Showing posts with label apple. Show all posts
Showing posts with label apple. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 06, 2013

Bug with Web Browsers in OS X Desktop

I came across a fun little bug with Safari and other Web Browsers (FireFox and Chrome) on the Mac OS X desktop when you run with two monitors.

I was using a TV display as a second monitor and had my main laptop monitor arranged underneath. The critical factor was that the OS X menu bar was positioned on the Laptop monitor. i.e. It was between the primary and secondary monitor.

Laptop as main display with menu bar. TV display above.

Laptop as main display with menu bar. TV display above.

When the Menu Bar is between the main display and the secondary monitor you can’t move a Browser window up on to the second monitor. This is an interesting bug that seems to impact many but not all applications. Lotus Notes, SameTime and Microsoft Office Applications seem to ignore the menu bar while Skype sees it as a boundary.

If you move the Menu Bar to the other screen these bounded applications can now move freely about the double desktop.

It will be interesting to see how OS X Mavericks behaves since it appears to be introducing the double menu bar. That looks to be a very welcome feature to avoid the need to mouse or track long distances between desktops to access menu bar features.



via WordPress http://blog.ekivemark.com/bug-with-web-browsers-in-os-x-desktop/

Saturday, July 07, 2012

Apple iOS, OS X Mountain Lion and Apple Maps how will it all work together

In iOS 6 Apple is switching from Google Maps to their own platform. Everyone is waiting to see how this will work out. However, a more interesting question is what will happen in Mountain Lion?
- Will this new Apple Maps platform have it's own web site, or will it only be accessible through an iOS app?
- What will happen to Address Book? If you right click on an Address Book on your Mac you get the option to open this in Google Maps. Will that change? Will it now launch Apple's Map product?
- If I am using my Mac and planning a trip. Will I be able to compile an itinerary and send it to my iOS device?
- Will I have to use Google Maps and then get different directions when it is interpreted by Apple's Map App on iOS?
May be a developer who is using a pre-release copy of Mountain Lion can answer these questions.
Ekivemark

Wednesday, November 09, 2011

Jobs Was Right: Adobe Abandons Mobile Flash Development | Gadget Lab

The BlackBerry PlayBook was famously marketed as a Flash-capable tablet, though ultimately failed to deliver. Photo: Jon Snyder/Wired.com


UPDATE 8:39 A.M. PST: Adobe confirmed it will cease Flash development on mobile devices in a press release published Wednesday morning.

In an abrupt about-face in its mobile software strategy, Adobe will soon cease developing its Flash Player plug-in for mobile browsers, according to an e-mail sent to Adobe partners on Tuesday evening.

And with that e-mail flash, Adobe has signaled that it knows, as Steve Jobs predicted, the end of the Flash era on the web is coming soon.

The e-mail, obtained and first reported on by ZDNet, says that Adobe will no longer continue to “adapt Flash Player for mobile devices to new browser, OS version or device configurations,” instead focusing on alternative application packaging programs and the HTML5 protocol.

“Our future work with Flash on mobile devices will be focused on enabling Flash developers to package native apps with Adobe AIR for all the major app stores,” the quoted e-mail says.

In the past, Adobe has released software tools for mobile developers that create a single platform programmers can use to make applications that work across three major mobile platforms: Android, iOS and the BlackBerry OS. While it’s seemingly easier than learning all of the native languages for each operating system, some developers have claimed a loss in app performance when coding in a non-native language that then gets translated into other languages.

The move indicates a massive backpedaling on Adobe’s part, a company who championed its Flash platform in the face of years of naysaying about its use on mobile devices. Despite Flash’s near ubiquity across desktop PCs, many in the greater computing industry, including, famously, Apple Computer, have denounced the platform as fundamentally unstable on mobile browsers, and an intense battery drain. In effect, Flash’s drawbacks outweigh the benefits on mobile devices.

Flash became a dominant desktop platform by allowing developers to code interactive games, create animated advertisements and deliver video to any browser that had the plugin installed, without having to take into account the particulars of any given browser. However, with the development of Javascript, CSS, and HTML5, which has native support for video, many web developers are turning away from Flash, which can be a resource hog even on the most advanced browsers.

Apple made its biggest waves in the case against Flash in April of last year, when Steve Jobs penned a 1,500-word screed against the controversial platform, describing it as a technology of the past. Jobs and Apple disliked the platform so intensely, it has since been barred from use on all iOS devices.

Despite attempts to breathe life into Flash on other mobile devices — namely, Android and BlackBerry OS — Adobe has failed to deliver a consistently stable version of the platform on a smartphone or tablet. In WIRED’s testing of the BlackBerry PlayBook in April, Flash use caused the browser to crash on a consistent basis. And when Flash was supposed to come to tablets with Motorola’s Xoom, Adobe was only able to provide an highly unstable Beta version of Flash to ship with the flagship Android device.

“Adobe has lost so much credibility with the community that I’m hoping they are bought by someone else that can bring some stability and eventually some credibility back to the Flash Platform,” wrote software developer Dan Florio in a blog post on Wednesday morning.

The drastic reversal in Adobe’s mobile plans comes in the wake of the company cutting 750 jobs on Tuesday, a move prompted by what Adobe labeled “corporate restructuring.”

An Adobe representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Flash is dead on mobile. One advantage Android theoretically had over iOS is going away.

Posted via email from ekivemark: pre-blogspot

Thursday, November 03, 2011

Dear Aunt TUAW: How do I enable AirDrop on my older Mac? | TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog

Great tip for OS X Lion users on older Macs. You can enable AirDrop via the command line. By default AirDrop is only enabled automatically on the newer Macs with certain WiFi chipsets.

I may have to try this on an older mac that I have.

Posted via email from ekivemark: pre-blogspot

Thursday, October 27, 2011

the understatement: Android Orphans: Visualizing a Sad History of Support

Media_httpmediatheund_dnewj

Great analysis to compare Apple v Android in the area of OS updates.

The pice that struck me was this assessment:

"Apple’s way of getting you to buy a new phone is to make you really happy with your current one, whereas apparently Android phone makers think they can get you to buy a new phone by making you really unhappy with your current one."

Posted via email from ekivemark: pre-blogspot

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Why Microsoft’s Skype purchase means a Face-off with Apple’s Facetime

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion in cash is a massive bet for the tech giant.

Although it look like it may well have over-paid by $4.5 billion, and bid against companies who weren’t seriously in the running (Google and Facebook), owning Skype means Microsoft has a much better positioning in mobile.

But that’s not all.

The implications of this deal for Facebook are actually far more interesting. Since Microsoft is an investor in Facebook, the latter will now have deep access to its investor’s assets.

Being able to Skype from within Facebook means Mark Zuckerberg will not have to build his own VOIP communications platform – a seriously complex affair for 600 million users. Plus, the social network already has tie-ins with Skype.

But it also means both Microsoft and Facebook now have a stick with which to beat Apple and its emerging comms platform, Facetime.

With Facebook integration Skype will not be so heavily linked to an actual device – as Facetime is with Apple devices. Note that Microsoft has pledged to “continue to invest in and support Skype clients on non-Microsoft platforms”.

This means Apple is going to have to really pull of the stops on its communications strategy. Perhaps that’s what the new server farm is for?

Posted via email from More pre-blogspot than pre-posterous

Thursday, March 10, 2011

The iPad Falls Short as a Creation Tool Without Coding Apps | Gadget Lab

At Apple’s tablet event last week, there was one noticeable absence: games.

Apple frequently uses games to show off the computing power of its mobile devices, but this time, Steve Jobs was driving home the message that the iPad is a tool for creation, not just a fancy plaything.

This is not a toy,” Jobs said after a demonstration of iMovie for iPad. “You can really edit movies on this thing.”

Later, after a demonstration of GarageBand for iPad, Jobs repeated it: “Again, this is no toy.”

Priced at $5 each, iMovie and GarageBand were the only apps demo’d last Wednesday on the iPad 2. These apps aren’t brand-new, because they were previously Mac apps, but bringing them to the iPad is a significant move.

Touchscreen tablets may become an ideal platform for multimedia creation with tools like these.

Historically, iMovie and GarageBand have been popular on the Mac because of their affordability and ease of use. With these two apps, Apple pioneered tools for Joe Schmo to create music and movies — skills that were previously exclusive to professional musicians and moviemakers with expensive hardware and software.

As a professional Final Cut Pro videomaker myself, I was personally frustrated that Apple kept making it easier and easier for anyone to replicate my technical skills with much simpler tools. (To be clear, beyond my selfish needs, I did view iMovie as extremely beneficial for creators.)

Now Apple’s making these same creative tools more accessible to an even broader audience, on an even more affordable device, the $500 iPad. The touchscreen interface is so intuitive that even children and grandparents have been able to pick up iPads and figure out how to use them in a few minutes. Now they could potentially launch iMovie or GarageBand and create some movies or music.

While touchscreen tablets are less than ideal for typing out long blog posts or writing novels, they may become an ideal platform for multimedia creation with tools like these. For that reason, these apps may be even more important than the iPad 2 itself.

But Apple still has a lot of room to improve if it wants the iPad to be a platform for creation. Going forward, one key area of creation that Apple should focus on is a tool to create apps.

Creative Coding

Programming is one of the most creative things you can do with a computer, and the iPad could potentially be a powerful tool to introduce this form of creativity to many people, particularly children.

Currently there is no way for people to use the iPad to make programs. Furthermore, the touchscreen interface already doesn’t seem ideal for traditional coding, and there’s no easy way to look under the hood of an iPad to understand how to create software.

Without a proficient programming environment readily accessible on the iPad, Apple’s tablet paints a bleak portrait for the future of programming.

“I think the iPad generation is going to miss out on software programming,” said Oliver Cameron, developer of the Friends iPhone app. “Kids don’t need Macs anymore.”

It doesn’t help that Apple enforces strict rules around how iOS apps must be programmed, which occasionally results in some collateral damage.

Take for example Apple’s rejection of Scratch early last year. Scratch for iPhone was an app for kids to view programs coded with MIT’s Scratch programming platform.

Apple rejected the app, citing a rule that apps may not contain code interpreters other than Apple’s. This rule appears to be specifically designed to prevent meta platforms such as Adobe Flash from appearing on the iPad, thereby allowing Apple to keep its iOS platform to itself.

The young community of Scratch programmers, however, doesn’t pose a threat to Apple’s business, and the rejection of the Scratch app shows how Apple’s developer rules can harm the art of programming.

‘I think the iPad generation is going to miss out on software programming.’

“I think it’s terrible,” said Andrés Monroy-Hernández, a Ph.D. candidate at the MIT Media Lab and lead developer of the Scratch online community, when Scratch was rejected April 2010. “Even if the Scratch app was approved, I still think this sends a really bad message for young creators in general. We have a forum where kids post comments, and they were really upset about this.”

Furthermore, Apple has especially frowned on the act of hacking iOS devices. It’s worth noting that programmers can still tinker on the iPad by writing code for “jailbroken” (i.e., hacked) devices.

But Apple has created the sentiment that hacking iOS devices is a criminal activity. Jobs has described Apple’s cracking down on iPhone hacks as a “game of cat and mouse.”

In the past Apple vigorously fought attempts to legalize jailbreaking on mobile phones. The company eventually failed in that effort when the U.S. Copyright Office added jailbreaking to a list of exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s anticircumvention provisions, making jailbreaking cellphones lawful. However, the iPad is not covered by that exemption, because it’s not considered a phone, and therefore the lawfulness of hacking an iPad remains uncertain.

The criminal stigma surrounding iOS hacking is disappointing, because many of our best coders learned a great deal by thinking outside the box, breaking the rules and hacking around with systems. Take for example, Alex Payne, an engineer at Twitter.

The thing that bothers me most about the iPad is this: if I had an iPad rather than a real computer as a kid, I’d never be a programmer today,” Payne said in a blog post last year when the original iPad debuted. “I’d never have had the ability to run whatever stupid, potentially harmful, hugely educational programs I could download or write. I wouldn’t have been able to fire up ResEdit and edit out the Mac startup sound so I could tinker on the computer at all hours without waking my parents.”

And then there’s software programmer Mark Pilgrim, who reminisced about the days when personal computers were truly “personal,” meaning a user could do anything he wanted with his device without feeling like a rebellious rule breaker.

“You could turn on the computer and press Ctrl-Reset, and you’d get a prompt. And at this prompt, you could type in an entire program, and then type RUN, and it would motherfucking run,” Pilgrim said in his post last year when the iPad launched. Pilgrim and Payne agree that children learning to program with an iPad won’t get the enlightening tinkering experience they had.

That’s unfortunate, because in our digitally driven economy, programmers are more important than ever before, and it’d be beneficial for people of all ages to learn some code.

If Jobs really wants the world to view the iPad as a platform for creation, it seems like an opportune time for Apple to release a suite of basic programming tools for iOS devices. This could be a simple tool that creates some rudimentary iOS apps (plenty of apps in the App Store would be considered subpar anyway), and purchasing it should include a free developer’s license for kids to get started programming.

It’s great that Apple’s iPad will give birth to some more musicians and moviemakers, but we can’t forget the people who make hardware extra special: the programmers.

Hey, Apple - why not at least give us an AppleScript Editor for the iPad/iPhone...

Posted via email from More pre-blogspot than pre-posterous

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Apple Aims To Take NFC Mainstream; Perhaps The Greatest Trick They’ve Ever Pulled?

MG Siegler at TechCrunch follows up on a Bloomberg report about potential Apple plans:  
Bloomberg has an interesting report tonight, but they have the headline all wrong. Apple Plans Service That Lets IPhone Users Pay With Handsets — is technically correct (assuming the report is true, of course), but it completely downplays the potential ramifications of what Apple is apparently attempting to do. If Apple can nail Near-Field Communication (NFC) and tie it directly into their already-established iTunes payment system. It could change everything. It could transform Apple from the biggest technology company in the world, to the biggest company in the world, period. By far.
Granted, that’s a very big “if” in the above statement. And there are many unknowns from this report, which I’m simply extrapolating out. But there’s also a lot that makes sense, if you think about it.
First of all, Bloomberg’s Olga Kharif reports that Apple will build NFC chips into the next iteration of the iPhone. That should be absolutely no surprise — in fact, we reported on it months ago. Plus, given that rival Google has already done this for the Nexus S Android device, it has gone from a no-brainer to a must-do.
What is somewhat surprising is first of all that the report only mentions the new iPhone “for AT&T” and not Verizon. And secondly, that NFC is said to be built into the iPad 2 as well.
It’s hard to know what to make about the former. Perhaps that’s just a slip up? Or maybe AT&T really will get the iPhone 5 first?
The iPad 2 talk is conceivably more straightforward. Typically, NFC is associated with mobile payments, but don’t forget that it can also be used for a host of other short-distance data communications. In fact, it could well be that NFC becomes a staple of most Apple products for beaming information instantaneously and securely over a short distance. Things like photos, movies, etc. Also, imagine if the iPad is in your bag or purse, it could certainly still be useful when it comes to paying for things by sending a signal to a receiver a few inches away.
But the key to this is really iTunes. Or more specifically, the payment system within iTunes that is already in use by millions and millions of people around the world.
The obvious main reason that NFC hasn’t taken off yet for payments is the lack of hardware support. But one reason that’s been slow to come is that manufacturers likely know that there’s simply no good payment processing system behind any of the current ideas. In fact, the best possible way for things to start moving is probably for the credit card companies to do this themselves and get the ball rolling. But while they are testing the technology, they don’t seem to see the need to disrupt a system that is already working.
So why is this becoming a big deal all of a sudden? Well, everyone’s ears perked up when they heard Google would be including NFC chips in the Nexus S. But the same basic problem remains. For all of Google’s strengths, they have not been able to nail a payment processing system. Yes, they have Google Checkout. But customers clearly prefer competitors like PayPal. The situation is so bad that they’ve even had to start including carrier billing options in Android so people will finally start to buy apps on a whim. Users are simply not doing that as much as anyone would like with Google’s current payment structure. And the system is to blame.
And the same issues will likely hold up their NFC ideas as well. And we’re already seeing the fact that while the Nexus S has NFC built-in, you can’t do anything with it yet.
Enter Apple. The technology giant does have a proven payment system. One with over 100 million accounts set up with built-in credit card access. But those interviewed by Bloomberg for the story suggest that Apple aims to go farther with NFC:
The main goal for Apple would be to get a piece of the $6.2 trillion Americans spend each year on goods and services, Crone said. Today, the company pays credit-card processing fees on every purchase from iTunes. By encouraging consumers to use cheaper methods — such as tapping their bank accounts directly, which is how many purchases are made via PayPal — Apple could cut its own costs and those of retailers selling Apple products.
And why would customers do that instead of using a credit card? Because a new piece of regulation may soon make it cheaper to pay via debit rather than credit. Apple could be in the right place at the right time with this.
Also from Bloomberg’s report:
Apple, based in Cupertino, California, is considering starting a mobile payment service as early as mid-2011, Doherty said. It would revamp iTunes, a service that lets consumers buy digital movies and music, so it would hold not only users’ credit-card account information but also loyalty credits and points, Doherty said.
In other words, it could be an evolution of the payment system within iTunes to allow for rewards, and other flexibility.
But what about the other side of the coin? It’s fine if Apple builds NFC into their devices, but there still needs to be equipment to read them. There’s a bit on this as well:
Apple has created a prototype of a payment terminal that small businesses, such as hairdressers and mom-and-pop stores, could use to scan NFC-enabled iPhones and iPads, Doherty said. The company is considering heavily subsidizing the terminal, or even giving it away to retailers, to encourage fast, nationwide adoption of NFC technology and rev up sales of NFC-enabled iPhones and iPads, he said.
You can expect Google to do the same. But again, Google doesn’t have the iTunes infrastructure in place to make this happen in a real way. Apple does. If they get a piece of that $6.2 trillion market, there’s no way they could downplay it as negligible revenue, as they try to do with the app and music sales cuts. It could conceivably be one of their biggest money-makers. And it could completely disrupt a number of industries.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves here, he says 1,000 words later.

This is a Really interesting article about the explosion of interest in Near Field Communications - wireless payment systems. The most interesting part of MG's article is the question of how Apple can tackle the challenge of getting Near Field Communication receiving devices out in to the marketplace. It is one thing to have phones capable of paying for goods and services but as Google has discovered with the Nexus S, without receivers there is no way to make a payment.

Let me tell you how I think Apple will solve this conundrum...

First, Apple understands the Consumer Electronics market. They know how to design and build easy to use devices at a price point that people are prepared to pay for.

So, You know that "Hobby" device: AppleTV. It was recently redesigned as an iOS device that costs $99 (retail). I think Apple can easily reconfigure the AppleTV, remove the HD TV output and add in a Cellular chip set to supplement WiFi. Then configure it with an iOS application that can handle the NFC transaction receipt and link to the iTunes ecosystem. The other part would be to implement a logging utility to deliver payment confirmations, may be via WiFi or USB (They already have USB onboard the AppleTV for diagnostics purposes) so that system integrators can interface to retailer checkouts. With that you have a device that Apple could discount well below $99. But, by including a cellular chip set they can sell the device via the cellular carriers who could discount the device to zero dollars when bought on a contract. Businesses could easily add the device to an existing cellular contract.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Saturday, April 24, 2010

If you have ever doubted that the iPad is an evolutionary but still revolutionary device...

Apple has something special with the iPad. Check out the blog post from Daniela Barbosa with examples of the young and the old enjoying the iPad.

Posted via web from More pre-blogspot than pre-posterous

Sunday, December 27, 2009

The Exhaustive Guide to Apple Tablet Rumors - apple islate - Gizmodo

There could well be 3G connectivity in the forthcoming iSlate from Apple. Why do I say that? Here's my logic:
1. Announcing in January with availability to follow a few months later fits with requiring the device to go through FCC approval. Announcing before the submission puts Apple in control of the announcement rather than risk leaks from the FCC.
2. If it didn't have cellular capability then it would be just like a MacBook or iPod Touch and you would expect Apple to announce and ship simultaneously, or at worst case with just a few weeks delay.
3. Adding a 3G modem allows Apple to distribute through the wireless carriers. It could fit with releasing to Verizon on their new LTE network. The iSlate is not an iPhone and hence doesn't violate the AT&T exclusivity agreement in the USA.
4. Distributing through one or more wireless carriers allows Apple to get the price subsidized. Remember, the 32GB iPhone 3GS is a $699 phone, like many other smartphones - when you buy it without a contract.

Posted via web from More pre-blogspot than pre-posterous

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Snow Leopard - Rough around the Microsoft Edges?

I have upgraded to Snow Leopard and after solving some of the glitches it has been running nicely. Then I added the Exchange integration. That has done a great job of slowing Address Book, Mail and iCal down to a crawl again.

I have also been using Word and Excel and find that they crash more frequently under Snow Leopard. I tried printing to PDF from word and kaboom!

Has anybody else been experiencing weirdness?

Certainly the Exchange integration is a cool feature and very, very easy to setup but that 64-bit speediness suddenly seems to lose at least 32 bits of speed. I suspect Apple have some work ahead in refining their Exchange support.

Today Apple released the inevitable software Update for Snow Leopard. It seems to fix some of the strangeness, such as the problems connecting to SMTP servers. It will be interesting to see if any other niggles are resolved.

Monday, August 17, 2009

MacBook Touch - the threads and rumors around the Apple Tablet come together

Recently I had to send my Apple MacBook Pro to the Apple Hospital for some Tender Loving Care. Thankfully after a new Logic Board everything is humming along nicely again. The incident did however underscore to me the hidden power of the MobileMe service.

If you have an iPhone you really should be using MobileMe. The Find my iPhone feature that was introduced with iPhone OS 3.0 is very cool but the real power is in the over the air syncing of Contacts and calendar information.

When my Mac was in the AppleCare Hospital I got my hands on a HPMini 1000 for a week and managed to install OS X. There were limitations to running OS X on the NetBook. For one thing I couldn't get sound working and the NetBook did not come with Bluetooth. However, once OS X was installed I was able to connect up to MobileMe and my preferences, calendars and contacts all came streaming down to the NetBook. With that core information the NetBook became far more valuable.

Why is this relevant to the MacBook Touch rumor? It's simple. While I have doubts that a Tablet will appear as "just one more thing" at the anticipated September Apple Music event. I do think we will see a Tablet arrive early next year.

The rumor is plausible that we will see a new product drop in around the $800-900 price range. A product with a large screen and that leverages MobileMe, the App Store and the beta development being done with iWork. Let's not forget that Apple has quietly been testing a web-based iWork platform. It has limitations but that and the iDisk app for the iPhone all point to an increasing capability to seamlessly connect to our data in the cloud.

A 10 inch MacBook Touch Tablet would be a great multi-tasking platform that could use 802.11n to stream movies from our iTunes libraries while also using the iPhone iTunes remote application to control a remote library.

Now will a tablet run OS X or a modified iPhone OS? I would hope it runs OS X. The Tablet could leverage the iPhone Multi-touch interface that has been built in to the OS X platform. Snow Leopard is about to launch with a streamlined core that makes OS X a lighter weight proposition. The Tablet could also run iPhone apps in emulation mode. Let's not forget that Apple has signed up thousands of iPhone App developers that are able to run an iPhone simulation on their Macs. What would it take for Apple to create an application that encapsulates an iPhone Application and run it on OS X? Surely not a lot. That would let the Tablet immediately leverage the library of iPhone Apps and be able to multi-task iPhone apps. With a full Safari browser the Tablet could leverage the cloud. Do you remember how the iPhone did this before Apple released the iPhone SDK?

The Tablet could run OS X without being dependent upon an Intel processor. Apple has already ported OS X once. Another migration to using a custom ARM processor would not be an unrealistic feat. The only downside to this is that support for existing OS X applications would be dependent upon Rosetta-style emulation as was the case in the transition from PowerPC to Intel processors.

The Fact that Apple is investing in data centers on a massive scale would also seem to reinforce the idea of a Tablet App store and a Tablet product that held most storage in the cloud. I think there would still be some local storage, for when a network connection is unavailable but Apple has been working with Sync services on MobileMe for a number of years now.

Will a Tablet include 3G network or WiMax support? I suspect not in the first iteration. I could see Apple doing so in the second iteration of the product after they have given Verizon some time to get their LTE 4G network up and running. The fact is that the vast majority of NetBooks are used inside the home. That makes it far more likely to include WiFi in 802.11g and 802.11n versions. With Wi-Fi Apple could also leverage their iPhone product line. It would be really easy for them to issue an up date to their iPhone OS that allowed you to setup a Wi-Fi sharing network between your Tablet and your iPhone and use the tethering feature on your existing iPhone data plan. This would also mean Apple could produce one version of the Tablet and not have to produce variations to meet the different wireless carrier needs. Don't forget that Sprint and Verizon are already carrying the Novatel Mi-Fi that I wrote about back in May - identifying the product as a game changer. That provides a personal Wi-Fi network. That would be ideal to match with a MacBook Touch with Wi-Fi. It would also allow Apple to build relationships with the other carriers in a way that promotes sales of those lucrative data plans. Can you imagine being able to go in to a Verizon or Sprint store and purchase a bundled Mi-Fi and MacBook Touch? There has also been talk about AT&T charging for Tethering on the Data Plan. Allowing unlimited tethering of a MacBook Touch via your iPhone might be an option that people would consider. AT&T could bundle that at a lower price point as an Add-on service than using the Mi-Fi service on a competitor carrier.

I increasingly believe that the Tablet will not be just another product from Apple. Instead I am convinced that Apple is looking to leverage everything they have learned with the iPod and the iPhone. They will leverage the cloud and the existing ecosystem. When the iPhone was released it built upon the iPod ecosystem and leveraged the iTunes store. Expect this new game changing product to take that a step further.

Do you think there is substance to the iTablet rumors? What are you looking for in a Mac Tablet?

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Apple is entering an Appstore minefield

Apple's recent rejection of Google Voice and the removal of existing Google Voice applications from the AppStore is a dangerous step that could backfire badly on them.

I voiced my concern to Apple, as suggested in "There's No App for That" and sent an feedback message to Apple. Why don't you do the same and post your message on the Internet for others to see. Here is what I wrote:

The recent decision to remove Google Voice related Applications from the AppStore is a short sighted decision that could have far reaching ramifications.

I currently use Skype over WiFi to be able to call my children overseas. I was hoping to switch to Google Voice to do the same thing. I have been using the original iPhone since the very first day it was released. For other complicated reasons my contract expires early next year. At that point I will seriously have to consider whether I upgrade my iPhone or purchase an Android-based phone.

The moves that Apple have recently taken in the arbitrary removal of apps or refusal to accept applications in to the AppStore jeopardizes the customer and developer relationship. Whether this is Apple's own decision or as a result of pressure from AT&T is irrelevant. The lack of transparency in the approval process will drive your developer and technical user base to consider alternative options.

The growing level of innovation that Apple has triggered with the release of the iPhone is finally seeing viable competitors emerge. This will make it easier for people like myself, who have been committed Apple supporters, to consider alternative options.

I urge Apple to reconsider their position and be more open with the processes around submission of applications to the AppStore. If Apple insists on treating their development community with such disdain it will be rewarded with a growing level of defections to platforms that are more supportive.

Is Apple planning to remove other IM and voice applications like Skype? Will you consider allowing Google Voice applications to work over WiFi? Apple has to tread very carefully here. Alienating the development community could have big repercussions on the ongoing growth of both the iPhone, iPod and Mac markets.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Background iPhone Apps, Push Notification and the iPod Touch

There has been a lot of talk in the past few days about Google launching their Latitude App as a browser app on the iPhone. I have to agree with Marshall Kirkpatrick who said "Google Latitude on the iPhone? It's Terrible, Try Brightkite." Brightkite, even as a web app, is streets ahead of Google's Latitude in terms of usability. Brightkite's iPhone App just takes their service to another level.

The interesting issues that emerge around all this discussion are those of background applications and push notification. Let's bring some threads together here:

  • Push notification is the bare minimum needed to allow applications to be updated with new contextual information. Thankfully the Push capability is in the works from Apple but will require iPhone application vendors to update their applications.
  • Push needs to be coupled with continual updates to location, at the user's choice. So, even if I am not using the BrightKite App I might want to broadcast my location to the BrightKite servers so that they can send me relevant push notifications.
  • The IPod touch is due for a product refresh and is rumored to be gaining a camera and microphone in the next iteration that is expected around September time. hat would tie in with Apple promoting the Touch heavily in their back to school promotions. Are they running down their inventory?
  • Apple is rumored to be unhappy with AT&T - like many of us iPhone users. Their network is performing poorly, things are breaking - like voice mail. We still don't have MMS and Tethering. The AT&T MMS capability for the iPhone is worse than awful. I complained about the stupidity of it over a year ago. As a result AT&T may loose their exclusive deal next year. Alternatively Verizon might pick up the rumored Apple Tablet early next year.
  • Verizon and Sprint have recently released the Novatel Mi-Fi which is a revolutionary personal wi-fi zone that supports up to 5 devices with a 3G backhaul. I wrote recently about how the Mi-Fi is a game changing product.
  • Skype offers an iphone voice calling application that works over Wi-Fi. It works great. I regularly use it to call overseas without being stung by AT&T's outrageous per minute costs on overseas calls. I am not singling out AT&T here. Every cellular company seems to be happy to gouge their customers on international calls from your cell phone.

I still use the original iPhone, complete with cracked screen. With all of these factors playing out at the same time I am considering a scenario where:

  1. Apple releases an upgraded iPod Touch with 64Gb so that it can store most of my music and it has a camera, microphone and speaker making it functionally equivalent to the iPhone
  2. Apple releases a workable Push notification system
  3. Skype, the Gizmo Project or Google Voice deliver an iPhone application that uses push notification to alert you to incoming calls. Gizmo is available on the iPhone via Nimbuzz.

If these three things come together then the iPod Touch could revolutionize cell phone use. People who are currently tied to AT&T in the USA could go to Sprint or Verizon and purchase a Mi-Fi with an unlimited data plan. In 2010 NovaTel might even release a Mi-Fi that uses Verizon's emerging LTE network for even faster backhaul.

UPDATE: Nimbuzz does in fact support push notifications. Since it supports the Gizmo Project and Google Voice supports Gizmo it means (in theory) you can get push notifications on calls to your Google Voice number notified to you via Nimbuzz when a call is re-directed to Gizmo by Google Voice.


Saturday, May 16, 2009

The Mi-Fi is a game changer

Verizon is launching the Novatel Mi-Fi this week. It is a game changing product. I currently have an original iPhone and a MacBook Pro. I have been considering getting a wireless broadband card so that I can access Twitter and Facebook more easily. The Mi-fi changes the choice dramatically.

I use Twitter as a major source for news and to stay in contact with people. However, Twitter's web site is now blocked by the Internet filters at work. Twitter is not the only blacklisted site. Facebook, YouTube and a plethora of video sites are on that list.

Since I spend much of my time in the Baltimore area the new XOHM Wi-Max service is an interesting option. It is a relatively low cost service with no long term contracts to sign. They currently offer a "Pick 2" option which could give me a home wireless broadband modem and a usb modem for $50 per month.

Another option is an AT&T 3G Wireless broadband card that I can tie to my iPhone contract. The cost is $60/month for 5Gb of bandwidth.

Verizon offering the Mi-Fi competes with that same service. $60/month for 5Gb of bandwidth. But I get a portable wi-fi zone. This offers intriguing possibilities. Broadband is not limited to one device. It will work with any Wi-Fi device. This means:

  • I might not need to upgrade my iPhone (unless Apple launches a dramatically improved iPhone next month)
  • I could Skype from my iPhone via the Mi-Fi to call anyone from anywhere
  • I can connect my MacBook Pro to the Mi-Fi by the Wi-Fi link. Connecting via Wi-Fi on a Mac is a breeze.  
  • I could replace the memory card in my camera and use Eye-Fi Memory Cardand allow my camera to upload photos to the Internet automatically
  • If Apple announces a new iPod TouchI can connect that to the Mi-Fi and use it like an iPhone without needing to sign up for a new AT&T contract.

With the Mi-Fi Verizon doesn't need to sell the iPhone. They could just start bundling the Mi-Fi with an iPod Touchand they have an interesting product offering to compete with AT&T. Would Apple care - Probably not if it means more sales for the iPod Touch.

When Apple finally provides background processing for the iPhone and iPod Touchit will create intriguing possibilities. I could then use an iPod Touchwith a Mi-Fi and a Skype-In phone number and I have an iPhone like device I can carry with me.

Yes, The Mi-Fi really looks like a game changing device.

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Mac Mini should become the Apple TV Plus

An article on Apple Insider today has Analysts urging Apple to upgrade the AppleTV to add Cable TV support. I think Apple would be better off keeping the price of the AppleTV low and instead building in the Cable TV interface to the Mac Mini when they revamp it. The Mac Mini with a cable TV interface and a large hard drive, plus the ability to add extra storage would make the Mini a great home media hub. The AppleTV could then continue as the satellite device. With a great hub product a family could easily add an AppleTV to each TV set in the house.

A fully fledged Mac running as a compact media hub opens the opportunity to sell additional wireless keyboards and mice too. The platform has Front Row and Mac OS X offers the opportunity to extend functionality more easily than opening up the AppleTV. The Mac Mini can be the adaptable point of entry for digital media and Apple can keep the AppleTV relatively closed. It stays as basically an iPod with an external screen and remote.

A fully fledged Mac OS X machine running as a home media server with iLife and iWork included further extends the influence of the Mac. A media optimized interface (via Front Row) makes it easier to break down the PC barrier in the home but the ability to do double duty as a computer further extends the reach of the Mac and breaks down the PC monopoly, ultimately making it easier for families to make their follow on computer purchase a Mac that would be compatible with their media hub.

Apple don't mess with the AppleTV instead upgrade the Mac Mini to be the home media hub. I am sure Robert Scoble and Dave Winer would agree with that strategy. They have been in the leading wave of Mac Mini Media Hub users.

Monday, January 19, 2009

We need to kill browser plugins - or move them to the cloud

Louis Gray asks an interesting question in a post on his blog: "Is requiring a Plug-in akin to designing for IE Only?" Like Louis, I use the Safari browser for a lot of my browsing, which doesn't support plug-ins. The rise in popularity of Plug-ins for Firefox has occurred at the same time as the rapid adoption of the iPhone.

The iPhone is in the vanguard of mobile internet use. This trend will continue with the introduction of Android phones and the continued popularity of the Blackberry. The Mozilla foundation is working on a mobile version of Firefox but this is not a real solution. Mobile phones are not the only way we access the Internet. Games consoles and Internet Tablets, like the Nokia N810 are also entering the mix.

I believe that the future lies with developers creating cloud-based functionality that can be activated from a bookmark. Examples of this already exist with bookmarklets from services like delicious and bit.ly. The advantage of the bookmarklet is that it can be designed to be browser-platform independent and can also deliver functionality to mobile devices.

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Flash and the iPhone

According to Mobile Crunch, Apple has reportedly changed their position on "Duplicate Functionality" applications on the iPhone and in the Apps Store.

This is raising the question of whether we will see Flash appear on the iPhone. Personally, I believe that Apple is holding out against Flash on the iPhone for strategic rather than technical reasons. Here are my thoughts:

  • With Quicktime as the de facto video standard on the iPhone, success with the iPhone supports the growth of Quicktime. Look at Google developing a library that supports Quicktime instead of just flash.
  • If Flash was available on the iPhone it would further encourage developers and media people to produce for the Flash Movie format.
  • Look how the Movie Studios produce trailers using Quicktime. Does Apple want to lose that business to Adobe?  

I am sure there are some technical reasons, such as processor load and battery life impact that can justify Apple's stance but at the heart of the issue is more likely the strategic battle with Adobe for control of video formats used by the entertainment industry.

Thoughts?

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Staying Aloft

This past weekend I had the opportunity to stay at one of the new W Hotels near Philadelphia. The Aloft Hotel opened earlier this year near Philadelphia Airport.

The aloft is certainly a different boutique style hotel. The rooms are really well designed and the staff are friendly. I would certainly stay there again.

Modern design is a strong point of the Aloft brand. The rooms are beautifully laid out with very clean lines. The large flat screen TV has a connectivity "gizmo" on one of the desks in the room. It is this gizmo that perplexed me. The idea is that you can connect up your laptop, or other electronic devices and use the TV as display and audio. A very nice idea. It would mean you could use the complimentary WiFi in the room and stream shows from Hulu out to the TV.

With all the thoughtful touches through out the hotel there has obviously been a tremendous attention to detail but it seems like the designers have never really thought about the electronics gizmo. It is a great idea but the execution seems a little lacking - except in one area. This box has four, yes - FOUR, power outlets. That is great for charging electronics. However the rest of the connectivity was strangely almost useless.

TheAloft Electronics Gizmo

It is as if the designers have never actually used the gizmo. Now I travel quite a bit. I also do a fair few presentations from my laptop. As a result I typically carry a selection of cables and connectors to hook up my MacBook Pro. I went through my bag and found I didn't have a single cable that would work with the gizmo.

This box would be infinitely more useful if they had provided a bunch of cables to go with it. For example:

I had an audio jack to BNC connector. I didn't have a cable with male plugs to allow me to connect to the gizmo.

I had a video out connector. I didn't have the necessary cable with a male plug.

I had a DVI to VGA connector but I needed a male VGA to male VGA cable to connect to the gizmo. If I had been traveling with a Video Projector I could probably have stolen the VGA cable from that, but alas, no.

I had a 3.5mm audio splitter cable but I didn't have a 3.5mm male to male cable in order to connect tot he audio in. So I couldn't even connect my iPod.

Given the target audience of this hotel I was really surprised that this gizmo didn't provide an iPod docking and charging connector. That would have been an instant hit with a large number of travelers.

Would I stay at an aloft again? Absolutely! Don't get me wrong this is a fun hotel. Only next time I would make sure I packed a few extra cables. I am publishing this so that others who may choose to stay there can go prepared.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

New Apple Notebooks confuse the lustful

Today Apple announced updates to the MacBook, MacBook Pro and MacBook Air. One of the areas of confusion is the new mini display port. Display Port is a new standard for connecting monitors. Apple's mini display port seems to be a derivative of this standard.

Apple released a new 24" LED Backlit Cinema Display that has a built in magsafe, usb and min display port adapter. A very nice solution for an owner of these new laptops. But what about the rest of us?

I would really like to see an adapter for DVI to mini Display port so I could connect my MacBook Pro to the new cinema display.

The other big question is mini display port to HDMI connectivity. The display port standard may be better than HDMI but an awful lot of TVs and monitors are shipping with HDMI and Apple needs to enable their laptops to connect to these monitors. This will be especially important if they update the Apple Mini to adopt the mini display port. I know a number of people, Dave Winer and Robert Scoble, included that have used the Apple Mini as the center of their entertainment systems, connecting them to large screen TVs via HDMI.

No doubt all of this confusion will be resolved over the next couple of weeks as the dust settles. If Apple doesn't release the necessary cables then hopefully third parties can step in to the breach and produce the necessary conversion cables. The end result may not be as pretty with daisy chained converters but hopefully it should work.

I carry my MacBook Pro with me everywhere and always carry a full set of DVI to various graphics interfaces - VGA, S-Video etc.

Apple I hope you are listening. The new Cinema Display looks great but don't cut it off from the loyal band of earlier Macbook and Mackbook Pro users. Let's have that DVI to mini display port cable so we can go buy the display as an interim step before we finally spring for a new MacBook or MacBook Pro.