LIVEdigitally

Tag Archives: ipod

Thanks, Steve!

Posted on by

Apple is one of those companies that tends to polarize people. Some hate them for “closed” systems.  Others love them for beautiful products.  Some call them evil and bullying.  Others say they open markets.  I’m not one to debate, so I’ll just cut to the chase by saying Apple, in the past decade, has contributed more to consumer technology than most other companies combined.  And it’s fairly hard to argue that the Apple of today is entirely the company Steve built.

Steve Jobs’ resignation hits hard, but the only thing that comes as a surprise is the seeming suddenness of it (Yeah, but I mean the very end, when he actually resigned. That was extremely sudden).  Here’s a list of some of the things, love em or hate em, that we should all be thankful of Jobs/Apple for (and yes, I’m sure some dude in some lab somewhere invented all these things about 300 years ago, but if it weren’t for Apple, we all wouldn’t know about them):

  • Internet-based music distribution: from iTunes to Pandora to Spotify to Turntable, had it not been for Apple creating the iPod+iTunes ecosystem, it’s unlikely the music industry would’ve had sufficient motivation to enable “digital” as fast as they did.  The MP3 market would’ve grown much slower, resulting in less buy-in from the industry, resulting in a lack of streaming and on-demand services.  Would we have something like it today?  Probably.  Would it all be priced the way it is today?  Doubtful.  It took the muscle of the iPod’s dominance to enable Apple to negotiate the entire music industry into the $0.99 pricing schema we have today.  It’s likely that companies such as Amazon and Sony would’ve ended up much strong in this space, but we’d probably be paying more for the same content, and I’d wager services like Pandora would never have gotten off the ground.
  • “Real” smartphones: Unquestionably smartphones predate the iPhone.  Blackberries had some “smartness” and earlier generation Windows Mobile devices actually provided quite a bit of functionality, not to mention the granddaddy of them all, the Palm/Treo lines.  But let’s face it, the iPhone really changed everything.  Capacitive touchscreens (remember the stylus? nope, me neither), app stores (more on that to come), and more, all thanks to the iPhone’s success.  I think Nokia and RIM would still be considered the leaders in the mobile space if Apple had never shipped an iPhone, and team Android should be exceptionally grateful for its existence.
  • Gestures: Pinch + Zoom? Swipe? Multi-finger scroll?  One could argue this is just a subset of the smartphone, but it’s not, as gesture support has improved the computing experience overall.  Prior to the “two finger scroll” feature on MacBooks, the only thing even close was the variety of PC manufacturers who enabled the right-side scroll region on their inputs.  Once again, an area where numerous companies could’ve beaten Apple to the punch, but simply didn’t.
  • The Internet: Just kidding.
  • That's a Vaio?

    Nice Macbook, er, Vaio.

    Bringing Sexy Back: From the moment Steve rejoined Apple through to today, the company’s products have set the standard for technology aesthetics.  Whether it’s the sleek industrial design, the minimalistic approach, the amazing attention to detail, or the use of aluminium, it’s as if Apple showed up in a Porsche while everyone around them were driving Volvos (boxy, but good).  As a result, there’s been an almost frenetic rush to make distinctive, beautiful technology.  And some of it’s even been pretty good!

  • Changing Retail: When Apple first announced they’d open their own retail stores, they were literally laughed at. There’s now over 300 of them, and they are unbelievably successful.  They are considered the best retail customer experience overall. They are wildly profitable.  Consumers enjoy going there even when they don’t buy things.  In fact, my only surprise here is the lack of copycats – nobody’s even close to creating a similar experience at such a grand level.  Well, maybe in China…
  • The App Economy: Yes, my PalmPilot had installable apps, and so did my Windows Mobile phone.  But it took Apple to create a nearly $4-BILLION app economy and marketplace.  My hunch here is without Apple revolutionizing the concept (by, again, creating a full end-to-end experience regarding discovery, installation, and most importantly, payment, for apps), we’d have nothing even as advanced as the Android market is today, which I still consider to be floundering in the dust relatively (simple tip to radically improve said experience: sort all apps AND reviews by device – will fix 80% of fragmentation problems in one fell swoop).
  • The iPad: Remember when tablets really sucked?  Guess what, they still do.  But what doesn’t suck is the iPad.  Other than speculation and conjecture, the reality check is the only successful “tablet-like product” on the market is the iPad, all others pale in comparison.  I could write a dozen or so blog posts on what everybody else is doing wrong, but the thing that matters here is all the things Apple did right.  They made something that perfectly fits into a few dozen million peoples’ lives.  Flash? Nobody cares.  USB?  Nobody cares.  “Closed system”?  Nobody cares.  The iPad, as if by magic, navigated through the waters of touch-input devices to create the admittedly-not-perfect product, but so far beyond “good enough” that it’s changed computing as we know it.

I’m sure I’m missing a bunch of things that the company did that I can’t even recall at this moment, but these were the ones that hit me as most important.  How did they do it?  The comfort in saying “no, we can’t ship that yet, it’s just not ready.”  The comfort in saying “it’s okay if we aren’t providing every feature known to man, just so long as our features are great.”  The comfort in saying “we don’t have to be perfectly compatible with all other technologies that have come before us, if we make a strong ecosystem ourselves.”  The comfort in saying “we believe this is what people really want, and we’re going to give it to them.”

These are statements that no other technology manufacturer or provider make, so far as I’ve seen in my career (with brief exceptions, such as Sling, Flip, and a handful of others).

When Steve Jobs rejoined Apple in the late 90s, it’s well known that he rapidly ripped apart products, cut staff, and trimmed down the entire operation to get radically focused.  Since then, beyond all the technology and products, what Steve’s done the most is built the very DNA of the Apple that we know today.  The real contribution Steve made, in my opinion, was creating a culture of building to perfection, and understanding what that means as a core essence.

As I commented on TechCrunch, “Much like when a pitcher walks from the mound, the entire tech industry should stand and give a round of applause for one who has contributed so much.”

Time to call it a day

When a pitcher takes that walk, sometimes it’s because they’re pulled.  But every now and then, that pitcher gave his all, kicked some amazing ass, and it’s just time for him to take a rest.  But along the way he carried or maybe even made the game.  And his spirit carries the team even further.  And for those of us watching on the sidelines, we rise with applause, out of thanks and respect.

You rocked our world!

And then the game carries on.

Why Trying To Destroy Online Information Is A Dumb Idea

Posted on by

Trying to put a muzzle on the internet is dumb. The nature of the web encourages users to create and share material easily and information wants to be free.

As we should have learned from the Streisand Effect, attempting to remove online information can have unintended consequences. That is, trying to delete “unwanted” websites only draws more attention to the content on said websites and makes the person attempting to stifle information look like a complete tool.

Take the recent outcry against Wikileaks. In attempting to remove the informationfrom the web, critics have only amplified the reach of the Wikileaks website. And even if the site is shut down, the information on the site can never really be destroyed.  Further, if it goes away, there’s a more-than-average probability that something else will return in its place, only less individually targetable.

Remember the end of Star Wars (the real one, not the one with the racist puppets), Obi Wan Kenobi tells Darth Vader that he can never really be defeated. If Wikileaks is struck down, it will only become more powerful than we could possibly imagine.

The recording industry and Napster serves as a classic example of what not to do online. The RIAA saw their files getting shared by music enthusiasts and immediately tried to shut down the system through legal means. The results? The RIAA did get Napster to go legit. They also then birthed distributed clones, now in the form of bit torrent sites around the world.  Only this time they are unstoppable.

What if, instead of the world of RIAA lawsuits, underground file sharing and billion dollar iPods, there was a different industry response? What if the music industry had worked with music fans to share content (for free and for profit), connect people with bands that they love and help individuals, music and technology converge in a positive, fun way? Isn’t that vision preferable to the world we inhabit today?

What is true for the record industry specifically is also true for the internet in general. When information appears that outrages, shocks, angers or offends you, the answer is not to destroy that information. This only leads to more websites, prolonged lawsuits and increased attention for the unwanted content.

Instead, individuals and organizations should recognize that information – once it is online – is almost impossible to erase. A better engagement strategy works with established structures of information and tries to compromise, collaborate and adapt. Do not try to forcibly take things offline.

I don’t exactly know what “should” be done with WikiLeaks.  I just know that taking it down is unquestionably part of the path to the Dark Side.

The difference between Fragmentation and Disparate Products, a counterpoint

Posted on by

My friend Louis Gray wrote a piece tonight mostly about the new Apple TV, but focusing on how he believes Apple is introducing fragmentation into their ecosystem.  Go ahead, give it a read.

I was writing the following as a long comment, and just as I was wrapping up I thought it would serve better as a blog post.  Please consider it a counter-point, and you should definitely read Louis’ arguments first.  Go ahead, click there, then read all the way through the comments until you get to…

“I’ve yet to see anybody dispute the facts about each device running a different flavor of the OS, which is the crux of the issue.”

The reason nobody’s disputing it is because it’s not actually an issue.  Apple does not, for the most part, have fragmentation in their platforms (other than tiny exceptions, which I’m sure someone will point out snarkily in the comments).  This is about disparate products, not a fragmented operating system implementation (though I do completely agree that the iTunes experience is woefully out of date within the overall product line Apple sells).

First, all the comparisons about what does/doesn’t play on Apple TV on day 1 of shipping are irrelevant – the wide swath of Americans who will buy the device will pick it up later this year (you know, November-ish), by which time the content library will be different.

Second, it’s not as if there’s any cross-product features, other than the few apps which happen to run both on an iPad and on an iPhone/Touch.   When we talk about Android fragmentation it’s because all the products are being labeled as having a common platform, yet there is MASSIVE discrepancy between user interface, app compatibility, features, etc.

Third, Apple isn’t out there marketing “iOS 4 devices” other than when it needs to in re updating iPads/iPhones.  And even then, it’s highly product-specific.  Android, on the other hand, *is* a promise/value expectation (and I’ll avoid commenting on the quality at this point).  When Google touts new Android features and someone with a Droid Eris (my former, sad sad sad phone) hears about them, they have *NO WAY* of knowing they will never ever get them.

Fourth, and last, is about the developers.  Ultimately fragmentation is most keenly an issue to them (even more than consumers), as it impacts their livelihood.  So if you are developing for Android, yet your app won’t run on the mega-phone Evo, and runs poorly on a Droid X, but is nice on the HTC Incredible (my current, much better, but still lacking phone), how are you supposed to communicate that to consumers, who will inevitably write poor reviews, not trust your brand, and ultimately not spend money with you.

That’s the problem with fragmentation.  Now let’s look at developers for iOS – they know exactly (1) how big their market potential is, (2) where the money is flowing, (3) how to build apps within the ecosystem, and (4) with 100% certainty, which devices their apps will run on.  A bad user experience is utterly the developers’ faults, not due to some random hardware maker poorly implementing an OS.  And if/when Apple TV gets iOS 4 (my prediction is it doesn’t happen until the next version of the device, but I’m getting a lot of these wrong these days, so who knows???), developers will have a clear path to build whatever apps they can, knowing exactly how they will perform.

Predictions for Apple event, Sept 1 2010

Posted on by


Watch live video from Jeremy Toeman on Justin.tv

In a nutshell:
– iPad iOS 4.0
– refreshed iPods, with wifi
– no 3x3cm iPod touch
– adding “touch” to iPod classic
– iTunes with internet streaming & sync
– no iTV announcement today
– iBeatles

Apple to Developers: Shall We Play A Game?

Posted on by

Apple announced new MacBook Pros today, and I think Michael Gartenberg addresses about 40% of the importance with his post on it.  The other 60% (maybe more), in my opinion, is about gaming.

Gaming’s long been a thorn in the side of Mac users.  In a previous era the Mac platform represented only the most miniscule of computer purchasing, and even today it’s just a fraction of all computers sold.  That is, until you look explicitly at the home and high-end laptop markets, at which point the story gets more interesting.

Last month it was announced that Steam (a gaming platform) was coming to the Mac.  Today, inside their official announcement for the new MacBook Pros they explicitly state:

More than twice as fast as the GeForce 320M, the powerful new GeForce GT 330M provides incredibly smooth, crisp on-screen graphics for the most demanding 3D games, creative software and technical applications.

Video games are an $11 BILLION dollar industry. That’s more zeroes than I can type.  And almost none of it is on the Mac platform.

Yet.

I’m a big believer in betting on trends.  Further, if I apply our typical analysis as to determining market viability for gaming on the Mac, here’s how it looks:

  1. Does the infrastructure already exist?
    It does now. Macs have sufficient hardware and a mature enough OS to enable immersive gaming (a requirement for non-console games), as well as well-integrated connectivity and media sharing for casual gaming.
  2. Does the product tie into a rising trend?
    As stated above, “heck yeah”.
  3. Is there already an “acceptable” solution to the problem?
    No, the only way to play games on the Mac today is either (1) use BootCamp or (2) play Web-based games.  Minorly acceptable for some, but clearly not touching on that $11B number.
  4. Is there a perceived need?
    Quite clearly, people like to play computer games, and there just aren’t many for the Mac. So yes.
  5. Is there a want for the product?
    Gaming is one of those rare “need/want” industries.  Some basic googling will find evidence on both sides of “are computer games a waste of time” but let’s simply agree it’s debatable.  It most certainly is a high “want” and has tons of emotional and cultural significance these days.

I believe Apple has laid all the groundwork necessary to entice game developers to really pay some attention to their platform.  They’ve showed them a clear revenue path through iPod/iPhone/iPad distribution models, and the Mac is the final bridge to cross.  The only downside whatsoever is the amazing costs that go into modern game production, with budgets reaching $100 million, and climbing.  But considering a $50-60 price tag, and popular games selling 1-3 million (or more), the possibilities are unquestionably there.

Game on!

What Would Jobs Do?

Posted on by

If you follow gadgets or new tech and you are not aware that Apple is introducing “something” next Wednesday, you are either (1) my wife or mother or (2) awaking from a long long sleep. Now along with virtually anything Apple does, or contemplates doing, or doesn’t contemplate doing but others contemplate on their behalf, the rumor mill on this “iPad” is just out of control.  Not a day has gone by this week, and probably the week prior, where numerous stories on TechMeme centered on the speculated device.  My turn.

I’ve tried to think about this entirely with the following perspective:

  1. Tablets, as we think of them today, suck (unless you are in a very specific niche, or perhaps a crazed fanboy).
  2. Steve Jobs does not like to ship suck-y products.
  3. Apple does not focus on niche markets.
  4. Some of the rumors we’ve seen are likely correct (a million monkeys on a million keyboards…).
  5. Apple will still likely do one or more things nobody’s even hazarded a guess at.

So with that in mind, what is Apple up to?

Some more assumptions:

  • It’ll have 3G services built-in.  I’d hope for Verizon, but that limits Apple to its international possibilities.  And there’s no way they’d waste the money on two different 3G chips.
  • It’ll have a “built-for iPad” program at launch.  Still nothing from Droid on this front, but you can bet that Griffin, Case Logic, Kensington, and all the other players will have cases and other accessories coming to market extremely soon.
  • It’ll have the iPod connector, USB, DisplayPort and an SD card slot.  A webcam is highly probably, and I wouldn’t be surprised with an IR interface as well.
  • It might have some clever method of charging (magnetic induction).

Here are some thoughts on the product itself, in no particular order:

  • Sub $300 e-reader + tablet: How about if Apple directly takes on the Kindle, and throws in a great version of Safari, and a Verizon 3G connection?  They sell it at cost, give it a beautiful touch-screen, make it all iPhone-y, but keep it as a simple device.  At this price point it does compete with the iPod Touch, technically, but not in reality, as they are such vastly different products.  We know from the Kindle’s success that there’s a market for the category, and we know that the Nooks and Sonys of the world won’t stand a chance versus Apple and Amazon as the category leaders.  In the “what seems kinda possible and stands a chance at selling in the millions” way of thinking, this is definitely a contender.  Not as sexy as some other options, but possible.
  • Detachable MacBook screen: I’ve come back to this one a few times, as it seems to fit “the world we know” fairly well. What if instead of it being a whole new device, Apple upgrades all MacBooks to have touchscreens that are detachable.  In other words, the keyboard part of the laptop comes off.  It would require some fairly sophisticated engineering to pull off, as the bulk of the computer itself is in the keyboard area, but if anyone’s going to do it.  I think it’s a bit farfetched, but only because I can’t conjure up the physical realities that would be required for it to work.
  • Mac “Accessory”: Had an interesting chat about this concept the other day – basically it’s the idea that the tablet is a remote desktop viewing device that lets a user log in to another Mac elsewhere on the Internet.  It would probably have an internal Web browser as well, and some simple other features, but effectively it’s a “dumb terminal” for a more powerful computer.  And in a coup de grace Applesque way to do things, it would probably let you log into a Windows 7 computer as well (assuming you got the right drivers installed, of course).  I don’t think this is a strong possibility, as it doesn’t seem mass-market enough, but it would become a really interesting competitor to a netbook in regards to being a “disposable computer”.
  • Media Slate: So picture a device that’s sleek and sexy, can play back movies, TV shows (including live TV), Internet radio (lala), show pictures/slideshows, play simple games (app store), and be otherwise completely entertaining.  It connects from anywhere, has enough internal storage to last a nationwide flight, and is all about fun.  Further, it comes with numerous context access options, including free services, a la carte purchasing/rentals, and subscription options.  It probably also has a Webcam and native iChat support. I’m fairly bullish on this concept, as it seems to fit in with the Apple iLifestyle very well, and makes for a useful product.

Those are all good, and nice safe bets.  I don’t think I’ve hazarded guesses that others haven’t.  But now I’ll (try to) get more interesting.

  • What if the entire device were touch-sensitive? Front AND back.  Fully gesture enabled, not just multi-touch but multi-hand.  Remember, one of the things that makes tablets suck is figuring out how to hold it right – so let’s assume they “magic mouse” the whole thing, and made it smart enough to figure out the difference between the “holding hand” and the rest of it.
  • What if it’s a flexible display instead? Okay, this is probably stuck in the in my dreams category, but it would be crazy impressive if they skip the whole concept of a tablet and move the industry up a notch with a flex display.
  • What if there’s a built-in pico projector? Going on the “media slate” theory, but kicking into gear the concept of “fun for the whole family”.  Also doubles-up as a productivity device for showing presentations.

And lastly…

What if there’s no tablet?

Seriously, it’s a real possibility.  What if instead of showing us a tablet, they show a 4G iPhone and impressive updates to other devices (or not)?  What if they announce media streaming services instead?  We all know Apple plays their own game, and if they haven’t figured out how to make this thing magical, I don’t think they’d want to ship it.  It would be a bit of an odd strategy, as there seem to be a few too many pseudo-confirmed rumors, but then again, Apple doesn’t deal with terrorists rumors.  It’s a possibility…

The Third Age of Gadgets nears its end

Posted on by

The iPad TabletMac MacTouch iSlate will supposedly launch next year, and with it comes the end of an era.  For that statement to make any sense, I should probably backtrack a bit and give a little explanation.  While considering the impact of this product (should it even exist beyond the labs in Cupertino, that is), I’ve been thinking back on the history and evolution of gadgets.  Incidentally, I’m only considering electronic gadgets, but not including computers (or laptops) nor kitchen-related items (pretty much everything in the modern kitchen is some kind of gadget).  I’ve grouped them (in my own mind) into three major phases, and in pure Tolkienish geeky wonderfulness, I’m calling them Ages.

The First Age

Definition: For sake of discussion, I’ll define the First Age of Gadgets as starting with calculators and LCD watches (and, of course, calculator watches).  Sticklers will quickly point out something I’m missing, but in my opinion that’s when the concept of “gadgets” really got kicking.  These products (1) required batteries and (2) did one thing, typically pretty well.  These early gadgets were typically fairly functional in nature, not very gimmicky or showy.  They were also workhorses as compared to modern products – you can drop most “old school” products and not fear for significant damage (probably directly related to LED or single-line LCD outputs).

Timeframe: roughly the early 1970s all the way into the 1990s. That said, many products came out in the ’90s that would still be considered First Age gadgets, per the definition above.

Defining gadget: tie between Walkman and Game Boy.  Both effectively defined a product category, and still do to this day in most respects. It’s far too easy to argue that the iPod is just a “modern” Walkman, and ditto for the DS/PSP.

Memorable gadgets: Mattel Football, Atari 2600, NES, Speak and Spell (the first DSP was inside it), the Polaroid instant camera, and HP calculators (they could graph stuff!), DiscMan (also great, but not as revolutionary as the WalkMan).

The Second Age

Definition: In a nutshell: USB connectivity and/or card reader integration. Slightly more detailed: the Second Age of gadgets is about products that were able to connect and/or share data with a computer (but did not include WiFi) and/or cell phones.  Gadgets started becoming a little more pervasive, a little more mainstream, a lot more pop culture. In addition to the gadgets themselves, the category of gadget accessories really began to boom (chargers, carrying case, rechargeable batteries, etc).  This was also the dawn of the gadget blogs. I asked Peter Rojas, founder of Gizmodo, if he could recall why he launched the site: “It was an experiment, something Nick and I started almost by accident.  I don’t think either of us thought blogging would become as big as it did. People are a LOT more interested in gadgets now than when I started Gizmodo in 2002 – it’s become part of pop culture.”

Timeframe: late 1990s to mid-2000’s.  Obviously there were definitely earlier cell phones and we still have completely disconnected gadgets coming to market today, but this is still a fairly definable time.  Interesting, I referred to this timeframe in another “look back” kind of post last year.

Defining gadget: tough call, but it’s the iPod. No other device was so utterly perfect at the concept of end-to-end interaction between the device and the computer.

Memorable gadgets: TiVo, Motorola StarTac and RAZR, PalmPilot and Palm V, Sony PlayStation, Rio mp3 players (especially the Karma), Casio Exilim and Sony U10/U20 digital cameras, Creative Nomad Jukebox, Garmin Nuvi.

The Third Age

Definition: Internet access and connectivity. Devices had either built-in Internet access, or some hybrid method of interacting with the Internet to share content, data, or services.  In many cases Third Age devices are simple evolutions to their predecessors, but some innovated distinctly enough so that there’s no blurry lines.  Just as the USB-only devices evolved to a point of wacky ideas, we’ve already seen the same thing begin to occur in the current era.

Timeframe: mid-2000’s to 2010.

Defining gadget: This is a debatable call, but I’m going to go with the BlackBerry. It truly ushered in the notion of a converged device with phone and Internet access, and was the major game changer of usage behaviors with regards to mobile devices.  Obviously the iPhone has had its own impact, but one could argue that (1) the BlackBerry is a clear success, and (2) the iPhone might never have come out without it.

Memorable gadgets: iPhone (see, it’s there!), Xbox 360, Harmony 880 remote, Slingbox (disclosure: I built it, so I’m biased, but I think it belongs on the list!), Sonos (disclosure: I have worked with Sonos in the past, but again, I think it’s hard to argue that any other product has so well integrated the Internet and personal media and home gadgets), Eye-Fi (like it or don’t, but it certainly opened new concepts), the Flip, the Kindle. Oh, and of course the Twitterpeek (just kidding).

The Fourth Age

Regardless of the iSlate, we are at the brink of a new generation of gadgets that utterly change the way we think of technology and mobility. Internet access and data synchronization/sharing will be considered ubiquitous and pervasive across new devices.  I consider gadgets like the FitBit right on the fringe of what I’m talking about – designed for a connected life, but don’t focus on a typical way of being used. My expectations for what I’m calling the Fourth Age of gadgets center around three major changes and improvements in displays, inputs, and power.

Displays: I assume we’ll be seeing flexible display surfaces (folding, roll-up, etc) that change the way we physically interact with a device.  The concept of a hard, flat screen (even a touchable one) seems very outdated to me. I think the real revolutionary tablet will be the first one with some form of flexible display (and my money’s on Apple for making this happen). I also foresee better use of microprojectors to remove the need for an on-board display at all.

Input: Next generation products should have inputs much more interesting than just a keyboard.  Let’s assume the concept of gestures is one good starting point, but it really needs to be taken further than the pinching and scrolling effect.  I’m also anticipating more use of optical recognition (like Natal uses) to simple “watch” the user control a device – gestures are even more interesting when you don’t have to touch a screen. Voice recognition and input is basically already here, but yet to be fully put to work (thanks David for that suggestion). Another is more interesting uses of accelerometers and motion sensors, where a gadget is interacted with simply by how you move it around.

Power: I consider batteries, even the most modern Li-Ion ones, one of the key deficiencies in gadget design. Batteries create massive inefficiencies in cost structure, environmental impact, and product usage. As a stopgap solution, I am a fan of the wireless charging concepts, but that’s really just a big bandaid in my opinion. We are right around the corner from making rechargeable fuel cell based devices very feasible. This is a good step, but I’m anticipating some more monumental leaps.  As per my thoughts on flexible displays, I think the materials sciences engineers out there are cooking up some very innovative solutions to make gadgets last longer, weigh less, and be notably cheaper to produce.

For a little sanity check, I asked Josh Topolsky, Editor-in-Chief of Engadget, his opinion:

“I think we’re just starting to scratch the surface of what’s possible in mobile computing (non-laptop, non-traditional computing, that is). Smartphones are in their infancy, tablets are non-existent; what we’ve seen in demos only just begins to show the potential in this space. When manufacturers can add the horsepower and bandwidth needed to those devices without sacrificing battery life or design, our perception of computing will shift dramatically. Multitouch interfaces and UI concepts that involve more than just moving boxes around on a screen will completely upend our ideas about how you interact with the machine; gadgets like the iPhone and Surface have already sparked that fire. In just a few years (say, less than five), I expect that using a laptop or desktop computer will seem quaint, or worse: antiquated.”

Personally, I’m excited about the future.  I’m just ever-so-bored of the current state of gadget affairs.  The iPhone has just sucked the life out of real innovation, and everyone’s playing a pretty boring game of catchup, with the occasional attempt to one-up Apple.  The problem is the giants of CE are acting like big sluggish organizations, and the cost structures have been prohibitive to enable startups to find easy paths to success, with few exceptions to these rules.  Hence why we in the Third Age we have One Phone to Rule Them All.  But 10 years ago we’d have bet on Sony, not Apple, to lead the revolution.  I wonder who will lead us on the road ahead (and if we’ll see it at CES 2010?).

Why did Apple colossally screw up the iPod Shuffle?

Posted on by

On a scale of 1 to 10, the new iPod shuffle is just stupid.  (You could probably tell from the title what I want to rate it.)

Good lord.  Where to begin.  Let’s start with a disclaimer.  I haven’t touched or seen the new shuffle in person.  Deride me all you want, I don’t care.  Apple has made several colossal, incredible mistakes with this device.

Anyone who’s read this blog before (only a rare few have come back more than once) knows that I care a great deal about Apple, and that I adore the aluminum shuffle.  That review was one of my very first, and it took place almost exactly 2 years ago.  I like that shuffle so much that I even got a second one and had it waterproofed.  But this new one… sigh.

Let’s see.  No buttons. Brilliant, let’s use an earphone-based switch.  Except, wait a second, what if I want to use a different set of earphones?  I can tell you for a certainty that some people (Sol) don’t like Apple’s earbuds – they just don’t fit.  So now I’m locked into Apple’s proprietary earphones whether I like it or not.  I will be unable to skip songs, pause and play, or change the volume without them.  Epic Fail.  And the controls are not very straightforward – Adrian Covert over at Gizmodo compares it to Morse Code.  Haha.

Form factor.  The new one is smaller.  Small as a house key.  Whoopee.  I use my square shuffle when I run, and I clip it to the waistband on my shorts.  It fits easily and doesn’t pinch or push against my skin.  The new one is long and skinny instead of square.  Maybe it occupies less cubic space overall, but it’s still longer than the square version, which means that it sticks further down the leg and is significantly more likely to pinch and press against the top of the leg while running.  Wahhhh!  I know, I’m a crybaby.  Don’t care.  I don’t see how making it rectangular and slightly smaller is an improvement.  Doubling the flash memory while shrinking the device (and preserving battery function) is a technological feat, I will grant them that.

The point is, they’re messing up an excellent product.  Even sight unseen, Apple just took a 7.5 and made it a 3.  The earphone restriction is egregious.  Moronic. Idiotic. It’s dumb.  The judgement on the form factor is my opinion.  Others may disagree, and that’s cool.  They can write their own blog.  But imho, there is no excuse for this stupidity.

Apple is a money-hungry American corporation that wants to insert themselves into our lives and control all our devices and hence have control over our actions and more importantly our buying habits.  For this I applaud them.  Seriously, I’m an American and a capitalist.  I love Apple, even if I find some of their practices annoying (DRM anyone?)  But when they start making bad (or worse yet, stupid) product decisions, that shakes my faith and my confidence in the world of consumer electronics.

As noted above, if I were force to rate this product (albeit without playing with it in person) on a scale from 1 to 10, it would get a 3.  If it weren’t being compared to such a superior previous version, it might score better.  But the earphone thing is pretty stupid.  Gahhh.

This reiew is also published at 1TO10REVIEWS.

A Waterproof iPod Shuffle in Review

Posted on by

A while back, when I first saw Steve Jobs announce the new version of the iPod shuffle, with integrated clip and super-small form factor, I was excited.  I exercise a lot, mostly running, biking and swimming.  Music (or “books on tape”) makes the whole experience a lot more tolerable, and the iPod shuffle with its light weight and built-in clip is a perfect companion.

For running and biking, the shuffle is brilliant, and I use it every day.  Every day.  However, I’ve been swimming a lot more lately, and most electronics don’t do well in water, chlorinated or otherwise.  And I’ll tell you something else.  Swimming laps is boring.  Really boring.  I find it slow, tedious, dull, and insipid.  I like the feeling of endorphin release, and the positive benefits of the exercise, but man swimming laps is uninspiring.

Enter Swimman:

Swimman.com is a service that will waterproof the iPod shuffle.  You can buy the iPod through them, or purchase it directly and send it to them.  The waterproofing treatment takes about one week, and then you’re ready to go.  They also sell waterproof headphones (which I bought) to use while swimming.

Here are the basics:

  • They waterproof the shuffle
  • The On/Off slider and the Shuffle/Continuous play slider are both locked in place
  • The buttons become much stiffer

Otherwise it works the same as before.  If you want to shuffle your music you can set your playlist in iTunes to shuffle.  Once you get your device, you’ll want to clip your headphones and the shuffle to the headband, strap the excess cord under the headband, and then you’re ready to swim.

Swimman offers a number of packages to choose from, including just the shuffle itself, the headphones and the shuffle as a combo package, etc.  I went with package E, along with a pair of swimman headphones.  The waterproofing treatment is $100 plus $15 for shipping and handling.  The headphones are another $100.  And the 2GB shuffle is about $70.  So all told I’m down almost $300 for the luxury of waterproof tunes while lap swimming.

I’ve now used the waterproofed shuffle a total of 8 times.  I am stoked.  I switch back and forth between music and books on tape (nothing gets you pumped up like Joe Mantegna reading the Godfather.)  But I find that I can now swim longer and with less impatience.  Here are some pics of the shuffle in situ – (it looks just like any other):

On the whole I think this is awesome.  It ain’t cheap, so if you’re short of cash you might need to look at cheaper options.  But all of those options are considerably bulkier, heavier, and/or less convenient than the Swimman waterproofing treatment for the shuffle.

If I were forced to give the Swimman waterproofing system a numeric rating between 1 and 10, I’d give it an 8.  It would probably be a 9 or 10 if the price wasn’t so dang high.

This post is also available on 1TO10REVIEWS.

Some other related posts:

Engadget

Can the Government Please Hire Tony Fadell to Build Voting Machines?

Posted on by

Who’s Tony Fadell?  The guy who built the iPod.

What’s wrong with voting machines (just in case you really needed to ask)?  Everything.

So let’s think about the criteria of a good voting machine, and put it in context to an iPod…

  • Voting Machines must be secure. The iPod is a very secure device, it even satisfies the criteria to make the content industry (including the RIAA) happy.  If those draconian organizations can sign-off on the device, I believe it’s safe to say Tony and crew can make a safe & secure voting machine.
  • Voting Machines must be reliable. The current generation of iPods are able to play music, videos, and games, and are extensible to an external developer community.  Granted there are third-party applications which can cause some issues on an iPod (touch/phone), but we are dealing with an extreme case.  Considering there won’t be any plug-ins or apps for a voting machine, it seems like Tony knows how to build a reliable enough device to work perfectly for a single day of the year!
  • Voting Machines must be easy to use. There are roughly 3 use-cases for a voting machine: (1) choose one of several options; (2) choose multiple of several options; (3) choose options in a ranked/cascading order.  There are a few other minor features, such as entering personal/private data, confirming selection, etc.  I think it’s pretty safe to say that an iPod (especially when you include iTunes) has many more features, many more complex features, and is a fairly easy to use device.

Per the link above, Tony Fadell left Apple to spend more family time, which I totally respect.  With 2 years until the next election, and 4 years until the next presidential election, it seems like we have a pretty good runway to build something much better than our current system.  Also, I have to assume that the US Government would probably be a lot less demanding than Mr Jobs, which should give Tony plenty of time with the kids!

Review: The Nextar T30 Portable Media Player Demands a "Saved By The Bell" Analogy

Posted on by

Saved By The Bell CastNote: If you’re not familiar with Saved By the Bell, I suggest you open up your wallet, clear a couple of days, and catch up. Then, return for the review.

The Nextar T30 is the Jessie Spano of the Portable Media Player world. The sub-$100 player has its upsides – it’s attractive, has a decent feature set, and the price for picking one up isn’t nearly as daunting as the cost of its more popular competition. But, much like AC Slater discovered when he started courting Jessie, the Nextar T30 features just enough potential deal-killers that you’ll wish that you had either made the effort to get your hands on the more attractive competition, or settled for something just as middling, but not quite as frustrating.

The Superficial

The T30, like Jessie, is a smart-looking piece of hardware with a slim profile. Its face is dominated by a 3.5 inch QVGA (320 x 240 resolution) screen, which Nextar claims supports over 260,000 colors (I didn’t count). The body, which is just under half an inch thick, sports a cheery orange accent. Tiny buttons for playback and navigation run the top and right edges. At 4″ x 3″, the whole package is light, easily pocketable, and garners the coveted “wow, that’s a big screen! Cool!” reaction from the easily impressed.

Nextar with Jessie SpanoNextar T30 ports

Nextar T30 Nav buttonsNextar T30 Play, Volume Buttons

In any range of conditions, I had no problem with the screen’s brightness – even in full sunlight, the picture wasn’t washed out. The picture quality is passable, but not great – even with well-encoded video or 320×240 images, there was still noticeable pixelation.

Sound quality was adequate via the built in speaker, better using headphones.

Smarts (It’s What’s on the Inside That Counts, Right?)

Jessie Spano, a geek’s girl before there was an even a concept of a geek’s girl, knew it all. History, math, science, she could handle it all. The T30’s functionality is almost as impressive, with qualifiers – it plays music, plays video, displays photos, and serves as an “ebook” reader. 4GB of internal storage come built in, and an SD port allows for up to an additional 2GB. If you roll analog, you can calm your Top 40 craving with a built-in FM tuner that also allows you to record the audio directly to the T30’s storage. I was able to manage my media with Windows Media Player with no problem, and the brave can simply create folders and drag files in Windows Explorer.

I’m So Excited! I’m So Scared!

So how can you resist? Let’s reserve a table at The Max, get on the Zack Morris phone, and take this little mama to the prom!

Not so fast, bucko.

Hands-on, the Nextar T30 has some issues that could, for some users, prove more worrisome than our beloved Jessie’s skeleton-laden closet (most worrisome first):

  • The Caffeine-Pill Addiction (the deal breaker): Just like Jessie’s lust for caffeine-fueled all-night study sessions almost destroyed her, the Nextar T30’s downfall is the device’s interface. It’s maddeningly slow and the button layout forces you to operate it with two hands. New media is listed seemingly by the day it was added, and there’s no way to adjust the display. Since you can’t sort your data (by album, song name, artist, etc), finding any piece of individual media when you’ve uploaded a full 6 GB will be an extensive, frustrating click-fest.
  • The Bad-Boy Brother: Media management, like Jessie’s rebellious half-sibling Eric, is aggressively irritating. Quick example: I own Wang Chung’s Greatest Hits (who doesn’t?), and I want the option to be able to listen to the album as a whole, or to listen to “Everybody Have Fun” on my “All Time Greatest Hits” playlist. To do this, I had to create two folders (one for each playlist), and then copy the song into each folder. Having to load the same media onto the same device twice is about as bad as trying to cheat Screech out of his valedictorian spot because you want to get into Stamford University.
  • The Know-it-all Attitude: You can play any type of video, as long as it’s an avi (video conversion software comes in the box, but doesn’t convert Quicktime files). You can read any ebook, as long as it’s a .txt file. You can listen to any type of music, as long as its an mp3 or wma file. Blech. I know format lock-ins aren’t unique to Nextar, but it’s still frustrating.

The Kelly Factor

Kelly Kapowski. Must... Not... Be... Gratuitous...Like Jessie, the Nextar T30 is in a field laden with tough competitors. Jessie Spano always seemed to find herself shown up in one way or another. The Nextar finds itself similarly outcompeted:

  • The Creative Zen 4 GB, the Stacey Carosi of the bunch. Not much prettier, but a lot more pluck – for the same price point, provides a more vivid (but smaller) screen, better media management, and basic contact info/calendar management.
  • The iPod Nano 4GB, for $50 more, is the Lisa Turtle – richer, and more polished. It’s an iPod. The screen’s smaller, but if you’re reading this site, you don’t need a rundown on how the iPod works.
  • The Archos 605 and iPod Touch are the lust-worthy Kelly Kapowskis. Both sport similar sized, more vivid screens, and are heads and shoulders above the Nextar in every category. I know the comparison is completely unfair, as these devices are targeted at entirely different markets, but the men of Bayside High and the Malibu Sands Beach Club had to make their choices as well. Is it worth a couple hundred extra bucks to have everything you always wanted, or do you want to settle for the issues-laden, unmanageable cheapie? The choice is yours.

The Report Card

Poor Jessie, despite all of her surface appeal, never came out on top. Time after time, her beauty and smarts were subsumed by her haughty whining, costing her friends, boyfriends, and audience love. The same holds true for the Nextar T30, a portable media player that manages to disappoint despite its attractive price point, appealing design, and huge screen. You may need to shell out a couple of extra bucks to pick up a better option, but the trifle of a few bucks is worth not having to deal with the T30’s maddening interface and media management issues. This little mama is going to detention – turn your sights elsewhere.