Sunday, May 30, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
More on Apple vs The World
As you can probably tell, i'm buried in techology at the moment producing jobs for Apple products so I'm catching up on debates which have been raging in iLand for years. What I really don't understand is how Steve Jobs can claim his restrictions are for the benefit of the human race and hoards of iSheep take his garbage and regurgitate it.
I wonder how much of this issue is generational. Most people I know who are over 30 remember the disaster Apple created the first time they owned the computing world and are watching with curiousity to find out how Steve Jobs and his megalomania will stuff it all up this time. When you read forums and chats from Apple fans talking about how poor the hardware quality is, the terrible repair centres and hardware support, and the lack of respect for loyal existing customers who constantly fork out a fortune for quickly out of date products, it is hard to see them still owning any market in 10 years time.
I just saw a post on Google buzz by one of the writers from CNET, stating how he hopes Adobe fixes the problems with Mac computers crashing when they run Flash. Sorry what? I thought mac's didn't crash?!?!
Why does adobe have to make flash work better on a mac? Why isn't it apple's responsibility to make their computers work properly with INDUSTRY STANDARD technologies? I can understand why Steve Jobs takes this line, he has profit to make and universes to take over, but what do individuals have to gain from such bias?
From my views it should be clear that I'm not an Apple fan, but I am grown up enough to admit when a technology is brilliant - I just don't think Apple are responsible for any of the brilliant parts.
I was going to try to find a 'team google' shirt ... but it seems Apple wants to take on anyone who has better products than them so my shirt may have to read 'team google, adobe ... and?' Maybe this time round, Steve Jobs should focus on improving Apple's products and respecting their customers who they seem to punish with every new release. All this energy put into fighting other companies is contributing to the 'us vs them' situation that got Apple in trouble the first time round with IBM and Microsoft. He certainly didn't get where he is for being smart or learning from his mistakes!
I like the angle HP are taking with their proposed SLATE (a nice name for a start!) by simply pointing out all the features their product offers that the iPad doesn't. Support for digital camera cards like SD, better interfacing with your pc (not via proprietary iTunes!), and the big white elephant that's missing from iPad's first release ... A CAMERA!
I've ordered my iPad. But knowing how little Steve Jobs cares about my $800 i'm sure a better release will come out within 6 months that features a camera, and I will be either expected to cough up another $800, or punished for being an early adopter by being stuck with out of date technology before it has its first birthday.
This highlights a famous quote by William Gibson ... The future is here, its just not evenly distributed.
I wonder how much of this issue is generational. Most people I know who are over 30 remember the disaster Apple created the first time they owned the computing world and are watching with curiousity to find out how Steve Jobs and his megalomania will stuff it all up this time. When you read forums and chats from Apple fans talking about how poor the hardware quality is, the terrible repair centres and hardware support, and the lack of respect for loyal existing customers who constantly fork out a fortune for quickly out of date products, it is hard to see them still owning any market in 10 years time.
I just saw a post on Google buzz by one of the writers from CNET, stating how he hopes Adobe fixes the problems with Mac computers crashing when they run Flash. Sorry what? I thought mac's didn't crash?!?!
Why does adobe have to make flash work better on a mac? Why isn't it apple's responsibility to make their computers work properly with INDUSTRY STANDARD technologies? I can understand why Steve Jobs takes this line, he has profit to make and universes to take over, but what do individuals have to gain from such bias?
From my views it should be clear that I'm not an Apple fan, but I am grown up enough to admit when a technology is brilliant - I just don't think Apple are responsible for any of the brilliant parts.
I was going to try to find a 'team google' shirt ... but it seems Apple wants to take on anyone who has better products than them so my shirt may have to read 'team google, adobe ... and?' Maybe this time round, Steve Jobs should focus on improving Apple's products and respecting their customers who they seem to punish with every new release. All this energy put into fighting other companies is contributing to the 'us vs them' situation that got Apple in trouble the first time round with IBM and Microsoft. He certainly didn't get where he is for being smart or learning from his mistakes!
I like the angle HP are taking with their proposed SLATE (a nice name for a start!) by simply pointing out all the features their product offers that the iPad doesn't. Support for digital camera cards like SD, better interfacing with your pc (not via proprietary iTunes!), and the big white elephant that's missing from iPad's first release ... A CAMERA!
I've ordered my iPad. But knowing how little Steve Jobs cares about my $800 i'm sure a better release will come out within 6 months that features a camera, and I will be either expected to cough up another $800, or punished for being an early adopter by being stuck with out of date technology before it has its first birthday.
This highlights a famous quote by William Gibson ... The future is here, its just not evenly distributed.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Adobe, isn't this just a touch desperate?
Look I love Adobe as much as the next person ... maybe more if that next person isn't dependent on Photoshop on a daily basis ... but this latest attempt from Adobe to get the public behind the usage of Flash in an effort to pressure Apple to provide support sounds a little desperate.
http://mashable.com/2010/05/13/adobe-responds-flash/
It reads a little like begging and a little like sore losing. Adobe states that they have worked very hard to get Flash to be a standard across operating systems and browsers, so why should Apple come along and ruin their market share? Or as they put it, make things harder for developers?
I'm actually on team Adobe, but even I can see that this was a desperate attempt to draw sympathy from an audience that, quite frankly, is probably sick of paying a fortune for Adobe's long over-priced software.
The debate about 'free markets' doesn't really work for a company who, up until the past few years, has charged several thousand dollars for Flash and Photoshop software required to build this standard. It may be supported by default across most web browsers without cost, but it is still expensive for developers to work with this technology - especially now that Adobe releases a whole new suite every year, making it even more expensive for developers to keep up.
To build projects in Flash, one must own a copy of the software, but to write applications in HTML5 (Apple's 'replacement') simply requires learning the knowledge to write it ... no software required. It may be reinventing the wheel, but isn't HTML5 more 'free market' than a program which costs $1, 168 (aud) to purchase?
Now I'm no lawyer, but shouldn't there be a case against Apple for refusing to support a standard that's accepted across other digital technology? Isn't there an element of non-compete, forcing Adobe out of the market, or specifically targetting one piece of a competitors suite to take that competitor out of the overall game?
Wouldn't Adobe have been better off taking this to court, rather than trying to draw sympathy from a fickle audience who have already been given a way around a flash free future? Not to mention that Apple have given those developers who were paying a fortune for flash software the option, and means, to make money from their work.
Apple's choice to not support flash is annoying and not in the spirit of sharing, but would anyone ever have expected the bitter Steve Jobs to play nice with others? If Adobe wants to keep market share, they might need to do what Jobs has done ... bribe developers with the opportunity and means to make revenue for themselves.
After all ... why would Adobe's profits be more important to us than our own?
http://mashable.com/2010/05/13/adobe-responds-flash/
It reads a little like begging and a little like sore losing. Adobe states that they have worked very hard to get Flash to be a standard across operating systems and browsers, so why should Apple come along and ruin their market share? Or as they put it, make things harder for developers?
I'm actually on team Adobe, but even I can see that this was a desperate attempt to draw sympathy from an audience that, quite frankly, is probably sick of paying a fortune for Adobe's long over-priced software.
The debate about 'free markets' doesn't really work for a company who, up until the past few years, has charged several thousand dollars for Flash and Photoshop software required to build this standard. It may be supported by default across most web browsers without cost, but it is still expensive for developers to work with this technology - especially now that Adobe releases a whole new suite every year, making it even more expensive for developers to keep up.
To build projects in Flash, one must own a copy of the software, but to write applications in HTML5 (Apple's 'replacement') simply requires learning the knowledge to write it ... no software required. It may be reinventing the wheel, but isn't HTML5 more 'free market' than a program which costs $1, 168 (aud) to purchase?
Now I'm no lawyer, but shouldn't there be a case against Apple for refusing to support a standard that's accepted across other digital technology? Isn't there an element of non-compete, forcing Adobe out of the market, or specifically targetting one piece of a competitors suite to take that competitor out of the overall game?
Wouldn't Adobe have been better off taking this to court, rather than trying to draw sympathy from a fickle audience who have already been given a way around a flash free future? Not to mention that Apple have given those developers who were paying a fortune for flash software the option, and means, to make money from their work.
Apple's choice to not support flash is annoying and not in the spirit of sharing, but would anyone ever have expected the bitter Steve Jobs to play nice with others? If Adobe wants to keep market share, they might need to do what Jobs has done ... bribe developers with the opportunity and means to make revenue for themselves.
After all ... why would Adobe's profits be more important to us than our own?
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
ABC's Apple Monkeys!
When writing an article about a new product, isn't ABC supposed to be objective?!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/12/2869846.htm
The summary according to this ABC journalist ...
Apple = god
Google = the devil
You get the picture.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/12/2869846.htm
The summary according to this ABC journalist ...
Apple = god
Google = the devil
You get the picture.
Apple got me with an iPad
I said it would never happen, but today I purchased my first Apple product and pre-ordered me one of those iPad thingy-whatsits. I don't like this pre-order thing, where I pay for the product but wait 3 weeks to hold it in my eager little hands.
To make matters worse we already have one at work so I know just how much I'm going to love it. I'm looking forward to that first few hours where setting backgrounds and playing default games seems exciting.
Anyway ... on with the details!
Here's the Australian pricing:
Wi-Fi
16GB1 - A$ 629.00
32GB1 - A$ 759.00
64GB1 - A$ 879.00
Wi-Fi + 3G
16GB1 - A$ 799.00
32GB1 - A$ 928.00
64GB1 - A$ 1,049.00
Optus, Telstra and Three don't have any information on their website yet but they are listed on Apple's page as a provider. Vodafone have only told us that they'll offer iPad plans, and to register for information:
http://www.vodafone.com.au/personal/ipad/ipad-register/index.htm
And now ... we wait.
To make matters worse we already have one at work so I know just how much I'm going to love it. I'm looking forward to that first few hours where setting backgrounds and playing default games seems exciting.
Anyway ... on with the details!
Here's the Australian pricing:
Wi-Fi
16GB1 - A$ 629.00
32GB1 - A$ 759.00
64GB1 - A$ 879.00
Wi-Fi + 3G
16GB1 - A$ 799.00
32GB1 - A$ 928.00
64GB1 - A$ 1,049.00
Optus, Telstra and Three don't have any information on their website yet but they are listed on Apple's page as a provider. Vodafone have only told us that they'll offer iPad plans, and to register for information:
http://www.vodafone.com.au/personal/ipad/ipad-register/index.htm
And now ... we wait.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Google's Social Search
The slight changes in google search results might not be noticeable to anyone who doesn't spend most of their day there, but I was most excited this morning to find that my Google results had updated with (some of) the features.
Most noticeable to me are the following ...
1) Google Image Search - By Colour, Face & Line Art
How awesome is that?! For those of us who use Google to be inspired by the design work of others, you can now refine image search by colour, displaying all results with red or green featured prominently. The colour bar is a 1 click, instant loading display option that sorts images based on their colours. Other options include sorting by face, black and white, photos, line art, clip art etc ... but what effect will this have on the big traffic war between Facebook and Google?
2) Google Social Search - Discussions
For some reason i'm seeing a different type of social search to what was described in Google's introduction video (below) so I think I'm getting a limited version here in the land down under technology reach. Discussions however is an option which allows me to see conversation in forums and blogs, which is just one more step towards an advertising economy driven entirely by social commentary.
3) Wireframes in Google Docs
This is a few weeks old by now but I stumbled on this awesome dude who created some templates to share for free, using the new Google drawing tool. Working with webpages every day means lots of mockups, so we are always looking for clean and simple software to compose wireframes for clients, designers and developers. Add the cloud computing component where the document can be secured or shared to anyone inside or outside your company.
If you just want to doodle a diagram, you can do that too, but to create complex wireframes the best place to start is to visit Morten's shared docs page which is linked below, save a copy of the free templates to your account and edit it to create your own wireframes.
> Here's some templates from Morten Just
These 3 features don't seem that exciting when I see them written, especially in comparison to the open graph announcements by Facebook with over 50,000 sites (apparently) implementing it in less than 2 weeks. They will however make my day to day life easier and will probably still be in my life long after Facebook has faded into little more than one night stand on the digital media relationship timeline.
What's a topic worth without a few good, unanswered questions to ponder? So here ya go ...
How will the new social search effect listings in Google? How will Facebook's open graph effect Google's backward link heavy algorithm and the accuracy that they are so known for? Is it ridiculous for so many social media commentators to be even comparing the likes of Google and Facebook?
You tell me ...
Most noticeable to me are the following ...
1) Google Image Search - By Colour, Face & Line Art
How awesome is that?! For those of us who use Google to be inspired by the design work of others, you can now refine image search by colour, displaying all results with red or green featured prominently. The colour bar is a 1 click, instant loading display option that sorts images based on their colours. Other options include sorting by face, black and white, photos, line art, clip art etc ... but what effect will this have on the big traffic war between Facebook and Google?
2) Google Social Search - Discussions
For some reason i'm seeing a different type of social search to what was described in Google's introduction video (below) so I think I'm getting a limited version here in the land down under technology reach. Discussions however is an option which allows me to see conversation in forums and blogs, which is just one more step towards an advertising economy driven entirely by social commentary.
3) Wireframes in Google Docs
This is a few weeks old by now but I stumbled on this awesome dude who created some templates to share for free, using the new Google drawing tool. Working with webpages every day means lots of mockups, so we are always looking for clean and simple software to compose wireframes for clients, designers and developers. Add the cloud computing component where the document can be secured or shared to anyone inside or outside your company.
If you just want to doodle a diagram, you can do that too, but to create complex wireframes the best place to start is to visit Morten's shared docs page which is linked below, save a copy of the free templates to your account and edit it to create your own wireframes.
> Here's some templates from Morten Just
These 3 features don't seem that exciting when I see them written, especially in comparison to the open graph announcements by Facebook with over 50,000 sites (apparently) implementing it in less than 2 weeks. They will however make my day to day life easier and will probably still be in my life long after Facebook has faded into little more than one night stand on the digital media relationship timeline.
What's a topic worth without a few good, unanswered questions to ponder? So here ya go ...
How will the new social search effect listings in Google? How will Facebook's open graph effect Google's backward link heavy algorithm and the accuracy that they are so known for? Is it ridiculous for so many social media commentators to be even comparing the likes of Google and Facebook?
You tell me ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)