My iPad 3 Event Predictions

Last night sucked.

But, the good news is that Wednesday brings a new day and, perhaps more importantly, a new iPad for the whole world to see and bask in the glory of.

It seems a popular pastime to read rumor blogs and sites on days leading up to the big Apple announcements. I do quite a bit, and I suspect that even Joe I-know-nothing Schmo is even remotely aware of some of the features of the new iPad.

My intention is not to guess feature-by-feature, though I will. To me, the new features seem fairly obvious. While Apple has a history and passion for surprising the tech industry with new innovations (who saw the Smart Cover coming?), I suspect that most of what we will see on Wednesday will not be as shocking as other Apple events. I'd like to take some guesses at how the event will roll out. Then, maybe I'll come back here and judge how I did.

  1. The stage is sure to be set with a giant Apple logo on the screen, as it always has been. They'll be playing a mix of Adele and perhaps some other new, hipster artist over the PA. The room will be dark and there'll be some chairs, just as Steve sat in for the original iPad introduction. There'll be some iPad 3s (or whatever they're going to call them) on a table near the side of the stage for demo purposes. They'll, of course, be covered in black sheets.
  2. The lights will dim and Tim Cook, the new CEO, will come out and greet the crowd. Apple typically begins with news about the company and it has been far enough from their quarterly earnings report that they'll have some updated numbers about the business. Tim will run over how well the iPhone and iPad are doing, emphasizing the recently passed 25 billion app downloads. Apple has sold over 50 million iPads, and I suspect that that'll be a large part of the numbers presentation.
  3. Tim will even speak to how well the Apple TV is doing. I should make this clear, I doubt that we will see an actual Apple television set at this keynote. If there is an update to the product line at all, it will likely be an A5 chips that powers it, 1080p output, and perhaps a few more services integrated in. I suspect that they'll announce a new model Apple TV box (one that connects to your TV via HDMI) but it will be a minimal upgrade. This event is about the iPad, not the Apple TV.
  4. Tim will introduce Phil Schiller, Senior Vice President of Worldwise Marketing. Tim Cook is a nice guy and definitely a wiz at organizing a company, but Phil is the presenter. Phil is, in my opinion, the only executive that can hold a candle ate Steve's presentation style. Phil will be the one to introduce the new iPad.
  5. Phil will talk a bit about the success of the iPad and present some very high sales numbers that perhaps Tim had eluded to earlier. Don't bet against them talking about how the tablet competition can't keep up. He will absolutely also talk about the popularity of the new iPad Textbooks and present some spun numbers that will actually be very low but will seem high. Phil can spin numbers like few others.
  6. Then, he will begin to talk about the new iPad. He will talk about how great a product the iPad is and how it is changing the way that people interact with content. He will likely show a video about how the iPad is changing lives. Expect the video to be touching to your senses.
  7. "Then, we thought to ourselves, how can we make this magical device even better? We have come up with a ton of new ways, and we will focus on many of them this morning," he might say. What will it be called? My guess is either the iPad 3 or, more likely, the iPad 2S. He will show it and it will look a whole lot like and iPad 2.
  8. "The first revolutionary change...our unbelievable Retina Display. The Retina Display on the iPhone 4, 4S, and iPod touch is just gorgeous. It's something you have to see to really believe. It's the only display that truly lets you read from your phone as if you were reading from a printed page. It is phenomenal. Now, we are bringing that display to the iPad. It doubles every pixel to present things you might never have imagined. It make reading on the iPad the most enjoyable reading experience you've ever had." Apple keynotes are known for their superb use of hyperbole.
  9. Demo of the Retina display a la the iPhone 4 announcement. Hopefully without the "Turn off your wifi" moment.
  10. Next, the dual-core A5X processor. Phil will talk about how fast it is, dual core, with updated graphics. I'd imagine the new graphics will be about 7-9x the graphics performance of the iPad 2. "This thing just screams. And, mixing this with the retina display creates an amazing gaming experience." Also, I expect an update to the iMovie for iPad software.
  11. Demo of the A5X processor, done by game makers like the makers of infinity blade or Electonic Arts. If new iMovie software, a demo would go here as well.
  12. Next, Cameras. The iPad 2 cameras are horrible for everything but FaceTime, so a camera update is entirely needed. I'd expect a camera upgrade to the level of the iPhone 4, but not the 4S. They'll show some gorgeous pictures of what can be done with the iPad cameras.
  13. Along with that, a new app. iPhoto. Scott Forstall will likey come out for this. The photos app for iPad is simply unable to do anything like iPhoto for the Mac can do. Because Apple insists on photos being tied down to apps, the third-party offerings are insufficient. I don't expect this to be a separate purchasable app, this will be an updated version of the 'Photos' app that already resides on your iPad.
  14. Next, Siri. Siri, at least for dictation, makes too much sense to leave it out. Scott will either stay out or Phil will welcome him back out to talk about how much better Siri has gotten and how pleased customers are with it. They'll do a thorough demo of Siri and if I were you, I'd expect several new functions for Siri that will ship on the iPad 2S. Perhaps coming later via a software update to iPhone 4Ss. Sorry iPhone 4 users, I doubt Siri is ever coming to your phone. iPads are used differently that iPhones so this will be an interesting place for innovation on Apple's part.
  15. Next, LTE. Phil will be back. He will talk about the popularity of the 3G iPads and how quickly companies like Verizon are building out their LTE networks. I suspect that the 3G in these models will be like the iPhone 4S and be compatible with both GSM and CDMA. Not sure what to guess about whether or not you will still have to choose Verizon, AT&T or Sprint, like you do on the phone. No contracts though, that's for sure.
  16. Battery life. The iPad 2S will have the same 10 hour battery life. Which, if you think about it, is quite a feat.
  17. Then Phil will talk about price. Price is easy. $499 16GB. $599 32GB. $699 64 GB. Add $129 to each to get the Wifi+3G+LTE versions. Same pricing as before. The iPad 2 will continue to remain available for $399 at 16GB only.
  18. And that'll be it. There could be some sort of surprise attachment or accessory, but for the most part, the event will be pretty standard. Phil will invite everyone to the hands on demo center and a few lucky journalists will go home with loaner models with which to reveal.
  19. Release date? I'm guessing March 16th. If they do a pre-order (unlikely), it will start on the 9th.

I think people are going to feel Steve's absence. The last product announcement was a day before Steve's death and I just suspect that it'll be felt worse here than before.

I think some will come away feeling disappointed with the event, because it won't be as flashy as we expect. The Retina Display is going to be amazing and the device is going to truly scream. The graphics will be astounding and there's surely some exciting new software possibilites coming. All in all though, I wouldn't expect to be blown out of the water.

If all this comes true, would this be a device worth getting? Definitely. Worth updating form our iPad 2? Maybe. One thing is for sure, they're going to sell a lot of them. Millions. And they'll sell them fast.

Would you get one of these iPads?

 

-B

 

Why Apple's Supply Chain Problem is Such a Big Deal

If you clicked this link, your thought was likely, "Bryant's a fanboy, let's see what kind of spin he puts on this horrific topic." Or, you might be someone who has tweeted to me, emailed to me, or trolled my Facebook timeline with this NY Times article released the other day.

The gist of the article is this: Apple employs hundred of thousands of poor Chinese workers who spend their entire lives connecting cables inside of iPhones for very little pay. The article goes further than that though, too. The article makes the pronouncement that Apple cares very little about the working conditions of their supply chain and you should feel guilty for owning an iPhone, iPad, or iPod. Here's a taste:

Employees work excessive overtime, in some cases seven days a week, and live in crowded dorms. Some say they stand so long that their legs swell until they can hardly walk. Under-age workers have helped build Apple’s products, and the company’s suppliers have improperly disposed of hazardous waste and falsified records, according to company reports and advocacy groups that, within China, are often considered reliable, independent monitors.

Tim Cook, the newly appointed CEO, made it clear in an email to employees that he was 'outraged' by the accusations that the article made and was deeply offended. It's not hard to see why...The New York Times and Apple have mostly had a very cordial relationship. The NYT's website is included in iOS's default bookmarks and Steve often visited their site first when demoing a new product. The Times was quick to adopt the iPad as a way of releasing their content and the relationship has worked for the betterment of both companies. Everything seemed fine.

Until this.

Even today, the BSR, who is quoted heavily throughout the Times's piece refuted much of its claims. I suspect that we haven't seen anywhere near the end of this.

As a point of reference, here's a short clip of Steve Jobs reacting to the Wall Street Journal's questions regarding the suicides and suicide attempts by Foxconn employees a while back:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gOu50HaEvs&w=640&h=385]

Again, we haven't heard the end of this. As we shouldn't.

The poor workers. They're worked hard, worse than many Americans will ever work, and when Apple wants to lower production costs and raise quality of the products, something's got to give. The media is beginning to claim that the cost of these two desires is human lives and well being. In fact, the NYT titled their piece, "In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad."

It's linkbait, but it starts a good conversation. Why is this so important? Why does Apple take the heat?

Sure, it's because theyre bigger than everyone else. That's what got Nike in so much trouble. Sure, it's because they are a hugely profitable company. They made more in profit than Google brought in total last quarter. Sure, it's because people love their products. But I think this has become a bigger deal for another reason.

I think it's because their products speak a bit of hope.

Andy Crouch referred to this phenomenon when he spoke about the gospel that Steve Jobs preached in a piece immediately following Steve's death. I don't agree with the correlations that Andy drew throughout the entire piece, but his general thesis is good. Steve had a different, often better, way of envisioning how a human interacts with a product. (Andy's piece comes off a bit harsh at times, though I know that Andy is an Apple fan because when I saw him speak live once he referred to his MacBook Pro as the true representation of 'perfection' on earth.)

Apple's mindset has always been about Thinking Differently. Using a computer sucked until 1984 when the Macintosh was introduced. MP3 players sucked until 2001 when the iPod and iTunes made it possible to actually enjoy listening to digital music. Cell phones sucked until 2007 when the iPhone finally made a smart phone easy to use. Tablets sucked until 2010 when the iPad reimagined what a tablet was and how humans interact with it.

Steve's quotes. Apple's marketing campaigns. The products themselves. All of these presented nearly hyperbolic statements about what it was like to use an Apple computer and how much there was to love about them. Sites like "CultofMac.com" and documentaries like "Mac Heads" and terms like "fanboy" are signs of the effectiveness of this message. (I'll admit, I often get accused of buying into the Apple gospel more than the Jesus Gospel. I'd argue that that might be because Apple is better at presenting it than our churches are right now, but that's an argument for another day...)

When you use an iPhone, you fall in love with it. Or, most people do. Apple is no longer an electronic company; they become an ideology, a mindset, and a way of life. Apple has engrained this "Think Different" message into our understandings of who they are as a company. When we love their products, we want to believe that the truly are better than everyone else. In every single aspect.

Yet this Foxconn situation seems to be the same as everyone else. I remember getting in trouble at a young age and my first response was to say that 'everyone else was doing it!' To which my parents were quick to point out, "Perhaps, but you're better than that." These poor (literally) workers in these factories are indicative of what is wrong with the world we're in and we'd like to think that Apple can rise above those problems. For God's sake, they've risen above it with all of their products!

I hope Tim and Steve are (were :-( ) right that they are actively working to take greater measures in treating their workers fairly. They're certainly working to spread a good word about how much better they are than many other suppliers. I hope that what they say is true, is true, and that it will continue to get better quickly.

Apple has nearly $100 Billion in the bank. If there is one company who can actually Think Different when it comes to this type of labor ethics, it's Apple. They have the means.

I'd like to see them turn this around. Not just politically. Not just through marketing. I'd like to see them make gigantic strides and stand up for the right and well being of humans.

Because that's what Apple does. They Think Different.

Please, dear God, don't let that thought leave with Steve.

-B

But The iPad Is Just A Toy!

When people say that, laugh in their face. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaIhEXZ7WW4]

Consider that an order.

-B

Apple's Ruthless Ad Campaigns

Steve Jobs used to explain Apple something like this

Our goal is really simple, we like to make GREAT products for people. Then, we tell people about them. If they like them, we get to come to work tomorrow. It's really simple.

Apple has had quite a few iconic ad campaigns since its inception. With the exception of the 1984 commercial, they buy A LOT of air time.

Here's the newest addition (expect to see much more from where this came from):

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uS6d7fsPnM]

In the biography by Walter Isaacson, Steve is quoted as saying this before he passed:

“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

If you want to watch a good fight, this is going to be a good one.

Apple is ready to battle and they have the resources and infrastructure to do it.

It began with those Samsung lawsuits. Now it is time for the ads. Again, I'd expect to see a ton of these ads in the near future.

-B

This Will Change Your Life

Don't ever tell me that the iPad is not a powerful and fun tool.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYq97enkdx0&w=640&h=385]

I'm well aware that I just changed your life.

-B

Fitting Into Societal Norms

Throughout my life, I've struggled with a lack of discipline in many areas of my life. I was never one who thoroughly enjoyed exercise or the simple discipline of it and I LOVED eating. As time has progressed and my metabolism has been unable to keep up with my poor habits, my body has taken the brunt force of those "bad" habits and it has become a factor of embarrassment for me as I try to relearn what it means to take care of my body, from the way that certainly seemed more "natural".

So, recently, I've been watching what seems to be the new trend in television: shows on losing weight. After all, when A&E does a series, you know it is the trend. I suppose it most likely started with "The Biggest Loser", but "Extreme Makeover: Weight Loss Edition" and A&E's own "Heavy" have been most popular in recent months. I've watched significant portions of each show, trying to wrestle with how these people came to be in the position they are, what lifestyle decisions they've made, and why it is that they can't seem to change themselves, by themselves.

All of the participants in these shows are significantly overweight. More than I ever hope to be. Yet, I still find it intriguing because I recognize their lack of desire to work and equate it with my struggle as well. No, I'm not 500 pounds, I'm not even that close to half of that, but I figure that if I can learn about what it is they need to change about themselves, perhaps it will assist me in changing myself as well.

The question always seems to be begged: why is the change necessary?

These people break down into two distinct groups (as I can see it). About half of them have been overweight since birth. The other half had some sort of traumatic experience in their lives that has driven them to compulsive eating. Most of the second group deal with some sort of depression.

The first group, though, is the most interesting to me. They've always been overweight. They've always eaten a lot. They've rarely exercised. Surely some of that is due to their upbringing, the sudden growth of fast food, etc. However, it makes me wonder, why is it that they never exercised? Why is it that they ate more than a normal human should? And I wonder these things because I wonder them about myself as well. Why is it that I chose to go play the piano or guitar before going for a run? Did I not find running interesting? Did I find running painful? Why is it that some people are encouraged when the pain sets in? Why is it that some people can easily fight through the pain when others of us cower in fear? If it is "natural" to exercise, why is it that most of us don't? Why is it that we come up with easier ways to get around so that we can avoid exercise at all cost?

Surely when our societies were hunters and gatherers, we were in great shape because we had to hunt down the food we were going to eat that night. And we weren't eating fried potatoes.

But that wasn't sustainable for the long haul. It seemed easier, and profitable, to do the hunting FOR other people. Then we'd sell them the food. That'd make it easier. Then we'd be able to feed more people more efficiently. And we are humans...we love efficiency. We build tools to help us be more efficient.

It's obvious what has occurred: we've built tools to help make our lives easier. That's why we are all addicted to our smart phones and iPads. We spend more time inside than any generation before us. We walk and run less than any other generation because there are enough distractions other than exercise. And it has come to the point that when we are walking around the mall our mood goes down when we see stairs, because we'd rather ride the escalator.

But I return to my original thought: discipline. Have we become undisciplined and lazy?

Or, has laziness simply become a byproduct of progress? Or "naturally", are we more inclined to create tools to help us? Or is the hunting and gathering mindset what is really "natural"?

Which leads me to my ultimate thought: does what is "natural" always fit into a societal norm? And, is what is "natural" always the high road and good?

Some people are born with a chemical imbalance that leads them to abuse alcohol. We all know the phrase, even after you're clean, "Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic." On ABC Family's "Switched at Birth", one of the characters is an alcoholic. She's hard on her biological daughter who chose to drink prior to being an adult. The daughter didn't understand why she was being so hard on her. But the mother explained that she simply doesn't have luxury of being able to have one drink. It's not possible because of who she is. But just because her bodily inclinations and behavior lead her to act in certain ways, doesn't mean that society thinks it is okay to be an alcoholic. We look down on drunks.

The same is true of drug users.

The same has been said of gay people.

And so, I suppose the question ought to be asked of societal norms: are societal norms (and accepted practices) based on what we might consider "destructive" behavior? In other words, do we judge others' actions because what they do puts them (and often others) at risk of dying sooner than they might?

The extremely obese people will die because their body and heart simply can't keep up. Alcohol abusers will drive themselves out of house, home, and family, because they use alcohol to cope. Drug abusers run the very real risk of overdosing or taking something that they thought was something else.

And they all become addicts. They become so engorged in what they are doing that they don't care about anything. They lose their families, they lose their jobs, they lose their lives.

Because these things...the unnatural foods, the copious amounts of alcohol, the drugs, all seem...unnatural.

The laziness is unnatural. Because that's not how we once lived.

And we draw this line to connect the dots between "unnatural" and "destructive". And we assume, in almost every instance, that these two are inherently connected.

And if we think under that paradigm, we can perhaps see why homosexuality has been treated, in our society, the way it has. Biblically, it seems unnatural. Many of the conservative voices have argued time and time again that it is "destructive" to our society because it breaks down how we view humanity and the design of a family. Many view it as an addiction, one that can be "treated" (see Michele Bachmann's husband).

Because we've connected those dots. We operate under that mindset. We equate "unnatural" with "bad". We think everything that is "unnatural" is "destructive".

There's no doubt in my mind that many of the Biblical writers (for the most part) consider being gay (or participating in homosexual acts) "unnatural". AND, because of the societal norms of their culture, and the cultures working against them, they equated "unnatural" with "bad" or "sinful".

So the question becomes: can we read "unnatural" in the Scriptures and equate it with our definition of unnatural now...post French Fry? Can we read into God's creation of Adam and Eve and assume that that is what is "natural"?

Because that is what we are doing. We are reading texts out of context. We are placing our own 21st century definitions on words used thousands of years ago. And we assume, that because what seems unnatural now has proven itself to be destructive, that that's what "unnatural" has always and will always mean. And we assume that what society currently considers "normal" behavior is the correct way to be. And when we do that, we lose sight of humanity and of God's creation of it.

It's a tough thought process, one with unclear implications and most likely more divisiveness than unity. It's troubling.

I was not born with an inherent desire to exercise. I have always been a fan of progress. This is the "unnatural" reality I live in. At the end of the day, I really like my iPad...but I still need to exercise.

-B

Yes, I know this doesn't make a clear and decisive argument, as you might be used to getting. That's because I'm not sure this can all be answered.

Steve Steps Down

Over the past six years or so, I've become increasingly obsessed with Apple Computer (of course, they dropped the "computer" part of their name several years back).

Of it, probably, my greatest obsession has been with one of its cofounders, Steve Jobs.

The man is remarkable. He has a keen sense of taste, a clear vision for the future, he is unapologetic about his decision making, and Apple has been, thus far in history, unable to turn profit and survive without his leadership. He literally took a company on the verge of disaster and bankruptcy and spent ten years growing it into the colossal giant that it is today. He knows how to hire great people who design and build great products that help us with our everyday lives.

Today, Steve stepped down as CEO. He's leaving his highly influential position (some might say, controlling) in the company that he built. In his parents' garage.

His letter:

To the Apple Board of Directors and the Apple Community:

I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.

I hereby resign as CEO of Apple. I would like to serve, if the Board sees fit, as Chairman of the Board, director and Apple employee.

As far as my successor goes, I strongly recommend that we execute our succession plan and name Tim Cook as CEO of Apple.

I believe Apple’s brightest and most innovative days are ahead of it. And I look forward to watching and contributing to its success in a new role.

I have made some of the best friends of my life at Apple, and I thank you all for the many years of being able to work alongside you.

Steve

Short and sweet, to the point, as usual.

I have often referenced Steve's leadership and vision for the company in regards to Walt Disney's influence in the monstrosity that is Disney. I have even mentioned before that I feared the way that Steve might leave Apple, as Walt left Disney. But at this point it is clear that this won't be the way it will go.

While this knowledge might make this a little easier, it doesn't truly make the concept of losing the man who brought all this into being any easier to swallow. Steve will no longer be leading this company. It will be weird, it will be difficult, and it will be uneasy.

Is it a rough day? Yes. Is it a sad day? I don't think so.

I suppose the real question is: where does Apple, as a company, go from here?

Undoubtedly Tim Cook will step in as Apple's CEO, and Steve will continue to have a significant amount of influence in the accountability of Cook and future product decisions. The truth remains though...the boat has a new captain.

Here's where we are fortunate: Cook knows what he is doing. Cook has been managing operations for quite some time now and has brought Apple the sales numbers that we keep hearing about. Cook managed product shortages when people just HAVE to get their hands on them, and he certainly added to the continuing profit gains Apple's been reporting. The good news is that I think Apple is going to be alright.

One of the things that I've done a lot of in the past few years is listen to every extended interview Steve Jobs has given throughout time. There aren't many of them, but Steve has always chosen his words and actions carefully, and that makes these presentations and interviews unbelievably interesting to parse.

Even the biggest anti-Apple pundit you might encounter will admit that Steve has preached, yes...preached, a mindset and attitude to his people: Great products, great products, great products. He has always defended Apple by preaching and evangelizing about the products. He has an eye for beauty, simplicity, and innovation and is unafraid to make difficult decisions. He has always believed that if Apple makes good products, and they tell people about them, people will buy them. If enough people buy them, he gets to come to work tomorrow. This is his understanding of capitalism and a free market. This is his understanding of the world.

And so, the questions remains: will Steve's vision be carried through into the future?

This question, obviously, remains to be answered. Tim Cook is not the stage man that Jobs is. Tim Cook does not have persona that Jobs has. But Tim Cook has proven himself as a businessman. Tim Cook has proven himself as a manager. Tim Cook has proven himself as an unbelievable CEO.

Apple is going to be more than alright. Apple is going to be stellar.

What's my proof? Apple's culture.

Steve has left a message and mission. Steve has left a culture. Steve's words, thoughts, and dreams will forever be captured in his interviews, products, and legacy. If you meet someone at the Apple store, or any employee of Apple, you will know what I am talking about. It becomes more than a selling point. It becomes a life, a system, a love.

Outsiders think we are crazy. We probably are.

"While some see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do."

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oAB83Z1ydE&]

Steve said it best:

I believe Apple’s brightest and most innovative days are ahead of it.

-B

Friends, I'd like to leave you with my favorite of Steve's videos. This is why I think he "gets it".

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob_GX50Za6c&]

To honor Steve, I wrote this entirely on my iPad. The future, friends. The future.

The iPad, errrr, "Tablet" Market

You may have heard. HP, the company who likely made many of the laptops you see in day to day ongoings, announced yesterday that they are completely going out of the consumer product business.

The Wall Street Journal writes this of the conference call:

“The tablet effect is real, and sales of the TouchPad are not meeting our expectations,” Apotheker says, explaining the movement of consumers from PCs to tablets as one of the problems with the PC division. So H-P is exploring options for its unit that “may include separation through spinoff or other transactions.”

The iPad is killing computer sales. HP thought they could be a part of this paradigm shift, but they've proven that they can't.

Only problem: HP spent a significant amount of money on producing their tablet, the HP TouchPad, which was reported as having abysmal sales since its introduction 49 days before its demise.

Literally, this thing was on the market for 49 days before HP threw in the towel. 49 days. They dropped the price by $100. They promoted the heck out of it. 49 days.

Absolute failure.

And it's really a shame. the TouchPad was easily (in my opinion) the best iPad competitor. It was behind in speed, app market, thickness, OS robustness, and physical locations to buy it, but it was easily better than anything else on the market. Besides the iPad.

And when someone goes to buy a tablet with $500 in hand, they're going to choose the iPad over the TouchPad. This is reality.

Today, HP dropped the price to $99. $99! It made even me think about buying one. Because a full tablet (no matter whether it is dead end or not) for $99 is a clear steal.

Problem? You can't find them. All the retail chains are reporting to be out of them, and the geeks are going crazy buying them up. Because for $99, why not?

Then I see this nonsense on Facebook:

Well HP has proven one thing: There's a LOT of interest in tablets, just not at $500. Which is...exactly what a lot of us have been saying all along: Apple fanboys would buy the iPad at $20,000; the rest of us would only buy it at $200 or less.

Wrong.

Apple announced several months ago that they'd sold 25 million iPads. Some at $499. Some at $829. That's more than fanboys. That's more than Apple elite. It's because Apple came into a brand new market with a price that competed SIGNIFICANTLY with anything ANYONE ELSE would be able to create. Why? Because Apple bought a huge supply of flash memory in bulk, lowering their cost. Why? Because they integrate the hardware and software better than anyone else.

Apple created a market, an interest, and a device that completely changed who Apple is and the future the tech industry is taking. They did it at a competitive price (one others couldn't match) and sold the heck out of it.

HP isn't proving that there is an interest in tablets. HP is proving that if you create a product that is worse than a competitor's and sell it at the same price, people won't buy it; then if you lower the price by $400 and sell it significantly under your own cost, then you might be able to sell the remaining tiny stock you have already produced, at what could eventually be a several million dollar (perhaps billion dollar) company loss. Cool work, HP.

There is a tablet market, but HP didn't prove anything. Apple did, and they did it in the way that counts...profit.

25 million. And that's before my dad bought one.

-B

Scrolling in Mac OS Lion

Apple released the newest version of what they call "the most advanced operating system on the planet" on Wednesday, as expected, at 8:30 in the morning. It is the first operating system (by Apple) to be distributed solely by online digital means at launch and is highly encouraged to be installed without any use of optical discs, USB drives, etc. Supposedly, Apple will sell copies of OS X Lion in the coming months in their retail stores for $69 on a USB stick.

While $69 is still cheaper than your typical install of Windows, it is basically what you pay $29 on the Mac App Store on a USB drive. The USB drive would only need to be about 4GB in size (and you can buy these as low as $8 on Amazon) so a $30ish markup sends the customer one clear message from Apple: download this, don't buy a physical copy. When they released the Mac App Store not long ago they dropped the price of their photo editing software, Aperture, from $200 to $80. The price didn't drop on the copy with physical discs. If you went into an Apple store and bought Aperture you would pay $199. If you wised up, went home, and downloaded it online through the Mac App Store, you could install it on any machine you own as many times as you'd like for no more than $79. Apple is getting rid of optical media(DVDs) in a large way and is more or less pushing their customers into the future...like it or not.

This is all well and good, but if the download and install for Lion went horribly wrong (think MobileMe), Apple would have to answer for this seemingly hasty decision.

But it didn't.

It installed perfectly, without a single hitch, on both of our machines and seems to be running well. The rest of Apple customers seem to be saying the same thing. More than a million people downloaded Lion on day one and everything everyone has said has been more than positive about the download and install process.

I have had limited experience with it thus far as we have been traveling, but I really do like it. And to be able to install it on as many machines as you own for $29 is more than a good deal, it is a steal. To not upgrade to Lion seems absurd, unless $30 is really a huge strain on your wallet. If you through down the >$1000 on the computer to begin with, chances are that you can afford the $30 upgrade. If you're even considering it, and don't have a legitimate reason not to (some of the old PowerPC apps will not run anymore in Lion), it seems very dumb not to do it. You don't have to got to the store to buy a disc, you don't have to have it shipped. You simply pay $30 through your iTunes account and download. Within an hour and a half, you've got the brand new operating system.

Many, many things have changed in Lion. Almost 100% of these changes are easily seen as good, from the user's perspective, right from the start.

One, though, has been getting some backlash.

For years, you've been able to scroll on the Mac using either a scroll wheel on a non-Apple branded mouse, the Apple Magic Mouse, the Apple Magic Trackpad, or the trackpad on your laptop.

I assume that scrolling really evolved from the directional arrows that have sat on the side of our browsers and windows since the beginning. If more content went past what was currently visible on the screen, you clicked on the down arrow to move the page downward. You could also click on the scroll bar and move it toward the bottom.

Scrolling, without having to interact with the side scroll bar, developed from this idea. The most common way on a Mac has been with two-finger swipes on the trackpad. If you want to go down on the page, you swipe with two fingers downward. It makes sense, right? Not anymore.

One of the things Apple is starting to do with Mac OS X Lion is to bring some of the quality designs and decisions they made with iOS back to the Mac. One of the most immediately evident is...scrolling.

On an iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch, when a user wants to scroll through a web page (and much of what users do on these devices is completely through the browser), they take their finger (on an iOS device it is just one finger) and "push" the content on the screen around. This process is actually exactly opposite of the Mac's directions, but gives the user the sensation that they are physically manipulating the content on the page with their hands. Apple really debuted this concept with the outset of the iPhone with "pinch to zoom" multitouch but didn't speak at all about how scrolling worked on the iPhone. It just made sense.

The decision seems easy. The layer of abstraction is gone when a mouse and keyboard are gone, so why create another layer? The user knows there is more content they wish to view. So, like in the real world, they physically move the content in front of them, out of the way. You never have to explain to the four year old manipulating your iPad how to scroll a page, they just do it. Because it feels natural.

So on Mac OS Lion, Apple decided to reverse the scrolling. They decided to call this new scrolling "natural" because it feels more "natural". You can tell there was some internal conflict at Apple about this because the VERY first thing you see when you start up Lion is a welcome box that explains how scrolling works in Lion. They are very conscious that this is going to be very different and very frustrating at first to seasoned users. And, if you're reading this and thinking that this isn't good at all and is the sole reason not to update, have no fear, this can easily be changed by unchecking one box in System Preferences (another example of why, perhaps, everyone at Apple was not in total agreement).

The idea is simple. If we are going to interact with the content on our computer in the same way we interact with the information in physical form in our lives, the way we interact with it needs to feel more natural.

Which brings me to my plea: don't uncheck that box. Give yourself some time. Allow your brain to relearn how to interact with everything. Because, in general, this too is a good change. We want to feel as if we are directly manipulating content on a screen. And, in order to do that, we need to get rid of the layers of abstraction that have existed because we couldn't think of a better way when we all began.

Here's where I think Apple went wrong though: Why even refer to it as scrolling? When Phil Schiller introduced it, he described it as "pushing the content" but he stilled called it "scrolling". They shouldn't have stuck with that name. "Pushing" is much, much better. Instead of a welcome screen titled "Scrolling in Lion" it should have read "Pushing in Lion". Because really, we aren't scrolling anymore. We are manipulating. And when we need to move from top to bottom, scrolling seems silly, we are pushing. In that sense, it wouldn't appear as if Apple simply reversed the way it used to work, they just came up with a new plan, a new concept, a new paradigm of thinking. Imagine Apple saying, "scrolling is out. We don't need it anymore. Now, we just push. So from now on, we call it 'Pushing'. Welcome to the new "Pushing" in Lion, it is more natural, revolutionary, and...magical." It would have brought the house down.

Give it a shot. Don't uncheck that box. It took me only a couple of hours to get used to it. It was very, very strange at first, but as we move more into the world of touch screens and manipulated content, "pushing" is the future, not scrolling.

Apple has always been a company to make big sweeping decisions and force customers into the future. They put the computer in one box and gave it a mouse and new user interface (but what about our command lines?). They took the floppy out of the iMac (how absurd!). They took the CD out of music (it's a shame that didn't work out). They took the keyboard off a smart phone (that's been totally unpopular and never was copied). They took the keyboard off of the tablet(gosh, if only 28.6 million of those hadn't been sold). They ended scrolling on a screen (if only they had marketed it that way). In every instance, it has been met with much positive approval and has led to a complete paradigm shift of thinking in the computer industry.

Stick with it. It'll get better.

-B

Final Cut Pro X = iOS

Apple released the new version of their professional video editing software Final Cut Pro. The older version is Final Cut Pro 7, the new version is a huge step forward...X. Within hours of the release, the critics came out in droves. They have been not only negative, but they've also used this to pass judgment on Apple as a company and the decisions they've chosen to make.

I need to make a few things clear before I move on:

  • I do not own Final Cut Pro X (I don't have the extra income to make a $300 purchase, especially for software I don't use on a regular basis)
  • I have read extensively on the new product (when Apple releases a "dud," it is always intriguing) and have considerable experience with Final Cut Pro 7 (though I am in now way, form, or fashion, a "professional" at Final Cut Pro).
  • Apple is a 90-90 company. Apple makes decisions based off of what 90% of the people want/need to do 90% of the time (I didn't come up with this myself, I stole it from Alex Lindsay, founder of the Pixel Corp).
Because of these things above, I've come to one basic conclusion: most who are criticizing the product (no matter their prestige in the video editing world) do not understand Apple as a company.  After all, Apple makes some seemingly-crazy decisions on a regular basis. They seem, under Steve's leadership, to be doing ok.
It is my goal here to draw comparisons between Final Cut Pro X and iOS, as Apple has made strategic decisions with both of the products.  I do, in fact, think that iOS is indicative of the direction and market Apple is pursuing. I think these decisions parallel, in many ways, the decision that Apple has made with Final Cut Pro.  It's not a clean analogy by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it has some ring of truth to it.
It's hard to remember the first iPhone now. But, not too hard.  There were no direct competitors.  Today is the four year anniversary of the launch of the original iPhone. Let's compare some features that we take for granted now, shall we?
The original iPhone had:
  • no multitasking (this is true of the original iPad as well, when it first released)
  • no third-party applications
  • no home screen backgrounds
  • no Microsoft Exchange support
  • no front-facing camera (the original iPad didn't have any cameras)
  • no 3G support or coverage
  • an audio jack that required an adapter for a regular headphone set
  • no intelligent way to deal with notifications
  • no push notifications
  • no user-replaceable battery (still true today)
Slowly, thanks to adequate competition from Android, Apple has added a majority of these over the past four years. Slowly, but surely, Apple has redesigned some of the most basic features in Mac OS X to work in ways that are best suited for the mobile environment.  Many argue whether these are the best strategies or not, but no one argues whether or not they are working...they are.
Because here is what happened with iOS: Apple wanted to make a mobile phone (Steve has discussed on stage that this actually started with the pursuit of a tablet device). It was important that this device be radically different than anything within the market.  Because the original idea came from a tablet form factor, a big candy-bar shaped piece of glass seemed like the best idea. If they could implement a worthwhile digital keyboard (and they did), then the full glass front would prove to be a great solution.  Apple had a leg up on the competition for two reasons:
  • they saw a new phone not as a mobile phone, but rather as a mobile computer.
  • they already had a phenomenal proprietary operating system.
The enabled them to start the iPhone OS with a strong foundation: Mac OS X.  This was, in fact, one of the points in Steve's original keynote when he introduced the iPhone. Here was the problem though: no one was going to use a mouse to navigate the iPhone's screen. Because Apple makes decisions often based on minimalism or simplicity, they also threw out the idea of using a stylus. Steve has said it before: When you throw out the stylus, you have to use your finger. Mac OS X was built so that someone could have the precision of the tip of a cursor.  Without a stylus, you don't have that precision. You have a finger tip, which is much, much cruder.
Apple, taking the foundational elements of Mac OS X, designed a completely new interface to the iPhone's operating system. It is important to understand this distinction. When Windows 7 went "touch-enabled" Microsoft did little more than make it a bit easier for a hardware manufacturer to add a touch screen. A touch experience on Windows 7 today is more than painful (try it and you'll see). Apple took a different approach. The rewrote EVERYTHING so that it would work with the point of a finger. iOS (originally called, iPhone OS) required Apple to, more or less, start over.
And start over they did.  If you look at the history of iOS, it becomes obvious that people at Apple sat down in a room and said, "If we were going to reinvent computing, what would we do different?"  You can imagine that they thought of things like malware, spam, viruses, ease of writing, finding, and downloading apps, battery life, the file system, price, etc. Little by little, with their own unique approach, Apple has fought each of these things. If there are features that people want/desire on an iPad or iPhone that their computer has, Apple slowly implements those features in a way that suits the device that they're running on.  It hasn't been perfect, but it is hard to argue that it hasn't worked.
So, how does this relate to Final Cut Pro?
Final Cut Pro 7 (the older version, just replaced with FCPX) was a 32-bit application. Apple has migrated most of their apps to 64-bit over time. Final Cut Pro was one of the last. And Final Cut Pro was on old product. Somewhere along the line, I imagine that it was decided that to take FCP to 64-bit, a significant amount of re-coding was going to need to have been done. Here is a big change, and it needs to be re-written to work well (sound familiar?).
One must imagine that at some point someone working on this re-coding said, "If we're going to re-write this anyway, why don't we just start over?" as if to say, "If we were going to reinvent movie editing, what would we do differently?"
And so they did. They did this a while back with iMovie. Now it was time for Final Cut Pro. So, they re-wrote it, from the ground up.
We can make a strong argument that Apple is willing to enrage 5,000 high-end professional users in order to satisfy 2 million new users.  That argument would be valid.  We can argue that they lowered the price to entice new users to come.  That argument would be valid.  We can argue that most of Hollywood is already using AVID and is unlikely to switch (editors get very quick and comfortable with editing environments that they know and love).  That argument would be valid.
But my argument is that they're starting over.
There are a lot of things that they've done well this time:
  • Distribution and licensing is much easier as it is handled through the App Store.
  • Stepping up from iMovie is much, much easier with the new FCPX.
  • Many of the extra features that used to exist in stand-alone applications are now well-integrated into the Final Cut Pro experience.
  • Magnetic timelines have made it so that non-educated or non-experienced users can easily perform tasks that used to be a burden.
  • The user interface resembles iMovie so that all of their products have a seamless workflow to them.
  • Rendering is done in the background so that the editor doesn't have to worry with telling the computer to re-render every video edit.
  • Final Cut Pro works works much better with Motion (so much so that using Motion to create FCP Title templates is much, much easier) than it ever did.
  • Everything is 64-bit.
  • Final Cut Pro renders footage more useful now that it has facial recognition built into its logging of clips.
  • Many, many more new features.
The two biggest complaints from the high-end professional world have been:
  • The interface is too foreign (unchangeable and too much like iMovie Pro)
  • It doesn't import old timelines and projects.
Apple has said that the second one is simply impossible. Many might ask, why would Apple go forward with a project that wasn't compatible with the old one? The answer is easy: when there is something better in the future (and for Apple, this is much better) a few sacrifices sometimes need to be made. Remember when the iMac released without a floppy disk drive? Yeah, that didn't work for them at all...
iOS was a complete re-write, leaving out key features until they could add them in a way that made sense.  Final Cut Pro X is a complete re-write, until they can add the features users want in a way that makes sense.  It's a compromise that Apple made to please tons and tons of amateur video editors at a low cost, knowing good and well that the high-high end market may react because it is...different.
It's almost like asking a computer programmer to write an app on the original iPhone.  They'd probably laugh.  When you asked why they were laughing, they'd say, "It doesn't have the right tools."  To which you would reply, "yet."
Does this hurt their growth in the high-end professional market? Probably.
Does it help their growth in the low-end amateur market?  Without a doubt.
The high-end market is tiny.  The low-end market is huge.
Can you really blame a company for making any different of a decision?
People really seem to like their iPhones and iPads.
-B

How do I get iOS 5?

I should have never opened my mouth. All day today, I've received text after message after email about wanting me to give people iOS 5 for their iPhone or iPad. Technically, I broke the NDA that Apple developers have to agree to in the first place. If you were one of these people, don't be offended, but I can't get it to you.

First, I'm not technically a developer.  I've been using a friend's account.  One that he graciously let me log in to.  But it costs $99 a year to do it and he, not having produced any apps, finally saw that it didn't seem to be worth the money.

I've considered paying the fee to be a developer, but I no longer live in a situation where I can be the only one making financial decisions, and it doesn't make sense for me to pay for the account at this point in my life.

So, I'd like to fill you in on what it takes to get a beta iOS release onto your phone:

  • You must be a registered iOS developer. $99 a year.
  • You must download the ipsw file from Apple's servers.
  • Then, in Xcode, you must update your phone.  This is a clean wipe and you'll want to make sure that you backup all of your contents in iTunes first. You'll be able to re-download apps (and now, music) that you didn't back up and bought from iTunes, but it's safe to back up anyway. You must register with not only the UDID of the device, but also with account's credentials inside of Xcode 4.
  • If it works anything like iOS4 did in beta, you'll have to reorganize everything.  Generally, you'll need an updated iTunes (10.5 for this one) for iTunes even to be able to recognize an iOs5 device connected to it.
  • Apple generally works off of a two week beta cycle, meaning that in two weeks, you'll have to do this all again.
    • It's worth noting that this MIGHT change this year as Apple has switched to Delta (meaning, change) updates that update over the air (much like Android). You might not have to do a clean install on your device for the second beta, but we won't know until the release happens.
Thanks to the generosity of a friend of mine, I tried this last year on my 3GS for iOS 4.  Let me explain my issues last year:
  • I had to do a clean wipe every time.  That doesn't sound like a huge deal, but iOS4 introduced folders. iTunes didn't (at the time) recognize folders. So, every clean install also required new folder alignments, etc. That can literally be hours of work for them to be well organized.  Then, in two weeks, the jig is up and you have to do it again.
    • Again, this may be cleaner this year,
  • Every two weeks, when the new beta is released, the old one is not longer functional. A timer is set and you must renew it before time runs out.  Fun.
  • Some apps don't work.  Literally, my TomTom app was useless because iOS4 changed the way that the apps read the iPhone location data.
    • PROOF: Marco Arment (creator of tumblr and Instapaper) tweeted this today:
      • "Developers: there's a VERY good chance your app needs tweaks to work properly on iOS 5. Not fully backwards compatible. Test like crazy."
  • Some general apps didn't work.  We didn't know it at the time, but Apple was definitely testing some features with the camera app.  For the first two betas, the camera didn't work.
  • There's way more.
All in all, I learned a few lessons: don't update on a device that is "mission critical." Apple says explicitly in their documentation that this is for testing purposes only, and that it should not be used on a phone that someone relies on to get around with. Hence, I put iOS5 on my 3GS last night and spent the day playing with it.  It's not bad, but it's slow and iTunes doesn't back up to it well enough yet,  iCloud (really, the functioning part of what we'd like to use it with) is not fully up and running yet and so playing with the new features isn't fully ready. If I were you, I would wait.  It'll save you money, and think about how good it will feel when you finally get hold of it!
If, though, you still want it, you have a few options:
  • Become a registered developer ($99)
  • Buy a name and password from some dude on eBay ($5-$10) and hope he doesn't take your money and run.
  • Watch all the videos that go up on YouTube by all the people who break their agreements with Apple.
  • Jailbreak your current phone and get some of the features (given, not as well employed) and try them out that way.
  • Search for the ipsw file online, download it, try to install it in iTunes (option-click the restore button) and hope for the best.
Sorry I can't be of any more assistance.  I've decided against putting it on my iPhone 4 or iPad (even though I've been very tempted).
-B

The Padfone is Magical

I thought about posting this last week but decided against it because most of my commentary wasn't, as they say, "appropriate". Asus unveiled their new Padfone. And when I say unveil, I mean...unveil.

You HAVE to watch to understand.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=sqjoRMHyYQc]

Jobs gets laughed at for calling the iPad "magical". This takes that to a whole new level.

All in all, the Padfone is an interesting idea (although I'm not sure Asus is the only one who has thought of this, ever heard of the Motorola Atrix?) but I doubt I'd really be interested.  We shall see whether it sells or not.

-B

Inkling Textbooks

I remember hearing about these guys a few months ago. Inkling is the first company to work with all the major textbook companies to redefine what a textbook is, and how it can be used (and paid for) more efficiently on a tablet device. Take a look at the video below to get a feel for what a textbook looks like in this environment.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxthBN3Pb88&]

The head guy of Inkling presented the product at The Wall Street Journal's D9 conference last week. If you have the time and this sort of stuff interests you, it'd be worth your effort to check out his presentation and explanation. You can do so at the bottom of the page here.

They have an interesting business approach and seem to have the right strategic partners. But, it takes them 12 weeks to produce one huge textbook. They need a bigger staff.

You can count me in for being the first to forego carrying giant books to school. I wonder, though, how this might work in the public schools where the textbooks are provided by the school free of charge to the students. I can't see the public school system handing each child an iPad and allowing them to take it home with them, but when prices drop, the world may be open. I suppose someone once said that about the current textbooks, "we are going to let kids take these $300 books home?!?!"

I do, though, think it'd be great to buy my child an iPad instead of forcing them to carry these books. I swear my back still hurts some days from those days in school.

My favorite part of the guy's presentation though was his attention toward the iPad. He said something like, "We think Android and web development is very interesting, but as long as the iPad has 90% of the market, I think we are going to focus our efforts there."

A they say in NBA jam, BOOMshakalaka.

-B

Schubert's "Wohin?" (Performed with an iPad)

I generally go for creative uses of technology with music. Especially when they include an iPad. Words cannot describe or encompass all of the things wrong with this, however.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C9iIKCtVCA&]

-B

Charlie and The Apple Factory

Quality work done by College Humor. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSaqKalBnHE&]

The point, though, makes me think: what is it that defines a product? While the video is meant as humor, and probably nothing else, it strikes me that many in the world think like this.

They write off people like me as "fanboys" and "obsessed" and "brainwashed." I thought the clip with Bill Gates was perhaps the funniest part, but was simply untrue. They don't make the same stuff Apple does. Because if they did, the market would react to their stuff in the way the market is beginning to react to Apple's iOS devices. Microsoft didn't sell Zunes. But it wasn't because the Zunes sucked (alot of people liked the software) but they didn't buy them because the ecosystem of a music store, app store, and iTunes integration simply wasn't there. Zunes have progressed since, but not enough. Microsoft has dropped the product line. The product was more than the...product. Though Apple shows their iPods off more, that doesn't mean they are the same as Microsoft's products.

I suppose that Apple pays attention to showmanship more than other companies do, in fact I submit that THAT is what separates Apple from the rest. I view it as a consistent attempt to create a better product and display it in a way that counts. However, showmanship can be seen right through by the general public if the product itself sucks. In fact, the press would probably laugh at you. This happens to Apple from time to time with products that aren't as well put together as others, but it happens rarely.

On the other hand, many other companies are attempting to improve their showmanship and style in order to compete with a growing Apple market. Their products will have to, at some point, stand for themselves. I think it will only be at that point that it will start to challenge Apple's emotional ties and energy.

As I stood in line for iPad 2, it occurred to me: there is only ONE company in the world that can make that many people wait in lines for that long several times a year...Apple. Try to name another one.

In the end, though Wonka was eccentric and the factory was crazy, they still made the best candy in the world. If they didn't, Charlie wouldn't have wanted any part in it. In order to make it funny and make their "point", College Humor had to focus on the eccentric aspect. If they hadn't, you'd have seen right through it and realized that the metaphor was almost completely parallel. (And that's a good thing)

What showmanship.

-B

UPDATE: Can't watch it? Blame YouTube. And watch it here.

What If There Is No New iPhone?

Since the original iPhone released in 2007, Apple has announced a new iPhone every summer at their conference for developers, World Wide Developers Conference (WWDC). Steve Jobs usually gives the keynote and then the phones ship a week or two after the conference.

Before that, usually, Apple has an event near the end of March that announces the new iOS (previously, iPhone OS) that the phones and later iPod touches will run on.  Last year, Apple held an event in January to announce the iPad and then the iPad released around this time of year. They announced iOS 4 on April 8th last year.

This allows for a few things:

  • The new iPhone to be released in June with the new iOS installed on it.
  • Developers can test their apps with the new iOS prior to its release (it usually spends a few months in beta).

This week, Apple announced WWDC 2011. It sold out in something like 10 hours. Each ticket cost $1,599.

They have 5,000 of them. And they sold out in 10 hours.  Last year it took 8 days.  The year before it took a month. (Anyone here seeing a trend?)

Here's the thing though, most reports are saying that there will be no new iPhone at it.

Their tag line, "Join us for a preview of the future of iOS and Mac OS X."

A preview? Could this mean that there will not be a late March/Early April event highlighting the new iOS? Very possible.  In fact, many bloggers and analysts are saying that they are hearing "Yes."  They're saying that Apple has skirted around saying that there will be no new hardware at WWDC.

Some have said that maybe these rumors are flying so that Apple can really surprise. I say, no. The new phone (almost undoubtedly) would have to be running the new iOS. In order for that to happen, all those apps on the App Store would need to be tested and approved through the process. In order for that to happen, iOS 5 (the presumed name of the new one) would have to be in beta for a few months. The only way there is going to be a new phone at WWDC this year is if it runs iOS 4.  Doubtful? Very.

This raises a question, who might buy a new iPhone this summer and how will they feel about doing so? The latter can be combined with the former to become easier to manage and be broken down into sections or categories:

  • Verizon iPhone customer: You just bought your iPhone 4.  You love it. You waited forever for Verizon to carry it. You don't want it to be "the old model" come June. (Nevermind that if you buy an Android phone today, it is completely feasible and highly possible that it will be the "old model" in a few weeks. You can't predict Android releases, you can't predict how many phones and what features they might all have.)
  • AT&T iPhone 4  late customer: You own an iPhone 4 on AT&T and have for a few months.  The darned Apple store employees didn't tell you that there might be a new phone (as they shouldn't) and you bought it not knowing.  If a new phone comes out, you'll feel like the Verizon iPhone customer.
  • AT&T iPhone 4 early customer: You're on top of this news.  You bought your iPhone on release day and have pretty much decided that if AT&T will let you, you'll buy a new phone every year just so you can have the new one at all times (This is me). You will buy a new one if a new one releases, but you'll be a little disappointed if there is no new phone (This is not necessarily me.
  • AT&T iPhone 3G or 3GS customer: Let's be honest.  You saw that the older model phone was cheaper. So, you bought it. Not a bad idea (all iPhones are great), but now you're behind and your phone doesn't have some of the features as your friend's phone.  The worst part is, you signed a contract with Satan (AT&T) and now you're stuck (especially if you're not the primary line on your contract) with an extended contract and a phone that is becoming less and less relevant because it was "old" when you bought it. You'd get an iPhone 4 if you could, but your friends said to hold out and wait for the new one.  If a new one releases this summer, you'll spend the extra money over the iPhone 4 (presumably to become the cheaper model) and get the iPhone 5. If a new one doesn't release this summer, you're going to be straight up pissed.
  • Other Cellular customer: You're on T-Mobile or Sprint (Or US Cellular or that other thing that Chandler has that only covers Mississippi) and while your carrier doesn't have the iPhone, you're happy with your phone (most likely some sort of Android phone). If there is a new iPhone this summer, you'll be intrigued to see what it can do, but you probably won't switch. It costs too much money monthly and you'd have to get out of your current contract.  If you couldn't stand your current phone, you'd think about it...but as long as you don't hate it, you're wiling to wait it out to see if the iPhone might come to your carrier.

So, what if there is no new iPhone at WWDC this year? If you're one of the first 3, you'll be ok.  You might be a little disappointed, but let's be honest...your iPhone isn't anywhere near outdated. If, though, you're ready for a new phone, this might hack you off a bit. If you're from category 5, you'll be ok.

So, having covered that...let's explore one more side of things.

If Apple doesn't release a new phone in June, that means that their one and only phone will be competing against phones coming out now. The iPhone 4 will be more than a year old. In the cell phone market, that seems like ages.

But - if you compare the iPhone 4, feature by feature, to almost every other phone on the market, it still remains EXTREMELY competitive.  It, still-after being out for 10 months (remember, this is an eternity), has the highest resolution screen, biggest selection of apps, one of the best cameras, best video chat software (does Android's Skype even have video yet?  And by the way, FaceTime is easily the easiest to use software...none of the other apps even come close), one of the best battery lives, and most definitely the best music integration software available.

So, in ten months, the iPhone 4 remains competitive. Extremely. Is it the best phone on the market now? While some of the Android phones beat it out  on things like 4G, Voice Control, Bigger displays, and faster processors...the iPhone still serves as a better experience, for most customers. It's not perfect, but it's pretty dang close. I obviously have a somewhat biased opinion, but I think it is still in the top two or three best phones on the market  And it is almost a year old.

So, what if there is no new iPhone? For you category 4 folk, it might suck.  But for the industry, there is still a way to go to catch up with the iPhone.

I hope there is a new phone. Apple's creations always blow my mind.  They change the industry also.

My wallet, on the other hand, hopes they wait a little longer.

Do you want a new phone? Do you want the new iPhone?

-B

Obama's Got an iPad

"Jorge, I'm the President of the United States...you think I gotta borrow someone else's computer?" [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-WC2TgWwrE]

Ha. In fairness, there was a huge deal made of Obama's blackberry back when he was elected.

I can see the dangers of having a personal communications device when you are the President.

But, the world is changing and yes, Presidents will need to have their own iPads.

I wonder what his favorite app is.

UPDATE: YouTube's integration sucks with some videos.  You can watch it here.

-B

iPad For Seniors

David Worthington at "Technologizer" interviewed his mother, 60 years old, on what it was like to use the iPad--her first computer ever. You can read the entire article here. A fascinating read to be sure.

As John Gruber wrote, "if you don't think this kind of perspective matter, you're nuts."

I have often wondered if tablet computers will replace computers for most of the world. I have documented before how I use the iPad for 90% of my day to day activities. (This probably explains why people see me with the new iPad and think it is a waste. They see it as getting a new toy. I see it as getting this iPad so that I don't have to buy a new computer. It is, for me, a new tool.)

For senior citizens, ones that primarily email and play games all day, this is a serious proposition. You can easily play on the iPad while watching your Soap Operas. Big plus.

It is not perfect though.

When I think about my dad's mother, the one I think about using one of these the most, I'm not sure it would work perfectly for her. She has committed to a group of games that she has played for years and she would not like losing her points, money, or whatever she has inside of each of those games in order to move to App Store games. In addition, a lot of her games are online and in Flash. That really isn't available on any tablet in full from yet.

But there is another problem, a fundamental one for someone like this. To use the device, you have to hold it. You can rest it in your lap (as I am doing now to type on it), or you can sit it up on a desk, but interacting with the device still requires a decent amount of dexterity and strength, something many senior citizens simply don't have.

There are also soooooooo many good parts.

The icons are big. The install of apps is easy. Everything, for the most part, seems to make sense. FAR more sense than ANY typical computer, or computing platform. You don't have to move a mouse. It has direct input. The keyboard comes up only when you need it. The screen is clear, it is travel-able.

If you read David's post, you'll understand some of the great parts about it.

I really do believe this to be the future. I encourage you to come along for the ride.

-B