I’ve been looking for an alternative to WordPress for some time now, and one of the problems has been the seemingly impossible task of making this blog port to another service.
I don’t want to simply throw away 2 years+ of thoughts, rantings and views so I’m glad to announce that the new url for this blog is:
http://techinertia.posterous.com/
Posterous is a great service that not only allows you to import a blog from another service, it allows posting by email, which for me is a great thing.
Their glorious leader comments on Google – ‘we’ll beat them, someday’.
Way back in Apple’s past, when money was tight, market share was none-existent, mind-share even less, the Apple-faithful and the wider tech-press looked to Apple for a solution to their woes.
Just what was Steve Jobs and Apple going to do to stop the downward spiral?
Steve’s answer surprised everyone, and in hindsight it’s the approach that has, in part, turned the company around, and secured their future – Steve Jobs said:
“For Apple to win, Microsoft doesn’t have to lose.”
Most of the Apple faithful balked at this comment, did they here that right? What was Steve Jobs on? Did he really know what he was doing? Surely Microsoft has to be crushed, stamped upon and erased from history so that Apple can ‘win’.
But Steve was right. One of the problems with Apple, was that they were obsessed with Microsoft, and it damaged everything they did, every effort, every promotion was measured against the impossible goal of toppling a giant.
What Steve Jobs did is refocused the company, allowed them to say to themselves, “it’s perfectly OK to have a small market share, there is room in this industry for everyone.” With that approach Apple could concentrate on what they were good at, and measure their success against their own watermark, not somebody elses.
Which brings us back to Ballmer. Wouldn’t it just be a breath of fresh air if Ballmer said:
“We don’t worry about Google – we relish competition, and there’s room in this industry for everyone. We don’t have to win all the time.”
I think the whole tech industry would breath a sigh of relief that at last, Microsoft was happy with it’s lot and concentrated on creating great products for us all.
Continuing the trend of leeching borrowing off Gruber’s ideas, his assessment of the iPad chimed with my thoughts as well.
Computers. Gruber thinks he’s seen the future of computers, and it is the iPad. “It’s really, really good,” he gushed. If you are sitting on a couch and you need a computer, most people are going to reach for the iPad, not the MacBook Pro. And that puts Apple into uncharted territory. For the first time since the original Mac replaced the Apple II, it has two overlapping computer products. And although it took a few years for the corpse to grow cold, the Apple II basically died the day the Mac arrived.
A very insighful observation which I think speaks of the future, not the present.
As Gruber points out, this is the same situation all those years ago when the Mac and the Apple II were side by side. The Apple II back then was the serious workhorse computer and the Mac was the novelty, the weird computer people didn’t take seriously.
The big difference now however is the iPad rides on the back of the success and investment of the iPhone. The AppStore and all its developers are primed and ready to launch the iPad with apps that just weren’t there when the Mac was released.
The Mac was an eventual success, the iPad with its thousands of apps? you get the idea.
I firmly believe that my children will be using the descendants of the iPad in their Graphic Design jobs, with fully envisaged multi-touch environments, instead of the mouse-driven Mac we all use now.
The big question for me is, what will Windows look like then?
Gruber speaks here on one of my favourite topics, Apple’s venerable MobileMe service.
Mobile Me. It’s great for syncing your iPhone to your Mac, but what’s the point of Mobile Me’s Web apps? If you’re at your computer, you use Mail and Calendar. If you’re out and about, you’re supposed to use the iPhone. Gruber has a sneaking suspicion Apple put apps up on the Web because “that’s what the kids were talking about.” It’s like the lounge singer, he says, who grows long sideburns after Elvis Presley arrives.
I think the point he’s missed is that MobileMe’s web services are for when you don’t have your computer with you, or you don’t have an iPhone, but I take his point – that doesn’t happen very often now, why would you leave home without your iPhone?
I’ve written long into the night concerning my love-hate relationship with Apple’s syncing service.
I now feel that I can recommend it, however it still seems as a whole, to be lacking a certain cohesion.
Certainly when adding up all the separate parts, it is very good value, but there are still some gaps.
A decent notes sync for a start. I won’t go into the shortcomings, and half-assed attempt by Apple to give us notes syncing, but it’s certainly not up to scratch.
The workaround I have is to keep all the notes as text files on my iDisk, and then edit them on my Macs with a text editor, and on the iPhone with an Office app that allows creating, editing and savings files to your iDisk over wifi & 3G.
Back To My Mac that actually works. I can’t get through my workplace’s arcane Windows server, so BTMM is a non-starter for me. I don’t see why it has to be this way. As a back-up I use the free ‘logmein‘ website, so I can log into any Mac on my network, remotely, with no configuration whatsoever – it just works. Why BTMM needs special configuration of the router is beyond me. Actually it’s not, I understand what need to be done, I just don’t see the reason why it needs to be done.
Coming back to the cohesion problem, MobileMe seems to be a good range of separate ideas, but they don’t gel together.
You have the web apps, the iPhone apps and the Mac apps. Some sync together (iCal, Address Book), others do not (Notes). Some exist on one platform (Notes on the iPhone and in Mac Mail), but not the other (no web apps for Notes).
To me ‘the cloud’ concept isn’t clearly being followed through. Apple need to have 3 clear clients:
Each app needs to be comparable to that platform, so if you had the iWork app ‘Pages’ on the Mac, then there is a comparable app on the other devices (as feature-rich as the platform allows).
Any new app is released on all platforms simultaneously – that is absolutely vital – true cloud computing, your content, anytime, any situation, anywhere.
And most importantly – they all need instant sync between each other, pulling from the cloud.
That is a MobileMe service I’d be willing to pay for – maybe even a bit more for.
Aw, doesn't look harmless? Big bad Google hurting his itty-bitty software company...
Microsoft accuses Google of unfair business practices – yes you read that right.
“In a blog post entitled ‘Competition Authorities and Search,’ Microsoft Vice President and Deputy General Counsel Dave Heiner said part of the motivation for Microsoft and Yahoo’s search deal was ‘we are concerned about Google business practices that tend to lock in publishers and advertisers and make it harder for Microsoft to gain search volume,’”
And here’s the killer line:
“according to court documents, Ballmer pledged to ‘f***ing kill Google’ after learning of Google’s plan to hire a key Microsoft engineer in 2005.”
Poor Microsoft are upset that Google isn’t just rolling over and letting them dominate search, just like every other company has let them take over their business-niche before them.
Maybe Microsoft are angry because:
a) they can’t ‘cut off their air supply‘ like they did with Netscape in order to create an abusive monopoly in the internet browser business
b) they can’t blatantly steal code from Google, like they did with Apple’s Quicktime, in order to have a product that got even close to what Apple had
Still, while Microsoft and Google are at loggerheads, it keeps them occupied whilst everyone’s favourite fruit company can stroll past them.
The Zeus Trojan – the God of botnets.
NetWitness found a botnet with control of 74,126 Windows systems spread around 196 countries. These systems are found at medical companies, insurance companies, educational institutions, energy firms, financial companies, Internet providers, and government agencies.
And here:
Prevx came upon a cache with logon credentials for 74,000 FTP accounts. These accounts were for companies such as NASA, Cisco, Kaspersky, McAfee, Symantec, Amazon, Bank of America, Oracle, ABC, BusinessWeek, Bloomberg, Disney, Monster, and the Queensland government.
You know, you start to become jaded concerning the security of the most popular OS on planet Earth.
The OS that 90% of the people viewing this blog use.
The OS that your company runs on.
The OS that your government runs on.
The OS your school, college or university runs on.
The OS that your bank probably uses.
The OS that despite being quite clearly not fit for use, somehow continues to be used, because so many people’s lives dependent on it.
What people? Well you, me, the IT department that won’t even let you change your desktop pattern wallpaper at work, your parents, your friends, the guy you overheard talking in the bus queue this morning about how his computer has become unusable again, or the other guy he was talking to who said that all he had to do was:
a) pay for more security software
b) visit this site that tells you how to solve your latest Windows problem in 38 easy steps
c) buy a new computer
d) don’t do anything on your computer to do with online banking or payments of any kind.
And, yes that last group of people who benefit from the crap that Gates & Ballmer peddle every day – the criminals and ne’r-do-wells that use the money they generate from hacking your computer to buy & supply drugs to your kids, fund terrorism, and various other nasties.
Lots of fun for all concerned.
Thank you Mr Gates and Mr Ballmer for all this, and thank you Apple for allowing me to write this blog on a computer that is not affected by any of this.
Sorry for being so jaded, but I don’t see anyone, anytime soon kicking Windows technology out of the door.
Continuing Gruber’s assessment of the 10 issues at Apple he feels worth their attention, we have the AT&T issue.
“AT&T. Apple is a company that clearly believes in the adage that if you want it done right, you have to do it yourself . Which is why it must stick in Cupertino’s craw that they are dependent on a carrier whose service in cities like San Francisco is almost comically bad. Has it reached the point where Apple turns to AT&T (T) and says, Darth Vader-style, “You have failed me for the last time”? Gruber thinks not, if only because AT&T so desperately needs the iPhone that Apple can extract far better terms from them than it ever could from Verizon (VZ). So he takes Tim Cook at his word when Apple’s COO tells analysts that the company has reviewed AT&T’s plans and is going to give it time to work out the kinks. Meanwhile, however, AT&T’s service problems are draining Apple’s good will.”
Although I’m based in the UK, and the carrier of choice here was until recently O2, I can see the crux of this comment, and it comes back to little old thing, ‘user experience’.
The reason why the Macintosh has such a good user experience because Apple control the hardware and software – and we have a similar set up with the iPhone.
I’m almost certain that Apple would, if they could, run their own mobile network (be an MVNO), by renting the service from another supplier, much as in the same way Virgin do – indeed, there were rumours to that effect in the run-up to the release of the iPhone.
For whatever reason, they don’t, so the next best thing is to gain as much control of the mobile carrier as they can. They have AT&T in an armlock, and this is because Apple see mobile network operators as just that – they run the network, and that’s it.
AT&T service isn’t the best, but they have the best terms and it’s those terms that allow Apple to control the iPhone user experience.
Service quality can (and by all accounts is) being improved, but it’s user experience that matters to Apple, once you lose control of it, it’s gone forever.
iPad’s Killer App: It Looks A Bit Like A Magazine.
Via Moconews.net.
Really good insight into what lies beneath Apple sleek, minmalist iPad, straight from the horse’s mouth – Colin McCaffery, product director at 2ergo (emphasis theirs).
“I believe the iPad will be about sitting in front of the TV whilst watching TV, browsing a ‘magazine’,” McCaffery – whose 2ergo made the apps for The Guardian, Fox News, Arsenal FC andothers – told me in an interview. “It will switch on in a second, you’ll be straight in to your content - it will be almost exactly like a magazine that you pick up from the coffee table.”
The jury is still out on whether people will naturally see the iPad as a coffee table companion, but it’s clear that important people in the media, already see the iPad as a way of realising the dream of digitized, subscription based content.
iPhone developers are currently getting to grips with the new software developers kit that includes iPad features, and 2ergo is already working on firm iPad app projects for four clients.
So the desire by the content creators is there, it seems now the ball is firmly in our court, that’s you and me, the content consumers – are we willing to pay for content anymore?
Last year I bought the excellent zombie-killer game on the iPhone, “Call Of Duty – Zombies”
This game is totally ‘up my street’, and last week they released a new map, which could be purchased through the app. The app cost £5.99, and the new map cost £2.99.
I purchased it straight after viewing the demo, but what worried me, and what should worry all content creators, are the comments on the app store from users who balked at the price.
Many thought that they has paid quite enough and expected all future maps to be either free, or under a pound.
Is this the current attitude of your average computer user?
It seemed that a lot of these comments came from kids, who obviously have very little money to spend, and they won’t necessarily be the same market that the clients of 2ergo are after, but no-one can doubt that these are their future customers.
And it’s this that seems to be at the heart of the iPad’s approach – it’s not a computer.
It’s not a device that ‘does it all’ and therefore doesn’t have all the shortcomings (from a content creator’s point of view), of that device – in this case, run illegal software and media.
It’s a perfect device to redefine what consuming media means as a concept, it’s the perfect device for content creators to take back their industry from the computer users, who have, let’s face it, damaged their careers, by arrogantly assuming that they can have everything for free.
A future where content is tied to a device and must be paid for might sound a nightmare to some people, but that’s also a future where content-creators can finally make a living online, allowing them to create even better content going forward, and in the long run, that’s good for everyone.
Good, valid points made from Gruber’s observations, but it’s the Nintendo comparison that got me thinking:
The App Store. There are two schools of criticism about the iPhone App Store: The most vocal critics say that it is totally going in the wrong direction and should be doing what Google (GOOG) does with the Android Marketplace — offer users the option of downloading apps that aren’t vetted and approved. The other school says that Apple is going in the right direction, but is hurtling at great speed a few degrees off course. Gruber fears that the shouting from the first school is so loud that Apple may be ignoring the second as well. There are game consoles — like Nintendo’s — whose apps are as tightly controlled as Apple’s. And there are computer systems with app libraries nearly as large as the iPhone’s. But there’s never before been a tightly controlled system with 150,000 apps. “If it proves unsustainable,” asks Gruber, “what are they going to do?”
My kids own a couple of Nintendo DS’s and it interesting that Gruber brings Nintendo into the conversation.
Nintendo have a similar approach to Apple, in that all apps released on the DS must go through an approval process.
I can say that there are a lot of DS games that are certainly cash-in products with poor graphics and have a ‘Adobe Flash’ game feel.
There are also a lot of high quality games also, but it shows that even when you have a stringent approval process, crap can still get through, hence the multitude of fart apps, softcore porn, and repackaged Gutenburg books on Apple’s AppStore.
What is Apple to do? Well they must do something. At the moment it’s difficult to find good quality apps on the AppStore, and you have to wade through a lot of hay, to get to the needle you’re looking for.
I think the small screen of the iPhone doesn’t help. Apple keeps the UI of the AppStore on the iPhone very simple, but it’s this simplicity that stops you from doing more advanced searches.
The only real way I find decent apps, is to fall back on other forms of advertising, such as when apps are mentioned on podcasts and on blogs.
I’m fully supportive of Apple’s approval process, I understand why it’s needed, but finding apps amongst the ever growing number available is a problem that’s only going to get worse.
Wired magazine is coming to the iPad.
“‘I’m from the media world,’ Anderson told the audience ‘and as you may have heard, we have lots of questions about our future. The good news is I think we found part of the answer…. We think this is a game changer.’”
I think the defining term is, ‘what do you mean by ‘game”.
The ‘game’ in terms of the publishing industry, is ‘paying for content’.
I used to pay for published content.
I used to subscribe to Macworld – until I realised I could get it for free at www.macworld.co.uk.
I used to subscribe to The New Scientist – until their website launched.
I used to buy newspapers – until their websites came online, and recently the excellent ‘The Independent’ iPhone app came on the AppStore.
And everyone else, with a few exceptions, is just like me.
The publishers have painted themselves into a corner, hoping that a free website supported by ads would generate sufficient revenue.
They were naive, and for the most part wrong.
Now cometh the iPad.
I still pay for movies and music, partly out of a duty not to pirate, but also because there’s a viable channel for someone like me to purchase it. Published magazine content I continue to get for free – because it’s there on the internet.
The iPad is perfect for movies, but it’s also perfect, and I’d say designed, for magazine, books & newspaper content – the aspect ratio alone tells us this.
Am I willing to return to my subscription habits of the past? Am I willing to subscribe for an online version of Macworld, The Independent & The New Scientist, and do that through the iPad?
Only if they offer something more than the website, more than the printed magazine, and I’d like to think that there are enough people out there, who are willing to pay for concise, well-written and immersive content, to make it pay.
I expect that, once the iPad is released we will see many publisher dipping their toes in the iPad’s, freezing water, to find out what the market is and whether it is worth it.
Let’s just hope that they ‘get’ the device, and make sure the content they expect us to pay for is worth it also.
Miserable user experience continues with Windows 7 via itwriting.com
A recent post on Tim Anderson’s ITWriting, concerning the unbelievably bad computer experience a user had with a ‘free’ Samsung netbook piqued my interest.
The user got the netbook with a contract from Vodafone, and had such a bad experience they actually returned it under the 14 day returns policy.
Now, I’m not dissing Windows 7 here – I’ve never used it, and for all I know it may be a good system. I’m hard-wired to prefer the Mac, but let’s just say it’s not for me.
Microsoft have put a lot of effort into Windows 7, some would say (and I’m amongst them) that this is because of the lead that Apple take – Microsoft cannot simply ignore it, they have to respond.
It’s all the more sad then, that Microsoft still don’t fundamentally understand the user experience, and even if they did understand it, I’m not sure that their business model allows them to do anything about it.
What I mean by the ‘user experience’ from Apple’s perspective, is something that transcends the OS on the screen. It transcends the physical plastic & metal that surrounds it, it even transcends the beautiful packaging that the computer comes in.
It even transcends the Apple Store you bought it in and the well-trained and informative staff who gave you advice on which model suited your needs.
Although every single one of those is vital, there’s one thing that keeps Apple ahead every time – it’s their business model.
Apple do AND CONTROL everything, it’s a case of the end result being greater than the sum of its parts.
Coming back to the article in question, the thing that made the user return the Samsung, wasn’t Windows 7 – they couldn’t even get to the position of having an opinion – it was the added ‘extras’ that every single OEM adds after Microsoft hands over their admittedly well crafted, and beloved Windows 7 OS.
The fundamental way in which the Windows experience works, with Microsoft spending an awful long time in perfecting their OS, but then having to rely on OEM’s to actually deliver the computer to the user makes for the experience outlined in this article.
A blurred, uncontrolled useless computing experience, designed to make every company in the selling chain as much money as possible – user experience be damned.
Now, a lot of Windows users accept this. A lot of Windows use simply take off all this crap and reinstall Windows. And good luck to them if they’re willing to do that, somebody in the comments to the article mentioned just that.
But to your average computer user, and the user that just expects better, why should they have to do that?
They shouldn’t have to. Apple’s computers aren’t like that because Apple want YOU to benefit from using the computer – not anyone else.
Apple
Apple’s 10 biggest problems as outlined by Gruber, via Fortune.
I have immense respect for John Gruber and his blog Daring Fireball, having been an avid reader since its inception.
He imparted his opinions (10 of them) recently at Macworld 2010, and it makes very interesting reading.
I sometimes spend fruitless hours trying to find something to blog about in which I have an opinion that I’d like to share – and then Gruber comes along and gives me almost 10.
Gruber’s 1st point, Steve Jobs:
It can be argued, Gruber maintains, that Steve Jobs’ most important product — the thing he’s spent the better part of his energy building since he returned to Apple — is not the Mac, the iPod, the iPhone or even the iPad. It’s Apple Inc., the company. The pessimistic dig on Apple, says Gruber, is that it’s a supremely well-organized company organized around one irreplaceable guy. The optimistic view is that Jobs has structured it to run like his other company, Pixar, which manages to turn out hit after hit, year after year, without a charismatic celebrity leader.
I remember many years ago when Steve went on stage at Macworld, and gave us the ‘one more thing’ that Apple sorely needed at the time – THINK PROFIT.
Apple made, on a previous quarter’s loss of $700 million+, a meagre profit of $34 million – and the crowd went wild.
That, in essence is Steve’s most important product. Doesn’t matter about market share, it doesn’t matter about simply filling existing markets, it’s about creating product they want to make, and market them to make LOTS OF MONEY.
What’s Apple going to do with that money? – that’s the unanswered question.
