How I Tried to Watch "Divergent": A Rant

iTunes Digital movie redemption is great. You open the app, navigate to the store, click on "Redeem" and redeem your legally purchased digital copy of your new favorite flick.

One problem: all iTunes movies are digitally protected so that they will not play on an external monitor (including a home projector or secondary display) that is not connected via HDMI. There's no way for them to check the copyright. Thanks, Hollywood.

No worries, though! My purchased BluRay comes with an UltraViolet redemption too! So, I log in with Flixster, my chosen UltraViolet redemption service. That's a whole thing because you actually have two logins: one for UltraViolet and one for Flixster. Nevertheless, I get logged in and attempt to redeem the code.

It starts downloading. Great! It'll play on an external display. Great!

Problem: it's downloading in SD quality. Less than 720p. At the same quality as a DVD. This is beneficial but on a home HD projector, it looks, well, bad.

But why? Why wouldn't I have an HD copy? My physical copy is in 1080p. Certain studios, it seems, only authorize standard definition downloads for all redemptions, regardless of the quality physical media that is purchased.

Piracy of digital media (mainly movies and television shows) may have been curbed *slightly* by the existence of digital redemption codes, but it hasn't come close to eradicating it. Nowhere close.

What would have been an easier way to watch the film? Find it on an online streaming site, load it in the cache, and click "Full Screen". I didn't do that because I've begun to have a conscience about such things. I paid the price as I attempted to watch a film I paid for on an external display that I owned in my own dwelling. And why? All because my display used a different connection.

If I buy an iTunes music file on Apple's service, there are no longer any digital restrictions on what I can do with the file. With it, and the existence of cheap legal streaming options, music piracy has been severely curbed. We're moving that way in film but it's taking far too long.

Some say that film and music are different arts. This is true. Steve Jobs once famously said that no one wanted to rent music, they'd rather own it. Because you might want to watch a movie once or twice in your life, but you may want to listen to a song thousands of times. The music and movie industry are different business models and different arts. But their distribution methods are much much the same.

Some say that the intention is to curb the unlawful presentation of films to large audiences. This isn't true. If I had an HDMI display, I could have played it easy peasy. Or, if I had chosen to play the physical media instead of the file-based media, I wouldn't have had a problem either. But, WHY WOULD I PUT A PHYSICAL DISK INTO A MACHINE? Yuck. What is this, 2005?

Movies, and the consumption of them, is moving to a sans-physical distribution method. It needs to move quicker and reward those who purchase legal material. To do so, the business structure may need to change. It may change the prices we pay.

But until then we'll fight. And cry. And be forced to watch our newly purchased film on an internet-connected television device. But we don't want that. Consumers want to watch what we want, when we want, and how we want.

Sell that to consumers in a non-proprietary way, and you just might sell more films.

-B

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.

Apple TV, iCloud, and The Future

When Steve Jobs introduced iCloud at WWDC, he announced a new thing called iTunes in the Cloud.  In essence, iTunes now makes all of the music that you purchased from iTunes in the past available to download onto any iOS device or Mac you own. One problem though: how much music have you bought from iTunes? In recent years, probably a decent amount.  But in the past, perhaps not as much. Problem solved: he then announced iTunes Match, a $25 a year service that takes your iTunes library and matches the music you own (legally acquired or not) and matches it with the high quality iTunes files.

This makes one thing possible: if your hard drive goes down, your iTunes will be backed up in their cloud services. Thanks Apple, nice touch.

Today, quietly, Apple updated the software in the second generation Apple TVs and allowed for any iTunes TV Shows purchases you ever made to be streamed to the Apple TV over the internet.  Kind of like Netflix, but with content you've already purchased.

Presumably, after more deals are made, iTunes Movies will be next.

Before we press on, allow me to explain to you what I do on a regular basis now. Throughout my life, before things like Netflix and Hulu, I purchased a lot of content on optical discs (DVDs). I got a little addicted to the 4-for-$20 deals at Blockbuster. We bought (or usually, received as gifts) TV seasons of shows that we enjoy.  And pretty soon, we had a nice little library of DVDs that had to find a place to sit in our tiny apartment.

One thing has struck me as strange throughout the past couple of years though: why do we do this? You know where my collection of CDs is? I have no idea. I really don't know.  Every piece of audio I own has been ripped into my iTunes library. Prior to Amazon Cloud Player, Google Music, and iTunes in the Cloud if my hard drive crashed, I'd consider my library of music gone. Not because I don't have the physical CDs (for a lot of them, I do), but because the amount of effort to find and rip would be too much to go through.  From the time when I first learned of digital music players (and particularly, the one that could hold ALL of my library in my pocket...iPod), I knew that optical media was going away. And it was going away quickly.

So, recently, I've been doing the same to my video collection. Slowly, but surely, I ripped all 9 seasons of the King of Queens onto my computer. It took time, yes, but it was well worth it. Because here is the process I used to have to go through to watch an episode:

  1. Decide I want to watch a random episode of the King of Queens.
  2. Go get a season from the bookshelf.
  3. Open the box.
  4. Find a disc (usually three or four per box)
  5. Put it in the DVD player.
  6. Wait for the opening menus (that don't allow you to fast forward) to end.
  7. Pick an episode.
  8. Press play.
But here's how I usually watched an episode: TiVo. If there wasn't a recent episode to watch on TiVo, I just didn't bother.
Last year, Apple introduced iTunes Home Sharing, allowing the new Apple TVs (and an iOS device on the same Wireless network) to access your iTunes library. Thanks to my handy ripping, here is my new process:
  1. Decide I want to watch a random episode of the King of Queens.
  2. Change the input of the TV to Apple TV.
  3. Choose an episode.
  4. Press Play
Because of this, I literally haven't used TiVo in months.


When it comes to personal digital content, I am convinced that this is the only way going forward.


And as always, there's a catch: Apple TV must connect to an iTunes library. Which means that your computer must be on, awake, and iTunes open in order for Apple TV to see it.


So this update today: big news or small news? BIG news. Why? Because now, you can watch anything you purchased through iTunes anywhere.  At the airport and forgot to sync that TV show you've been meaning to watch? No problem, download it from iTunes.  You bought it, right? You have the right to watch it. FINALLY.


But there's a catch: how many TV Shows have you purchased from iTunes?  Not many, I'd bet. Why? Lots of reasons: too expensive, crazy copy protection, only digital forms (can't lend them to people, etc), and more. Instead, you'd do what I did.  Buy it at Target on sale, rip it all and THEN access it. Or if you didn't know how to do that, you'd still be using those silly old things called DVD players.


Which leads me to my proposal: iTunes Match for TV and Movies. PLEASE, Apple.


Here's how iTunes Match works (from what we know).  Apple went to the Music companies and asked for it.  They most likely said no. Then Apple said, "We'll pay you large sums of money.  You're not getting a dime from people stealing music now, how about we do this and give you large sums of money?" To which the music companies thought, "Good point." This is the same reason Netflix has a bunch of content you may never watch.  Netflix approached the studios and said, "Listen, you've got content collecting dust on shelves not making ANY money.  How about we write you a check and you let us stream it?" To which the studios thought, "Good point."


This needs to happen with iTunes TV Shows and Movies. I own a bunch of video content in optical form. And I definitely don't want to have to buy it again. BUT, if I could pay a yearly fee (probably more that $25) and could give it the bar codes to everything I own and then have that content on any iOS device I want, whenever I want, however I want, it'd be worth every dime.


The studios would get more money than I've already paid them, and for those who stole episodes of this and that...the studios would be getting something from someone they weren't getting anything from. Everyone wins.

Every time you go to Target, more and more optical content is priced cheaper and cheaper. Why? Because Netflix and Hulu are popular. And because it makes less and less sense as time goes on.  Netflix doesn't have the King of Queens or the Big Bang Theory. And if I stop paying my subscription, Netflix goes away. I need a way to access my content that I own, in as convenient a way as I have through Netflix and Hulu.


Please, Apple, hear my cry.


-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

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

iOS 5 and iCloud: It's About Time

If you were under a rock today, you missed a few key stories:

Mac OS X Lion has been available in beta for quite some time now. They made all of the features official today.  If you own a Mac (and you should at least be thinking about it), you should check out the details here. The big news: it'll be available ONLY through the Mac App Store for $29 and can be installed on up to 5 machines. The Home Premium 3-pack of Windows 7 for families sell on Amazon for $124.99 (and yes, it took me at least 10 minutes to figure out which "version" of Windows 7 to choose).
Put bluntly, Apple is taking a big step by doing a few things:
  • Showing the world that the Mac is a serious competitor to Windows.
  • Showing the world that it shouldn't cost much to upgrade to the newest Operating System.
  • Showing the world that it should not be difficult or confusing to update.
Apple = Winner, here. Not only is it better software, it's cheaper. (Apple is cheaper? Holy cow, Call Rev. Camping)
iOS5 was the next big update from Apple. It will release in the Fall, most likely right along with the new iPhone.
In the case of iOS5, they're catching up to a lot of features that Android (and yes, even Blackberry) handsets have had for awhile.


Among them:

  • Revamped notifications with an easy way to access them anywhere inside of the OS. (Thank the Lord)
  • iMessage: a direct iDevice to iDevice messaging system (and competitor to the popular Blackberry Messenger).
  • Deep Twitter integration into the OS. (Given, Android doesn't handle the Twitter integration in the same way that the new iOS will, but the effect will be the somewhat the same for the end user)
  • A hardware button for triggering the shutter button on the camera app. (I hear there is an inside joke in the Apple world that goes like this: You can tell which apps and processes in the Apple ecosystem that Steve uses and which ones he doesn't. The ones he uses on a daily basis are perfect and complete in every way.  The other ones sometimes seem to be convoluted and...missing something. I think it has been abundantly clear from the beginning of the iPhone days that Steve never took a lot of pictures of himself, or he would have found searching for that little digital camera button to be the worst experience in the world.)
  • Photo editing in the camera and photos app (this should have been shipped with the original iPhone).
  • And perhaps the biggest one, a true post-PC device. (Android has had the advantage since the T-Mobile G1) Also, see this article to experience what it is like to set up your new phone for the first time (if you've already had an account, etc).


In each and every case, Apple was behind the curve in its software offerings.  Though I haven't used the new iOS (I currently have it installed on my iPhone 3GS but no longer have a normal sized SIM card, thus it can't be activated or used...another change in iOS.  It used to be possible to use old iPhones as iPod touches, without activating them with a SIM card. Doesn't appear possible anymore, whether tethered to iTunes or not.), these updates seem to have been produced and designed well and will be welcome additions to the new OS. I have a feeling too, that there're reasons that Apple had not incorporated these features into the OS thus far. Therefore, I expect that these features will be all around better experiences than on most Android handsets.


Apple = Probable winner, here.


The BIG news: iCloud.


Many expected iCloud to be another music service, much like Amazon and Google have both released recently. If it works well, it's going to be much, much more than that. John Gruber says to think of it as the new iTunes.


It's a better version of iDisk (the current file sharing platform of MobileMe.)  It saves documents without the user even thinking about it. It updates them across devices. It saves contacts, calendars, etc across all devices. It updates them across devices. It saves your music that you've purchased through iTunes. It allows it all to be accessed across all devices. It saves every photo you take or import to every device. It syncs them and makes them available across all devices. If you ripped (or stole, I guess) music and iTunes carries those titles, you can let iTunes match the songs and albums you have.  Thus, they will be available for free download from iTunes on any Apple device. This costs $25 a year and appears to be limitless.  It requires no uploading of your library to a cloud, it requires no data cap, AND it gives you a higher encoded (better quality) version of the song. This, my friends, is the jackpot.


But I've got a few questions still, since it seems a bit strange to me:
  • In regards to music, it is essentially doing what it had been doing with Apps for awhile. If you bought a song, you can get it anywhere (even if you delete it) at any time.
    • This seems great, but it would be even better if it was integrated into the iPod app. This way, you could stream over the internet without having to download to a local device just to play. Though, I'll take this set up any day over the current situation.
  • When you log into an account with a new device, you can set it up with your Apple ID and password and it will download your backup of your device and sync all of your data, apps, contacts, email.  Essentially, you could lose your device, go to the store and buy a new one, log in, and your device would be exactly how you left it the night before when it backed up.
    • This is great.  EXCEPT, my wife and I are trying to use the same account. That way, when I buy an app, she can also download it for free (without having to pay for it). So can we both use the same iCloud account? Would that mean that any picture I take show up on her device too? Does that mean any song I buy will show up directly on her device too? Does that mean that any app she downloads show up on my device?  You can turn these features on and off, but I'd like the music I download to go to my iPad.  But I don't necessarily want it to go straight to hers. If we split accounts again (not that big of a deal), can she still log out of hers and log in to mine to get the app I just bought? Does the app then transfer to her iCloud account? It isn't clear, and seems unlikely.  With a $.99 app it doesn't matter, but with a $50 app it would.


This is a new look at the iTunes ecosystem and how we will all interact with it henceforth.  There is surely going to be some confusion, etc. Android had the backing of Google's widely used contacts, calendars and mail, but has not yet been able to fully integrate Google Docs and Picasa in a way as well done as iCloud is about to.


(It is important to realize that Google puts all of their eggs into the cloud idea.  NOTHING is stored locally, except for apps and small pieces of data...that if technically could be stored in the cloud alone, Google would choose to. Google's word processor: Google Docs. Google Docs is nice, but when you compare it to the new ecosystem that Apple's Pages will have with iCloud integration, it doesn't even compare. It will be interesting to see how Apple attempts to conquer Google Docs with multi-person/site file editing, the one thing Google Docs has on apps like Pages and Word.)


Apple = Winner, as long as it works.


We shall surely see.  I for one think it is a welcome upgrade.  None of it is as revolutionary as the iPad, but will make all of us iOS and Mac users much happier in accomplishing day to day tasks.


I can't wait.
-B

Goodbye Music Industry?

About a year ago, Mashable posted the Infographic below.  I'll explain what it is, then you can have a look at it. It outlines how digital music has affected the music industry's profit models. With the advent of streaming services becoming more and more prevalent in our worlds and lives, you can quickly see how many times an artist has to have their song aired on a streaming service to make minimum wage ($1160 a month).

However, it is a bit of a loaded graphic because EVERYONE knows that artists don't make their money from album sales, they make it from touring and getting other artists to sing their songs (royalties is where the money is).

Another point to throw out as well: is the invention of home recording software making it easier and easier for artists to create their own work and sell it? Are independent artists able to market themselves like record companies can market? Can streaming music services like Pandora, Spotify, Rdio, and Mog help do some of marketing for an independent artist?  You can probably answer all of these yourself. You will probably notice that these answers don't really correspond or get along with each other.

I think the bottom line is this: while record companies have been getting rich off of artists' talent for years because they were willing to risk the capital up front, they have been unable to continue on that profit path because the original Napster and other P2P networks came through and made it incredibly easy to steal (I have argued before that this might be because the record companies failed to innovate). Trying to find a way to fix this, companies that didn't care about the profitability of the record companies (like iTunes by Apple) came through and figured out a way to do this digital download stuff legally.

Record companies lost out. Because of that, artists lost out. And because those responsible for the content creation have let others innovate for them, they've lost even more.

Friends, it is time for the music industry to innovate with new models THAT THEY CONTROL of profit gain so that they can be sustainable.  If this doesn't happen soon, the whole industry might close up shop.

See graphic below.-B

iPad 2 - The Thoughts

So, it's about time I get around to this. I've held off in posting this as I got mine on launch day and my parents have spent the last week waiting in long lines, just to be let down. Until today...when they had the luck of the Irish. So, how is the iPad 2?

I think I can break it down into a few different categories: Speed, Cameras, Software, and Thinness. And then...there's demand.

Speed. Is the iPad 2 really faster? The iPad 2 is faster than the original iPad. Apple claims it is about twice as fast, with 9x faster graphics. I'm not sure about the graphics, but they do seem to be faster. I imagine as apps continue coming out the graphics will really start to shine. When they take advantage of it, it'll be great. As far as the CPU speed...yes, yes, yes. Everything is faster on the iPad 2. Apps open and load faster, Safari is faster (thanks to iOS 4.3), and things don't hang like they used to. The original iPad is not slow, by any means, but there is a noticeable difference between it and the iPad 2.

Cameras. How are the cameras? Well, the iPad 2 has cameras. When Steve introduced it, he announced them as "video cameras" and didn't say anything else about them. When the iPhone 4 was announced, he made a huge deal about the quality of the camera. Take a hint from those facts, the cameras on the iPad are not quality. That's why he didn't talk much about them, that why he didn't display photos that had actually been taken on the device. The cameras are about the same as you seen on the current iPod Touch. Which means the rear camera is a little less than a megapixel. People will not be using it to take photos. Unless they are in a jam. I, unsurprisingly, don't think this is a negative aspect. Taking pictures with the iPad is a bit awkward. If you mix this fact with the idea that they need to keep costs down, this move makes total sense. If you want to use it for images, Apple sells a camera connection kit where you can plug in your camera and use the iPad to share the images.

Software How is iOS 4.3 and apps? iOS 4.3 is not too different from the 4.2.1 running on current original iPads. It has some nice updates to AirPlay and the good news is that if you have an original iPad, you get iOS 4.3 too. So what are you waiting for? Plug it in and update it! But...the apps...are unreal. Specifically GarageBand and iMovie. iMovie will only run on the new iPad and GarageBand will run on both, although much better on iPad 2. I own a lot of music apps for the iPad. A lot of them. GarageBand easily blows them all out of the water. It is diverse, it is well designed, and it is fast. You can record up to 8 tracks, whether midi or audio, and control and edit them with swipes of the finger. This is easily one of the best things Apple has done in awhile. iMovie is great too. It is not quite as powerful as the desktop version and doesn't hold a candle to FinalCut Pro, but for editing together vacation clips on the go, it works pretty well. It is not very customizable but works flawlessly. You can publish to all kinds of things right from the app as well. Here is an example of something I made of launch day: [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ooud8Ppxto&] Anyone can edit movies now. That fact alone is VERY cool.

Thinness Does it really matter? The quick answer is no. The original iPad is pretty thin already, and still thinner than all the competition out there. But the iPad 2 is still thinner...with the same battery life. The iPad 2 is thinner than my iPhone 4. And, honestly, I don't see how it could get any thinner. It feels better in the hand than the original iPad, especially if you have a case on your original. The iPad is not really any lighter (although it is a little bit) but it feels lighter because of the thinness. It is a significant difference (although it wouldn't require someone upgrading their old iPad). I didn't consider how much this matters, but it does. On my music stand at church, this takes up a lot less room.

Demand. Do people want these? YES. I arrived to the Apple store for iPad 2 on launch day at 2pm. I knew they would start selling them at 5pm. I was a bit confused about how long the line was at first, but I was probably about 95 people back in line. I was worried if they would have enough. My parents went back to the mall in Florida every day since then. Today, they got one, or two. Apple really has 18 different versions of the iPad 2, and because of that, supply was low...especially if you were looking for a certain version. The sold 10 million original iPads last year. I suspect they sold at least 2 million iPads, maybe more in the last week. Every Apple store is out country wide and the online store now says you'll have to wait more than a month for delivery. More than a month.

It's a great device. If you're new to iPad, it is worth buying if you don't mind the short live $100 premium over last year's model. (If you want last year's model, look fast when they're gone, they're gone.)

I suspect that Apple might be ready for you to buy too.

With the exception of RIM's playbook, I don't see any competition for it anytime soon. Seriously. They are way ahead.

Do you have one? Do you want one? Please share!

-B

Come In Pluto

In 2006, not long after the IAU took away Pluto from our planetary system, Jordan Stout, Andrew Norton, and myself wrote a song. A cry to Pluto if you will.

Andrew wrote the poetry, I saw it on the Facebook group and wrote this plea. We went on to write an entire album. Perhaps we will sell them on iTunes someday.

Lyrics will be below the video:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgMl9nGIWKc]

To you it may not seem that bad

But a life without Pluto is very sad

What did he ever do that was so wrong?

That is why I will forever sing my song...

 

Come in Pluto, can you hear my cry?

I'll fight for you until the day I die

And, come in Pluto no we won't let go

A dwarf planet it still a planet, no?

 

So don't just sit back while this goes on

Stand up and be part of the revolution

Bring pluto back to where he belongs

Together we can right this terrible wrong.

 

Come in Pluto, can you hear my cry?

I'll fight for you until the day I die

And, come in Pluto no we won't let go

A dwarf planet it still a planet, no?

A dwarf planet is still a planet, yes.

-B