.

–Nokia CEO Stephen Elop

The transition from Symbian to Microsoft’s Windows Phone platform is one of the more challenging parts of Nokia’s new mobile alliance with Microsoft. Implementing a new strategy like this takes time, something that’s in short supply in the fast-moving mobile market. And with Nokia complicating its roll-out with joint product roadmaps and shared responsibilities, some observers are beginning to wonder if the company will suffer more smartphone market share losses before it enjoys any gains–if it enjoys any at all.

Bernstein analyst Pierre Ferragu says he expects Nokia to lose 2 points of market share sequentially in smartphones in the first quarter. And he thinks that trend will likely continue in the quarters that follow, and perhaps even accelerate.

That might seem an overly-pessimistic view of Nokia’s situation, but Ferragu has his reasons, top among them the belief that Nokia’s alliance with Microsoft won’t solve the company’s fundamental problem: the lack of innovation and agility fostered by an overlarge company hamstrung by bureaucracy.

“For a company unarguably overstaffed, with an over-engineered organisation, a lack of reactivity clearly acknowledged by management, a partnership with another heavy giant doesn’t sound like the right remedy,” Ferragu argues, noting that Nokia’s worst enemy going forward is time. “The partnership with Microsoft will first take time to implement. Even if the largest areas of the partnership seem to have been decided, a few more months to agree on the details seem a minimum. Moreover, comments made by management [recently] on how the partnership is likely to work are not reassuring: joint product roadmaps, interactions at all layers of both organizations, interlocked areas of responsibilities. All these elements point at likely slower decision making processes and higher risk on the quality of decision made.”

Not the best spot to be in when your leadership position has been eroded by the likes of Apple and HTC, which earlier this month surpassed Nokia in market cap.

Aghast at the U.S. International Trade Commission’s ruling on its first complaint against Apple, Nokia has filed a second, accusing Apple of infringing its patents “in virtually all of its mobile phones, portable music players, tablets, and computers.”

At issue in the complaint are seven patents that Nokia argues “are now being used by Apple to create key features in its products in the areas of multi-tasking operating systems, data synchronization, positioning, call quality and the use of Bluetooth accessories.” Taken together with the IP cited in Nokia’s previous ITC complaint and related cases in the U.S., U.K., Germany and The Netherlands, the company has nearly four dozen patents in play in its suit against Apple.

“Our latest ITC filing means we now have 46 Nokia patents in suit against Apple, many filed more than 10 years before Apple made its first iPhone,” Paul Melin, Nokia’s VP of intellectual property said in a statement. “Nokia is a leading innovator in technologies needed to build great mobile products and Apple must stop building its products using Nokia’s proprietary innovation.”

Almost sounds like Nokia’s saying it invented the iPhone, doesn’t it? Which is ironic, considering the company is on the record professing its fondness for Apple’s handset.

Asked once about the striking similarities between a touchscreen device it was designing and the iPhone, Anssi Vanjoki, Nokia’s head of multimedia devices at the time, replied, “If there is something good in the world then we copy with pride.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Nokia Sues Apple
• Did Nokia Sue Apple Before Apple Could Sue Nokia?
• Nokia’s New Focus Is Mobile Services? Sure It’s Not Lawsuits Against Apple?
• Apple Countersues Nokia for Copying iPhone (Plus Disputed Patents and Full Text of Counterclaim)
• ITC Investigating Nokia Over Apple Patent Complaints and Vice Versa
• Nokia Accuses Apple of “Legal Alchemy.” Stops Short of “Chymistry” and “Heresy.”
• Apple Vs. Nokia: The Battle of Britain
• Apple Vs. Nokia: The Battle of Britain II
• ITC: Apple Did Not Infringe Nokia Patents

Reports of stock-outs are widespread, coming in from Canada,  Germany, Australia, and Great Britain, where the iPad 2 evidently sold out in 24 hours. An ATD reader in Paris tells me that both Apple Stores in the city–Opéra and Louvre–were sold out by weekend’s end. Another in the U.K. says Apple’s Regent Street Store–which, ironically, sits across the street from Nokia’s now shuttered flagship shop–had a line “so long I expected to see the Pied Piper at its head” (see video below courtesy of Only Gizmos).

Clearly, demand for the iPad 2 is as “amazing” abroad as it is at home. Which makes you wonder if some of those early sales estimates were a bit too conservative–bullish ones, too.

Obviously. Though it’s interesting to hear an FCC official say that on the record. During an appearance at CTIA earlier this week, FCC Chair Julius Genachowski declined comment on the deal, which is burdened by all sorts of competitive concerns.

AT&T, which has been spinning the acquisition as a boon for Americans and their country, says it’s confident it will win approval. “We understand that Congress, the DOJ, the FCC, as well as wireless consumers will have questions about the transaction. We look forward to answering and addressing those questions,” said a company spokesman. “We are confident that the facts will demonstrate that the deal is in the public interest and that competition will continue to flourish.”

I hope so. AT&T stands to lose $3 billion if the deal falls through.

Recent reports have put excess Galaxy Tab inventory in the hundreds of thousands and claim that surplus–not the debut of 8.9-inch and 10.1-inch versions of the device–is the real reason Samsung recently lowered its price. Said Samsung spokesman James Chung, “We don’t comment on market speculation but such talk is absolutely groundless.”

It’s worth noting that this isn’t the first time Samsung has been dogged by reports that the Galaxy Tab isn’t selling as well as the company has let on. As I’ve mentioned here before, the high sell-in figures Samsung likes to tout don’t represent actual sales to consumers. Instead, they are the number of Galaxy Tab devices it has shipped to wireless companies and retailers around the world.

And then there are those return rates. ITG Investment Research, which tracked point-of-sale data from nearly 6,000 wireless stores in the U.S. from the Galaxy Tab’s November debut through January 15, found return rates running between 13 percent and 16 percent. Of course, Samsung disputed those figures, claiming the real percentage to be less than two percent. But it provided neither data or explanation to support that claim.

Meted out by France’s Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés, or CNIL, the sanction is the agency’s highest ever and the first penalty levied against Google for data collection practices that have drawn complaints from dozens of countries.

According to the CNIL, though Google pledged to erase all the private data it collected, it “has not refrained from using the data identifying Wi-Fi access points of individuals without their knowledge.” Worse, the company continues to collect data on Wi-Fi access points via smartphones accessing its Latitude service, without clearly disclosing that to Latitude users. And, as it has done in other countries, Google refused to grant access to software used to harvest and store the information or an interview with the “rogue engineer” it claims is responsible for the whole debacle.

Google, of course, continues to play the penitent. “As we have said before, we are profoundly sorry for having mistakenly collected payload data from unencrypted WiFi networks,” Google’s Global Privacy Counsel Peter Fleischer said in yet another variation of the same statement the company has been issuing for nearly a year now.

PREVIOUSLY

• Lawmakers Would Like a Word With Google’s “Rogue” WiSpy Engineer
• Connecticut Won’t Press for Google WiSpy Data, Looks to Settle
• Well, Hell, If I Knew All I Had to Do Was Seize the Hard Drives…
• Look, Sergey, a Christmas Card From the Connecticut AG! Wait…
• Google Street View Privacy Debacle Far From Over
• FTC Closes Google Street View Probe
• Google CEO Apologizes for Street View Schmidtstorm
• Google CEO’s Advice to the Street-View Shy: The Video
• Schmidt: Don’t Like Google Street View Photographing Your House? Then Move.
• Mr. Schmidt, There’s an Inspector Lestrade on Line One
• State AGs to Probe Google’s “Deeply Disturbing Invasion” of Wi-Fi Data
• No Harm, Big Foul: Google Intercepted Passwords and Email Extracts
• Germany Questions Google’s Data “Mistake”
• Google Street View Cars Collected Wi-Fi User Data for Three Years

Bernstein Research analyst Craig Moffet calls the deal a “clear win” for AT&T, despite T-Mobile USA’s high price tag. “Even paying a premium to market for T-Mo, AT&T believes it can acquire the asset for free,” he writes. “The relative compatibility of the two companies suggests that very high synergies in this range are, in fact, plausible. The company can point to synergies in the areas of network, advertising and marketing, retail stores, support and SG&A, and spectrum.”

At Barclays, James Ratcliffe also describes the deal as a win, but worries about regulatory challenges. “While we don’t expect this deal to have an easy time getting approval in Washington, AT&T’s offer to expand its LTE coverage (feeding into administration goals of nationwide wireless broadband) and support from AT&T’s unions (T-Mobile is non-union), certainly help,” he says. “AT&T’s regulatory team is high-quality, and we don’t think the company would be going down this path (given $3BN breakup fee, especially), if they didn’t have high confidence of success.”

Simon Flannery at Morgan Stanley, too, sees the acquisition as a good move. “The AT&T/T-Mobile USA merger fits our thesis of logical combinations, with synergy opportunities and a common network technology,” he told clients this morning. “The deal would increase AT&T’s wireless revenues by 36.4 percent bringing wireless to 55 percent of consolidated revenues versus 47 percent currently. It would also raise AT&T to the number one place in terms of subscribers, revenue and EBITDA. Importantly, from a spectrum standpoint, the deal relieves significant pressure off AT&T.”

Over at BTIG Walter Piecyk applauds the deal for similar reasons. “[It] solves AT&T’s longer term spectrum issues,” he says. “It also eliminates a price aggressive competitor and blocks Sprint from merging with TMO.”

And Piper Jaffray’s Christopher Larsen states the obvious, saying the merger will make AT&T a more formidable competitor. “First, all of the carriers have been feeding off of T-Mobile’s subscriber base due to its lack of differentiated service,” he writes. “AT&T’s market position and reputation should help stem subscriber defections over the long-term (there could be some losses early due to merger-related distractions or forced divestitures). Second, the combination should allow AT&T to accelerate its 4G network build. Finally, AT&T’s new spectrum position gives it an opportunity to build the premier wireless network in the nation, as it relates to quality and capacity.”

At Oppenheimer, Tim Horan praises it as a wise strategic move, noting that it undermines a potential Verizon-Sprint deal. “In our view, from AT&T’s perspective, this is a smart time to come to an agreement of this magnitude and we believe the deal should be approved by regulators,” he writes. “By taking the strategic initiative, we believe [the carrier] is precluding other major deals from taking place.”

Consensus, then, seems to be that the deal is a savvy one which brings serious scale benefits and synergies–if AT&T can win the necessary regulatory approvals.

More Coverage

• AT&T Wraps Self in Flag, Says T-Mobile Deal Essential to U.S. Competitiveness
• The AT&Terminator: Rise of Ma Bell
• Sprint: AT&T’s T-Mobile Buy Would “Dramatically Alter” Market
• First Casualty of AT&T Deal: T-Mobile Drops From CTIA Panel
• What AT&T Owes T-Mobile if Deal Doesn’t Go Through
• T-Mobile USA: No, We’re Not Getting the iPhone Yet
• T-Mobile’s Memo to Staff on the AT&T Deal
• AT&T’s President on Why T-Mobile Deal Should Pass Muster and Won’t be a Customer Nightmare
• T-Mobile: We Were Totally Kidding About AT&T’s Crappy Network!
• AT&T Agrees to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

Nokia spends about five times as much on mobile R&D as Apple. In fact, Nokia has nearly as many engineers working on its smartphone software platforms as Apple does for its entire product line. Says Dediu, “Symbian alone may cost twice as much to develop than the iPhone (including the hardware).”

A shocking metric, if correct. And a pretty dismal return on investment–unless there’s another version of Symbian in the pipeline that will best iOS.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Not Seeing Much Return on That Massive R&D Spend, Are You, Nokia?
• Nokia: Big and Slow

ITG Investment Research tracked point-of-sale data from nearly 6,000 wireless stores in the U.S. from the Galaxy Tab’s November debut through Jan. 15 and found the device to have an unusually high return rate. According to its estimates, cumulative return rates for the Galaxy Tab through December of 2010 were about 13 percent. Worse, that percentage is growing as holiday purchases are returned. ITG figures cumulative Galaxy Tab return rates through January 15 were 16 percent. Ugly, considering the return rate for the iPad at Verizon since its debut on the carrier is just 2 percent.

But perhaps to be expected given Google’s own admonishments about Android Froyo’s tablet suitability. As Hugo Barra, director of products for mobile at Google, said last fall: Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets. If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn’t run, [Froyo] is just not designed for that form factor.”

[Image Credit: David Lyle/Wooster Collective]

“Verifying Google’s data snare is crucial to assessing a penalty and assuring no repeat. Consumers and businesses expect and deserve a full explanation, as well as measures shielding them from future spying. We will scrupulously safeguard the confidentiality of information we review.

“We will fight to compel Google to come clean–granting my office access to improperly collected materials and protecting confidentiality, as the company has done in Canada and elsewhere.”

– Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal Dec. 10, 2010

Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen has reassessed the need to review the consumer data inadvertently harvested by Google’s Street View cars and determined that it’s not quite as crucial as his predecessor claimed.

Jepsen said Friday that his office will enter into settlement negotiations with the company without reviewing the pilfered data, which Google has steadfastly refused to share with it. Under the terms of the deal between the two, Connecticut will drop the civil investigative demand it was using to force Google to produce the data at issue here, and Google will stipulate to collecting and storing it. It will also stipulate that the data collected included confidential and private information like “partial or complete e-mail communications.”

“This is a good result for the people of Connecticut,” Jepsen said in a statement. “The stipulation means we can proceed to negotiate a settlement of the critical privacy issues implicated here without the need for a protracted and costly fight in the courts, although we are ready to do so if we are unable to come to a satisfactory agreement through negotiation.”

PREVIOUSLY

• Well, Hell, If I Knew All I Had to Do Was Seize the Hard Drives…
• Look, Sergey, a Christmas Card From the Connecticut AG! Wait…
• Google Street View Privacy Debacle Far From Over
• FTC Closes Google Street View Probe
• Google CEO Apologizes for Street View Schmidtstorm
• Google CEO’s Advice to the Street-View Shy: The Video
• Schmidt: Don’t Like Google Street View Photographing Your House? Then Move.
• Mr. Schmidt, There’s an Inspector Lestrade on Line One
• State AGs to Probe Google’s “Deeply Disturbing Invasion” of Wi-Fi Data
• No Harm, Big Foul: Google Intercepted Passwords and Email Extracts
• Germany Questions Google’s Data “Mistake”
• Google Street View Cars Collected Wi-Fi User Data for Three Years

Nokia, for its part, doesn’t seem much worried by the action. “[We're] confident that all of the 37 patents [we have] asserted against Apple [are valid],” a spokesperson told Bloomberg. “We are examining the filing and will take whatever actions are needed to protect our rights.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Nokia Sues Apple
• Did Nokia Sue Apple Before Apple Could Sue Nokia?
• Nokia’s New Focus Is Mobile Services? Sure It’s Not Lawsuits Against Apple?
• Apple Countersues Nokia for Copying iPhone (Plus Disputed Patents and Full Text of Counterclaim)
• ITC Investigating Nokia Over Apple Patent Complaints and Vice Versa
• Nokia Accuses Apple of “Legal Alchemy.” Stops Short of “Chymistry” and “Heresy.”
• Apple Vs. Nokia: The Battle of Britain

It has given wireless carriers in the country the ability to intercept messages sent over its BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) service and BlackBerry Internet Service (BIS) if requested by the government. “The lawful access capability now available to RIM’s carrier partners meets the standard required by the government of India for all consumer messaging services offered in the Indian marketplace,” RIM said in a customer update.

Well, not quite.

The Indian government also wants access to communications sent over RIM’s corporate service. The company hasn’t yet provided that and continues to argue that it’s impossible to do so.

“No changes can be made to the security architecture for BlackBerry Enterprise Server customers since, contrary to any rumors, the security architecture is the same around the world and RIM truly has no ability to provide its customers’ encryption keys,” RIM explained in its customer update.

In other words, the solution RIM has provided is a partial one. It still hasn’t met one of the Indian government’s key demands. Will this concession on BBM and BIS be enough to mollify it?

Or, rather, how has it been responding? Because it’s clear the company has been preparing for this moment for some time. Last year, it accelerated upgrade eligibility for iPhone customers, making it easier for them to get the iPhone 4 when Apple released it. And it locked them all into two-year contracts in the process. And then, last week, it drastically reduced the price of the iPhone 3GS, halving it to $49 from $99.

Presumably, AT&T could follow this with additional pricing promotions that could further limit iPhone subscriber defections to Verizon, though at this point one could argue that it’s as well prepared for its loss of iPhone exclusivity as it will ever be.

Why? Two big reasons:

1. According to Piper Jaffray analyst Christopher Larsen, nearly 80 percent of AT&T iPhone users are currently on family or corporate plans, which makes switching to a new carrier a difficult proposition.
2. Approximately 75 percent of them still have at least a year left on their contracts.

And there’s a third wild-card reason as well: How Verizon’s network fares after a big influx of data-heavy iPhone subscribers. That’s tough to predict, but two analysts I’ve spoken with said they expect Verizon to suffer some network growing pains, though not as bad as the ones suffered by AT&T. Ultimately, Verizon is starting off with a better network, and CDMA is said to be a more spectrally efficient standard than UMTS.

So will there be some AT&T subscribers who switch to Verizon when it begins selling the iPhone? Certainly. But they may not be nearly as large in number as you might think.

“AT&T has done everything it can,” Needham and Co. analyst Charlie Wolf told me this morning. “The company locked in a lot of iPhone owners by waiving early termination fees last summer. It’s moved aggressively to add a bunch of BlackBerrys and Android phones. And it should be remembered that AT&T will continue to sell the iPhone. So I doubt that the loss of subscribers to Verizon will be that large. But it could be material as it pertains to the bragging rights between AT&T and Verizon. “

PREVIOUSLY:

• Why Verizon’s iPhone Won’t Be So Bad for RIM
• How Might the Verizon iPhone Differ From the iPhone 4 (Besides Being Able to Make Calls)?
• Tired: Speculating About Verizon iPhone. Wired: Speculating About Verizon iPhone Sales.
• Verizon iPhone to Debut With Unlimited Data Plan
• Apple CEO Likely to Appear at Verizon iPhone Event
• Verizon Event Set for Tuesday–iPhone Time

But only because those who speculated about the existence of a Verizon iPhone have been struck by a new monomania: Speculating about first-year Verizon iPhone sales numbers.

Indeed, the sales estimates are already rolling out, with the consensus so far hovering between nine million and 12 milion.

“Some think 10 million is possible in the calendar year,” Wedge Partners analyst Brian Blair told me. “And I think it’s a reasonable assumption–not just because of what we’ve seen on AT&T but because you have three years of pent-up demand from users who are loyal to the Verizon network because of its coverage and reliability.”

Gleacher & Co. analyst Brian Marshall agrees, though he’s betting on sales hitting the top end of the range I mentioned.

“The iPhone on Verizon will sell 12 million units in calendar 2011 assuming there’s a ramp-up similar to the one AT&T experienced in 2007-2008 (i.e., 5 percent penetration of the postpaid subscriber base within five quarters of launch),” he told me, adding that AT&T will see a material decline in its iPhone sales as a result.

Taking a more conservative view of the iPhone’s prospects on Verizon is Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, who expects Verizon to activate roughly 25 million smartphones in calendar 2011, of which nine million will be iPhones.

Barclays Capital analyst James Ratcliffe too is betting on that nine-million figure, and of those he expects approximately 500,000 to one million to be purchased by AT&T switchers. Said Ratcliffe, “We don’t believe that the addition of a Verizon iPhone will be a seismic event in the wireless competitive environment, although we do expect it to result in a modest spike in AT&T churn, as customers who love their iPhones but have become unhappy with AT&T’s network take advantage of the alternative.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Verizon iPhone to Debut With Unlimited Data Plan
• Apple CEO Likely to Appear at Verizon iPhone Event
• Verizon Event Set for Tuesday–iPhone Time

Here’s one way: By offering it with a wireless service plan free of the data caps used by AT&T.

Sources close to Verizon tell me the carrier will offer the iPhone with an unlimited data plan (presumably the same $30 unlimited plan it offers for other smartphones)–though they wouldn’t say for how long. That should distinguish it a bit more from the iPhone on AT&T, which requires a capped plan for data service.

Not that such differences worry AT&T any. “We think customers will prefer AT&T’s faster speeds and better functionality over a CDMA network device,” a spokesperson told me. And he has a point. AT&T’s UMTS network allows the use of data and voice simultaneously. Verizon’s CMDA network doesn’t–at least not yet. So, initially, Verizon iPhone users won’t be able to use the Web or check email while on a call–something AT&T iPhone users have long been able to do.

All Things D reported Friday that the special event Verizon is holding in New York Tuesday will be the carrier’s long-rumored iPhone announcement.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Apple CEO Likely to Appear at Verizon iPhone Event
• Verizon Event Set for Tuesday–iPhone Time

According to South Korea’s Cyber Terror Response Center, the hard drives it seized from Google’s Seoul office last August contained a smorgasbord of consumer data. “We unlocked 79 computer hard disks seized from Google Korea last summer and discovered e-mails, instant messages and other private data sent over Wi-Fi networks,” Response Center official Jung Suk-hwa told the Korea Times. “We are now working on an additional 145 hard drives, which were handed over to us later. These disks had previously been taken out of the country.”

But whether those drives hold similar information or not, it’s already clear that Google violated South Korea’s law protecting telecommunications privacy. That said, it’s not immediately clear if the company will face a penalty for that. “We are looking to penalize whoever ordered and developed the program, but are unsure as of yet who that might be,” a police official told the Korea Herald. “Even after we confirm the identity of the suspect, we believe it will most likely be a U.S. citizen, and it is unclear whether the Korean Police Agency can prosecute those involved.”

An interesting remark, since Google has so far refused to identify the “rogue engineer” responsible for this whole Wi-Spy debacle. Perhaps if South Korea is able to do this, he or she can clarify things and confirm the veracity of Google’s explanation.

Google, for its part, trotted out yet another version of the same apologetic statement it’s issued in the U.S., Canada, Germany, France, Britain….

“We are profoundly sorry for having mistakenly collected payload data from unencrypted networks. As soon as we realised what had happened, we stopped collecting all Wi-Fi data from our Street View cars and immediately informed the authorities. We have been co-operating with the Korean Communications Commission and the police, and will continue to do so. Our ultimate objective remains to delete the data consistent with our legal obligations and in consultation with the appropriate authorities.”

PREVIOUSLY

• Look, Sergey, a Christmas Card From the Connecticut AG! Wait…
• Google Street View Privacy Debacle Far From Over
• FTC Closes Google Street View Probe
• Google CEO Apologizes for Street View Schmidtstorm
• Google CEO’s Advice to the Street-View Shy: The Video
• Schmidt: Don’t Like Google Street View Photographing Your House? Then Move.
• Mr. Schmidt, There’s an Inspector Lestrade on Line One
• State AGs to Probe Google’s “Deeply Disturbing Invasion” of Wi-Fi Data
• No Harm, Big Foul: Google Intercepted Passwords and Email Extracts
• Germany Questions Google’s Data “Mistake”
• Google Street View Cars Collected Wi-Fi User Data for Three Years

The only big-name social app joining the “social networking” category at launch is Twitter, which contributed an app that it says is designed for the “mainstream” user and is three times faster than the previous version of Tweetie for Mac, the independent app that Twitter acquired. The new Twitter app is quite elegant, with the rounded corners and UI accents of an iOS app rather than something from the desktop world. Digital Daily’s John Paczkowski says that based on his positive experience with it this morning he’s already deleted the two other Twitter clients on his desktop.

Other than that, the category contains an app for Mashable, the blog about social networking. There are some independent Twitter apps such as Tweetings for Twitter and Itsy. There’s an app for MarsEdit, the desktop blogging software.

That’s slim pickings compared to the social networking category for iPhone apps, where the top free apps are Skype, Facebook and Textfree. Meanwhile, the free iPad social networking app category is led by a couple of off-brand Facebook apps and the official Twitter app.

Facebook has neglected development of its own apps on the iPad and other platforms, so it’s not a surprise that the company hasn’t built something for the Mac app launch. And Skype, as you can understand, already has its own desktop app. Various texting and voice services perhaps make more sense in a phone situation. But you’d think there would at least be a LinkedIn, Tumblr or Myspace Mac app.

Maybe they’ll come later–today’s launch included just 1,000 apps. Or maybe the desktop just isn’t a very social place.

(Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like I can link to the Mac apps themselves, as accessing the store requires a software update available only to users of the latest Mac operating system.)

In a sequel to his original research note suggesting the PlayBook’s battery life is “relatively poor” compared to rivals’, Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu reiterates that claim, saying he would be “very surprised if PlayBook matches anywhere near the battery life of the iPad at 10 hours unless it uses a larger battery.”

The reasons for this are threefold:

1. The PlayBook supports Flash, and Flash is a resource hog. Says Wu, “As seen in recent tests for the new MacBook Air, use of Flash can cut battery life in half….From our understanding, the poor battery life of early PlayBook units may be due to its incorporation of Adobe Flash.”
2. QNX, the operating system on which PlayBook is to run, wasn’t designed for it. It was intended for devices drawing power from a wall socket or car battery, not mobile platforms whose power sources are necessarily limited by their own mobility.
3. RIM’s implementation of power management is not as well-integrated as that of its rivals–particularly Apple, whose homegrown A4 system-on-chip enables the company to deliver superior battery life.

Obviously further work is needed to optimize the device’s battery life; RIM admitted as much in its rebuttal to Wu’s first note and, to be fair, this is a pre-release device–a work in progress. RIM still has a few months left to optimize the PlayBook’s battery and get it to that “comparable” level it claims.

But even fully optimized, Wu doesn’t see it matching the iPad.

“Our sources indicate that the best that PlayBook can probably deliver is six hours as offered by the Samsung Galaxy Tab, which is nearly half of that offered by iPad,” he concludes. “And that is with significant re-engineering.”

That’s RIM’s rebuttal to Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu’s suggestion that the PlayBook’s battery life is “relatively poor” compared to rivals–a claim the company says is based on the observation of a pre-beta version of the device.

“Any testing of battery life to date by anyone outside of RIM would have been performed using pre-beta units that were built without power management implemented,” RIM said in a statement. “RIM is on track with its schedule to optimize the BlackBerry PlayBook’s battery life and looks forward to providing customers with a professional grade tablet that offers superior performance with comparable battery life.”

Ah, but comparable to what? And speaking of “comparable,” what happened to “way ahead”? Wasn’t that what RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie said of the PlayBook’s performance during the company’s last earnings call? “I think there’s going to be a rapid desire for high performance. And I think we’re way ahead on that. And I think CIO friendliness, we’re way ahead on that.”

And what does RIM have to say about Wu’s suggestion that it may be forced to delay the PlayBook’s launch to optimize its battery life? Nothing beyond the oblique assertion that it’s on track with an undisclosed internal schedule. Question is, is that schedule still based on an early 2011 launch or one in the May quarter as Wu suggested. Because if it’s the latter, that means the PlayBook could conceivably arrive at market after the next-generation iPad.

Late Tuesday a Federal judge ordered SAP to pay interest on the gargantuan sum Oracle won against it in a November copyright infringement trial. But it also agreed to calculate that interest using a different method from the one employed by Oracle. And in doing so it lopped about $195 million dollars off the prejudgment interest Oracle had originally sought.

So good news or, rather, significantly better bad news. Certainly, SAP was pleased to learn it’s not obligated to pile quite as much prejudgment interest atop Oracle’s award as it might have been.

“While we believe that Oracle should only be awarded damages, we appreciate that the Court agreed with SAP on the proper calculation of interest in this case which dramatically lowered the amount,” an SAP spokesman told me. “The interest the Court ordered, based on the statutorily-set interest rate of .3 percent and the accrual period of September 29, 2006 through December 23, 2010, is approximately $16.5 million, rather than the over 200 million Oracle was seeking.”

Of course, that doesn’t make Oracle’s damages award any less massive. But then SAP hopes to whittle that down as well. As the company said in its filing last week: “Defendants plan to challenge that verdict on a variety of grounds in their post-judgment motions, including that it is excessive and overcompensates Oracle.”

Oracle declined comment.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Oracle to SAP: You Owe Us Another $212 Million
• Oracle-SAP Verdict: SAP Owes Oracle $1.3 Billion
• Oracle-SAP: Closing Statements Followed by Closing Insults
• Oracle-SAP Case Closes With $1.67 Billion Difference of Opinion
• LOLCatz: Safra on The Stand Again in Oracle-SAP Trial
• Plattner and White No-Shows at Oracle-SAP Trial
• Damages Expert to SAP: You Owe Me $14 Million and Oracle Four Times That
• Oracle, SAP and the Apotheker Sideshow
• Better Late: SAP Co-CEO Apologizes for Oracle IP Theft
• SAP Co-CEO Expected to Testify in Oracle Trial Today
• HP to Oracle: Leave Léo Alone
• Oracle Still Hoping to Snag HP’s Apotheker for SAP Trial
• HP CEO to Oracle: Here’s Looking at You, Kid–Suntory Time!
• Ellison to Self: Damn, Damn. I Knew I Should Have Said $4.5 Billion
• SAP Attorney: Board Knew TomorrowNow Was Infringing at Time of Acquisition
• Oracle Co-President on SAP’s Damages Offer: “It’s Crazy”
• Oracle Enlists Process Servers, Not PIs, to Find HP CEO
• Oracle-SAP Trial: Ellison Swaps Katana for Poison Darts
• Objection: Mr. Ellison Is Referring to the Defendant as “Choleric of Temper” Again
• Oracle Lands Early Shots in SAP Trial
• Your Honor, We Object to Mr. Ellison’s Repeated Use of the Term “Slimy Weasels”
• Oracle to HP CEO: Chicken!
• Oracle Vs. SAP: We Got a Right to Pick a Little Fight–Bonanza!
• SAP’s Tab in Oracle Case: $120 Million and Counting
• Gag Order Denied in Oracle, SAP Trial
• Ellison Taunts HP CEO a Second Time
• SAP to Ellison: Save the Drama for Your Mama
• Ellison to HP CEO: “Warrior, Come Out to Plaaeeay!
• SAP: Please Gag Oracle
• HP Scandal Sucks in New York Times Columnist Over Conflict of Interest
• Welch to HP Board: You Don’t Know Jack!
• Insiders Criticize Ellison For HP CEO Slam
• Was Apotheker HP’s First Choice of CEO?
• HP Names Ex-SAP Chief Apotheker as CEO

This in addition to the $120 million in attorneys’ fees SAP agreed to pay when the trial first began.

SAP, which believed that the damages amounted to about $28 million, had argued that Oracle was looking for an undeserved bonanza out of the jury, while Oracle contended the market value of licensing the IP was between $1.65 billion and $3 billion.

As Nucleus Research’s Rebecca Wettemann notes, the damage award is “a drop in the bucket” to Oracle, but a stern warning to the industry. Looking forward, she said, “You have to bet Oracle will be reminding customers they’re choosing between thought leaders and intellectual property thieves–and what that indicates more broadly about how SAP does business.”

In a statement issued after the verdict , SAP was contrite:

“We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary. This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation. The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TN, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. Throughout this matter, our customers, employees and partners have stood by us and, for that, we are grateful. Our focus now is looking forward, helping our customers be best run businesses, and extending our legacy of industry leadership well into the future. We thank the jury for its diligent service through this lengthy trial and the Court for its supervision of this complex case.”

On behalf of Oracle, President Safra Catz sounded as clinical as Jack Webb wrapping up an episode of “Dragnet.” “For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle’s own customers,” she said in a statement. “Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability; then the trial made it clear that SAP’s most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning. As a result, a United States Federal Court has ordered SAP to pay Oracle $1.3 billion. This is the largest amount ever awarded for software piracy.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Oracle-SAP: Closing Statements Followed by Closing Insults
• Oracle-SAP Case Closes With $1.67 Billion Difference of Opinion
• LOLCatz: Safra on The Stand Again in Oracle-SAP Trial
• Plattner and White No-Shows at Oracle-SAP Trial
• Damages Expert to SAP: You Owe Me $14 Million and Oracle Four Times That
• Oracle, SAP and the Apotheker Sideshow
• Better Late: SAP Co-CEO Apologizes for Oracle IP Theft
• SAP Co-CEO Expected to Testify in Oracle Trial Today
• HP to Oracle: Leave Léo Alone
• Oracle Still Hoping to Snag HP’s Apotheker for SAP Trial
• HP CEO to Oracle: Here’s Looking at You, Kid–Suntory Time!
• Ellison to Self: Damn, Damn. I Knew I Should Have Said $4.5 Billion
• SAP Attorney: Board Knew TomorrowNow Was Infringing at Time of Acquisition
• Oracle Co-President on SAP’s Damages Offer: “It’s Crazy”
• Oracle Enlists Process Servers, Not PIs, to Find HP CEO
• Oracle-SAP Trial: Ellison Swaps Katana for Poison Darts
• Objection: Mr. Ellison Is Referring to the Defendant as “Choleric of Temper” Again
• Oracle Lands Early Shots in SAP Trial
• Your Honor, We Object to Mr. Ellison’s Repeated Use of the Term “Slimy Weasels”
• Oracle to HP CEO: Chicken!
• Oracle Vs. SAP: We Got a Right to Pick a Little Fight–Bonanza!
• SAP’s Tab in Oracle Case: $120 Million and Counting
• Gag Order Denied in Oracle, SAP Trial
• Ellison Taunts HP CEO a Second Time
• SAP to Ellison: Save the Drama for Your Mama
• Ellison to HP CEO: “Warrior, Come Out to Plaaeeay!
• SAP: Please Gag Oracle
• HP Scandal Sucks in New York Times Columnist Over Conflict of Interest
• Welch to HP Board: You Don’t Know Jack!
• Insiders Criticize Ellison For HP CEO Slam
• Was Apotheker HP’s First Choice of CEO?
• HP Names Ex-SAP Chief Apotheker as CEO

[Image credit: Pre-Ellison Samurai image by Artem Mirolevioch]

It would seem, then, that RIM is on target to provide India’s Home Ministry with a solution that will allow it to “lawfully” monitor BlackBerry services by the January 31 deadline the two parties have agreed on.

“I think it would have been helpful and important for the jury to hear from him. On the other hand, it wasn’t essential. We were able to put our case in anyway.”

– Oracle attorney David Boies changes his tune on the importance of HP CEO Léo Apotheker’s testimony in the company’s copyright infringement lawsuit against SAP

ORACLE on SAP
“Oracle brought suit to stop the illegal conduct and hold SAP fully accountable for its actions. Four years ago we discovered massive and indiscriminate downloading of software and support materials from an Oracle support Web site.

SAP immediately and, for three and a half years, repeatedly denied wrongdoing and responsibility. But on the eve of trial SAP began a series of admissions to claims of copyright infringement, violations of state and federal computer fraud laws, unfair competition, breach of contract, interference and other claims that settled liability before the trial began. Trial evidence and testimony showed that the SAP Executive Board was fully aware of the illegal activity and still acquired TomorrowNow to unlawfully take Oracle support revenues and move Oracle customers to SAP products and to disrupt and discredit Oracle. SAP not only failed to take action to stop the behavior, but it expanded it for 18 months after Oracle filed suit.

The pre-trial admissions and testimony over the last few weeks have exposed SAP’s scheme to capitalize on the use of stolen intellectual property. While Oracle seeks damages to fairly compensate it for this massive theft, it is perhaps more important to expose the illegal conduct by a dominant player in the industry and to send a message that intellectual property rights must be respected.”

SAP on ORACLE
The time for testimony and sidewalk claims by plaintiff’s counsel are over. The actual testimony took place in court.

We are very proud of the SAP legal team and our counsel Jones Day for their work in presenting our defense. We believe we have presented a solid case for the reasonable and appropriate compensation for damages by the limited actions of TomorrowNow. This case is not about who knew what, did what or supervised what…those issues were handled by stipulations prior to trial. This case is only about the damages, and we trust now in the jury to examine the evidence and testimony and reach a fair and just conclusion.

SAP has a long history as a trusted partner and we believe our legacy will extend beyond this matter. Throughout this matter over these three years, our customers and partners have stood by us and for that we are grateful. The mark of a successful leading company is the way it handles it’s mistakes. As indicated in court, we regret the mistakes of TN, we apologize to Oracle, and we have sought to address these mistakes by compensating Oracle for the damages. All along, we have done the responsible thing by admitting to the mistakes, taking care of the customers, winding down the TN business, and accepting liability. We are confident we can put this matter behind us and continue our leadership of this industry.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Oracle-SAP: Closing Statements Followed by Closing Insults
• Oracle-SAP Case Closes With $1.67 Billion Difference of Opinion
• LOLCatz: Safra on The Stand Again in Oracle-SAP Trial
• Plattner and White No-Shows at Oracle-SAP Trial
• Damages Expert to SAP: You Owe Me $14 Million and Oracle Four Times That
• Oracle, SAP and the Apotheker Sideshow
• Better Late: SAP Co-CEO Apologizes for Oracle IP Theft
• SAP Co-CEO Expected to Testify in Oracle Trial Today
• HP to Oracle: Leave Léo Alone
• Oracle Still Hoping to Snag HP’s Apotheker for SAP Trial
• HP CEO to Oracle: Here’s Looking at You, Kid–Suntory Time!
• Ellison to Self: Damn, Damn. I Knew I Should Have Said $4.5 Billion
• SAP Attorney: Board Knew TomorrowNow Was Infringing at Time of Acquisition
• Oracle Co-President on SAP’s Damages Offer: “It’s Crazy”
• Oracle Enlists Process Servers, Not PIs, to Find HP CEO
• Oracle-SAP Trial: Ellison Swaps Katana for Poison Darts
• Objection: Mr. Ellison Is Referring to the Defendant as “Choleric of Temper” Again
• Oracle Lands Early Shots in SAP Trial
• Your Honor, We Object to Mr. Ellison’s Repeated Use of the Term “Slimy Weasels”
• Oracle to HP CEO: Chicken!
• Oracle Vs. SAP: We Got a Right to Pick a Little Fight–Bonanza!
• SAP’s Tab in Oracle Case: $120 Million and Counting
• Gag Order Denied in Oracle, SAP Trial
• Ellison Taunts HP CEO a Second Time
• SAP to Ellison: Save the Drama for Your Mama
• Ellison to HP CEO: “Warrior, Come Out to Plaaeeay!
• SAP: Please Gag Oracle
• HP Scandal Sucks in New York Times Columnist Over Conflict of Interest
• Welch to HP Board: You Don’t Know Jack!
• Insiders Criticize Ellison For HP CEO Slam
• Was Apotheker HP’s First Choice of CEO?
• HP Names Ex-SAP Chief Apotheker as CEO