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.

Posted via email from ekivemark: pre-blogspot

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.

• Previously
• Related Links by Contextly

via wired.com

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

Posted via email from ekivemark: pre-blogspot

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

via theunderstatement.com

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

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.

via techcrunch.com

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?

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