iSights.org

Why is Siri only on the iPhone 4S?

Ars Technica wrote in a recent article...

"It’s clear that Apple’s decision to limit Siri to the iPhone 4S and not roll it out to previous iterations of the device was not motivated by the hardware constraints of older iPhones."

Really? Well, let's dig deeper into the article.

When a user speaks to Siri on a 4S, the phone records the audio and compresses it with the Speex codec, an open audio format that is optimal for voice. The recording is transmitted to Apple’s servers as part of a specialized HTTP request. The servers send back a zlib-compressed binary plist that contains the response data."

Records the audio... using the newer noise cancellation technology in the 4S to get a better recording.

Compresses it with the Speex codec... faster using the new dual-core A5 processor.

Transmitted to Apple’s servers... servers send back... twice as fast using the new HSDPA chip and improved antennas.

And then there's the improved IR sensor that makes the whole "lift to talk to Siri" thing possible.

Now, it's true that there was a old version of Siri on the app store. But it was fairly limited, and the Siri app developers are on record as saying that they had to make quite a few compromises in order to get Siri running on older devices.

And we all know just how much Steve Jobs liked compromises.

Now, would the current version of Siri "work" on an iPhone 4 or 3GS?

Probably.

But would it work just as well, just as accurately, or just as quickly?

No.

It's not that older devices can't do those things. It's that the 4S can do them better (audio recording with active noise cancellation) and faster (encoding, transmit/receive).

Both of which, it turn, make for a better user experience with higher accuracy and less waiting.

Let's take one of these: In one article, Siri developers complained about getting clean voice recordings for analysis.

Why? Because even slight noise can make a significant difference in accuracy. Ever listen to a video camera recording of people in a room? Notice the voices?

Even echoes off the walls can degrade accuracy.

How about speed?

Remember the old axiom web developers used about loading pages under 7 seconds? The longer you took, the more you increased your chances that your visitor would just click elsewhere. Google just overhauled their search box prediction code to shave fractions of a second off the delivery of the results.

Why? Because even slight delays can degrade the user experience.

And that's the key part, because if Steve felt that the experience on a 4 or 3GS would be less than optimal, then those phones simply wouldn't get Siri. 

Sounds like motivation to me.

How long will Amazon lend books for free?

"... Amazon just pays publishers the wholesale price each time a Prime member downloads a book from the lending library..."

Okay. And I get that Amazon does this as part of the Prime membership... but just how long do you think Amazon will keep it up?

Since a customer who uses this costs Amazon more than the cost of the Prime membership, either one of two things will happen here:

1) Amazon will drop the program after deciding the the Kindle has had sufficient promotion.

2) Amazon will raise the price of the Prime membership.

Via [Ars Technica]

Microsoft's "Vision" Of The Future

It seems that Microsoft's done their own "Knowledge Navigator" video that demonstrates their vision of the future.

Watching the video, it seems that we’re primarily talking...

• Star Trek - Voice access and pads.
• Minority Report - Gestures and cameras and transparent screens everywhere.
• Avatar - More transparent screens and sliding data off one device to another.

So, other than ripping off Roddenberry, Spielberg, and Cameron, and other than slapping their name all over everything...

What’s Mircosoft’s vision again?

The Google Narrative: Open Is Better

I ran across the following comment today

"The narrative about Google is different [from Apple's], often involving its strength in creating platforms for open-source/community development..."

Yep, smart marketing move there. Google is in fact very involved in open sourcing technology and creating platforms for development...

Except when they refuse to do so with their search and map technology...

Or when it suits them to withhold "open" source for the "good" of the platform...

Or when they create platforms for development that they then shut down, like the Translate API's...

Or when they create features and technology that they then retract and subvert to their own ends, like the Reader features being removed in order to force people into Google+.

Or Google's other inconsistencies.

Yes, Google marketing narrative is different.

But it's a marketing narrative, nonetheless.

The iPhone Upgrade Cycle

Ever notice how the really sweet iPhone upgrades appear in the middle of your two year contract?

There's a reason for that.

With the iPhone 4GS, we've now gone through four iPhone upgrade cycles, and from in the process we can now make a guess as to Apple's overall iPhone business strategy.

First, let's take a look at the major feature upgrades across versions:

The original iPhone: Touch-screen. iOS. 2MP camera. EDGE.

iPhone 3G: New form factor. True 3G support. GPS. Faster. Better battery life.

iPhone 3GS: Same form factor as 3G. 3MP camera. Video. Compass. Faster. Better battery life.

iPhone 4: Brand new form factor. IPS Retina display. 5MP camera. HD 720p video. Front-facing camera for use with Facetime. Faster. Better battery life.

iPhone 4S: Same form factor as 4. 8MP camera. Siri speech recognition. Faster. Better battery life.

So, starting with the 3G it would appear that we're in a two-year cycle: New form factor, then upgrades. New form factor, then upgrades.

Two year cycle? Hmm… What else runs in two-year cycles?

Oh, yes. Cell-phone contracts. So what happens if we look at things from the perspective of a user that bought the original iPhone on a two-year contract?

You purchased the original iPhone.

Then the 3G comes out with drool-worthy features (new body, 3G, GPS). Then the 3GS comes out with the same body. So if you went for the drool factor, you upgraded to the 3G. If not, you went with your contract and then upgraded to the much better 3GS.

Then the iPhone 4 appears. New body. Retina display. 5MP and HD. Drool worthy. If, however, you again stuck with your contract, you waited and can now get the 4S upgrade.

From our perspective, it appears that the new body styles and the majority of the important new features are placed in the "mid-contract" period, enticing current owners to spend more in order to upgrade early, in mid-cycle. We call this "major" cycle.

Major cycle: 3G to 4 to 5.

The "upgrade" periods occur during years where, for many, contracts expire and subsidized upgrades are available. No need for major new features, since people will be upgrading to the newest version of the old form factor anyway.

This is the "minor" cycle: 3GS to 4S to 5(x).

So, major changes for mid-contract upgrades. Minor end-of-contract upgrades.

But lets say uou bought a 3G. Then you're getting the major form factor changes and the majority of the major new features the year they occur, and of course you're going to upgrade.

On the off years, however, you're left pondering whether or not the "upgraded" version is worth the trouble.

Probably not. Then again, maybe you're into photography and the BSI 8MP camera has your blood pumping. Upgrade away.

Or you came in at 3GS, in which case you just started the minor cycle in the middle.

There are, of course, other reasons to maintain existing body styles. Maintaining the same style reduces manufacturing costs, and it keeps case makers from having to retool each and every year.

Still, if we get form factor redesign, a larger screen and another major new feature or two in 2012, then that places many of us back to considering yet another mid-contract "drool worthy" upgrade.

So, when that happens, will you upgrade mid-contract, or will you wait until next year?

Either way, Apple wins.

 

For Steve

I was going to simply list every Apple ][, Apple ///, Macintosh, Powerbook, MacBook Pro, iPod, iPhone, and iPad I've ever owned, list every Apple OS and program, and in that list illustrate the effect that Steve and Apple have had on my life over the years, both personally and professionally.

But it's not that easy. Not that simple. It's not just the hardware. Or the software.

Because he gave us more than a set of products.

He gave us dreams. And he gave us passion.

The dream that technology should work for us, and not against us. The passion that went into implementing those dreams, and making them whole.

The passion that drove him and others -- and us -- to strive for excellence. To seek elegance. To reach for perfection.

We all know that perfection is unatainable, of course.

But we can still reach.

And Steve did. While driving everyone else around him to do the same.

And in this age where "good enough" is the status quo, that's rare indeed. And for an entire corporation to embrace those ideals...

Inconceivable.

I love tools. I especially love well-crafted, precision-made tools that are a joy to to use. That do what needs to done with a minimum of fuss and bother. That let me concentrate on the task or work at hand, and not on the tool itself.

That's the essence of the Mac. And the iPod. And the iPhone. And the iPad.

The Apple ][ was the first computer that I could personally own and use and program. The Lisa and Macintosh showed me the future of computing. iPod let me take all of my music and audiobooks with me anyplace, anytime.

I use my iPhone every single day in a multitude of ways, communicating and keeping up with the world and family and friends. iPad freed me from the tyranny of the desktop and laptop, and opened up even more worlds.

Groundbreaking technologies.

And we have them, all of them, because of Apple and Steve Jobs.

Without Steve, would Woz simply have sold a few "Apple" I's, and been done?

Without Steve, would would the Xerox GUI have simply languished in a lab?

Without Steve, would the small portable music player have become as ubiquitous?

Without Steve, would the music industry have opened its doors?

Without Steve, where would the mobile phone industry be today?

Without Steve, would there even be a tablet market today?

Without Steve, and his return, would Apple even exist?

Without Steve.

Despite having been to the Apple campus on numerous occasions, I never met Steve Jobs. But here, typing these words on my Mac, listening to my iPhone and looking at my iPad, I feel that I knew him.

They were his heart and his soul and his passion.

And they inspire mine.

Thanks Steve. And farewell.

Android App Store Passing Apple's In Five Months? Hardly.

According to a new report from analytics outfit Distimo, if Google’s Android Market maintains its current rate of growth it will surpass Apple’s App Store to become the largest app store in number of applications in just five months.

You can see the blue growth line for Android set to pass the green Apple App Store line in the chart below:

Oddly, however, Distimo analysts chose to break out iPad applications into their own distinct category.

If you combine the iPhone and iPad numbers into a single iOS platform number, as I did, then Apple ends up being the top line in the chart, and that line seems to tell just a slightly different story.

Guess it was a slow news day.

[via All Things D]

Desperate Congressman Claims Apple And The iPad Are Killing U.S. Jobs

In an abysmal display of economic ignorance, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr (D-IL), made the claim Friday that Apple and the iPad are killing US jobs.

Why? Because everyone who works at failing bookstores like Borders is losing their jobs. People who work in the publishing industry will lose their jobs. In fact, he makes it sound as if everyone will lose their jobs to the people making iPads in China.

Unfortunately, Jr. isn't considering the flip side of the equation.

Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of American jobs at Apple and elsewhere who create and design the iPads and tablets and write and maintain iOS?  Who work there in marketing and finance and administration?

Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of Americans creating, running, and maintaining online stores like the iTunes store and the Apple App store and the Android Marketplace and the Amazon Android app store?

Are there not hundreds, if not thousands of Americans with jobs selling iPads and iPhones and Macs in Apple stores all throughout the United States?

Are there not thousands of Americans busy writing iOS and Android and Windows 7 apps and software? Creating and selling cases and other accessories?

Are there not thousands, if not MILLIONS of American workers creating the books and music and articles and web sites we consume daily using these devices? Hint: ebook sales are up 300% over last year.

Besides, Borders was in trouble before the iPad even launched.

They sold books, and got hit with Amazon and home delivery. They sold CDs, and got hit by iTunes and torrents. They sold DVDs, and got hit with Netflix and Redbox and torrents. They sold magazines, and got flattened by the Internet.

Every aspect of their business saw sales drop. Even the coffee shop saw sales drop as traffic dropped.

Like the big chain music stores before them, they simply didn't have a chance.

Now, if Jr. had said that the Internet killed Borders, he would have been right.

But that's old news.

Today, you get a lot more press and soundbites by blaming Apple and the iPad.

iPads and tablets are disruptive technologies, true. But the horse breeders and saddle and buggy whip makers probably said the same thing about the automobile.

[via Business Insider]

 

Apple Employees: It Gets Better

As part of the It Gets Better campaign to end suicide among lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered youth, employees at Apple have created a video with their own stories about coming out and overcoming adversity.

Worth watching. And if you know someone it might help, then please, pass it on.

[The Trevor Project]

Are Retailers Pushing iPad Accessories?

Does a bear.... never mind.

I went to a local Verizon store because of an issue I was having setting up the Verizon 3G account, and had to sit though a speal about how one of their knockoff screen protectors was practically a requirement.

"Don't you care about protecting your investment," the salesman asked? "Do you WANT your iPad's screen scratched? We've already had three returns!"

I thought about pulling my 9-month-old scratch-free iPhone out of my pocket and showing it to them, but decided it wasn't worth the effort.

I didn't even buy the iPad from them, and they're still pushing accessories on every customer who walks through the door.

All this, I might add, with the store manager standing there behind him, arms folded and nodding in agreement. Apparently it was accepted store policy, and not just a pushy salesman.

Verizon, it would seem, isn't along on attempt to capitalize on the iPad 2's popularity.

According to an article on CrunchGear, a Best Buy store refused to sell a customer an iPad 2, unless he purchased a $109 Best Buy protection plan.  A manager said, "to try and find one somewhere else. They can do what they want."

Yep. That's "protection" all right.

If you really want a protection plan, or a plastic screen "protector", then buy one. Otherwise, hold your ground.

Taiwan's HTC seeks to differentiate its Android phones with new features.

Adding bells and whistles to the interface doesn't really help differentiate one Android device sitting on display from any of the others.

Why? Because they hardly ever sit out on display. Almost all of the retailers have shelves lined with little non-functional plastic bricks.

From them, you choose the hunk of plastic in the color and shape you think looks best, take it to a salesperson and then -- and only then -- might you see an actual, working unit.

Not to bring Apple into the picture, but... contrast this with Apple, where you walk into a store and you're surrounded by working phones that you can touch and play with to your heart's content.

I know it's expensive to put actual phones on display, but manufacturers need to bite the bullet and do so.

Look at it this way. Would you buy a new 52" color television based solely on a block of plastic with a printed label showing a simulated screenshot?

If the television folk can fork out $2,000 a pop for the real deal, cell phone manufacturers can fork out $400-$500 and do the same.

Who knows. You might just gain a few customers...

[Via mobilized.allthingsd.com]

Google: Do No Evil.

 One response to yesterday's article was simple, direct, and to the point...

"Not an article, just a bitter fantasy story."

I will admit the article was a little heavy on the sarcasm. and more than a little tounge-in-cheek.

But so is most satire.

You see, when a companies' mantra is "Do no evil", you tend to hold them a slightly higher standard.

When a companies' mantra is "Do no evil" and they do one of the things mentioned, but have a good reason, you tend to accept them at their word and let it slide.

But when they do similar things again, and again, and again, and again?

There's a line in Serenity when Zoe says, Sir, I don't disagree on any particular point. But..."

One has to ask just what's going on.

Did Google joined with Verizon on issuing a policy proposal that was criticized by some bloggers and journalists as damaging to net neutrality? Yes.

Is Davlik a "clean room" implementation of Java, or did they in fact strip out the headers, change some code, and publish it as their own? Oracle certainly seems to have a few problems with them.

Are they withholding the Honeycomb "open" source? They dance around the issue, and one can't argue too much with many of their reasons, but... a project is either "open", or it's not.

Did they pull Grooveshark from their free and unrestricted marketplace? Yes. And are they doing their own service? Rumor mill also says yes.

Will it be ad based? Does a bear...

Google shouts "open", "open", "open" all day long, but is Gmail or the bundled Android apps or their search technology open? No.

So. Add all of that up, and from my perspective, it seems that Google is in fact dedicated to "open source"....

For as long as it suits their purposes.

And that, in turn, they will no no evil...

For as long as it suits their purposes.

 

Hi! We're Google and we're pretty not evil.

Hi. we're Google, and we're totally dedicated to the concept of free and open source software. Well, pretty dedicated. 

Okay, we're dedicated, just as long as it suits our purposes.

And the purposes of the carriers who put an old version of our OS on their locked-down phones.

I mean, yes, you know and I know that you can hack them and download an update and probably get it to work. Only takes a couple of hours.

But hey, it's not like you get an Android free phone for free. Carriers have to make money too. And allowing them to lock down our free software is what makes our free software truly free!

You see, all software should be free and open and unrestricted, like the software in the Android Marketplace. It's our store, and it's dedicated to that fact. 

Unless someone complains about an app, of course. I mean, yeah, if the record labels had complaints, they should have taken them up with Grooveshark and not us. But since they did... okay. Gone. Zap.

But don't worry, 'cause we have our own service we'll be introducing soon. And it's going to be free! Really free! Totally free.

What? Of course there will be ads. Lots of them.

But they'll be personalized ads that you're going to want to see, all based upon our detailed records of your search and browser history. Well, those records, and the contents of your Gmail account... and then there's Google Docs... and, ah... 

Never mind.

Where was I? Oh yeah. Free and open. Like I was saying, all software should be free and open for anyone to change and inspect and...

What? Our software? Gmail and Maps and our search technology? Hell no! That's our software, with all of our proprietary concepts and ideas. 

To make it open would be to let just anyone use it however they wanted! I mean, people could use it to compete with us!

Just look at the Java JVM for Pete's sake! Oracle left the source to that open, and what happened? Someone just walked in and stole the whole thing! That's right. They changed just enough to pass a probable copyright suit and... What? We did that? 

Never mind. 

The point is, that other software, the open source software, that stuff should be open. It should be free and open for anyone to change and inspect and use how they wish. We need to trust our users to do the right thing. And our users need to be able to trust us.

Manufacturers, however, are sneaky bastards, and can't be trusted at all. That's why we're withholding the Honeycomb source from our trusted users and partners and manufacturers.

You'll just screw it up, and then everyone will blame us.

It's for your own good really. 

Trust us.

Besides, we promise to make it open again. Someday. Soon. Real soon. Scout's Honor. 

We're Google and we're not evil. 

Well, pretty not evil, at least.

So. Now that that's settled.. want to see some ads?

[Read More: Google - Do No Evil] 

[via Mashable]

Google's Crackdown On Android Partners Is Needed... And A Mistake.

According to Bloomberg, Google is cracking down on fragmentation.

Android partners will soon need to have plans pre-approved by Google. If they don't, Google will block access to updated versions of their "open" source Android software, prevent inclusion of standard Google apps like Gmail and Maps, and exclude them from the Android Marketplace.

By doing so, Google is looking to "encourage" better hardware standardization, and to minimize the number and types of changes manufacturers can make to the Android source code itself.

Why?

To cut down on Android device "fragmentation", and to prevent manufacturers from shipping products that might reflect badly on the Android platform.

All laudable goals. And, truth be told, probably needed. But the very idea of Android "standardization" could backfire.

Badly.

We have precedent for this, because Microsoft did the same thing with Windows, dictating ever stricter hardware standards and forbidding OS changes (though you were apparently free to install as much bloatware as you liked).

And the result?

Hardware among vendors was effectively identical. The software was identical. And manufacturers well left with little to differentiate a Dell PC from an HP PC from an Acer PC. Change the beige plastic to black plastic? Add some trim? Dell and Gateway tried to make a go of it via the customization route, but faced increased competition from manufacturers who were left with just a single weapon in their toolkit.

What happens when dozens of companies are producing identical products? You end up with a commodity. And how are commodities traded and sold?

On price.

And so manufacturers did the only thing they could do: undercut each other on price, to the point where PC profit margins were things best measured in dimes, not dollars.

I predict the same thing happening to Android.

With no significant differentiation, the majority of Android devices will end up being heavily discounted, or even given away as loss leaders by carriers and others attempting to lock subscribers into subscription plans. (Think Verizon and Amazon and even the New York Times.)

But look at it this way. Finally, Android will be "free".

The Fastest MacBook Pro... Ever

A recent article on TUAW rates the various MacBook Airs and Pros, and concludes: "If you don't do a lot of heavy-duty graphics/video work and want the fastest computer you've ever used, take a good long look at the MacBook Air."

"The MacBook Air is much more than just a light computer that starts up quickly. It's a computer that very nearly eliminates waiting for any of the normal tasks that most people do all day long. On the MacBook Air, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, and Excel launch a fraction of a second more slowly than TextEdit."

So how is the Air the fastest computer?

Well, it's not the relatively pokey Core Duo processor, but the SSD, or Solid-State-Drive, that takes the place of the normal spinning platter most of us are familiar with.

Eliminate the twitchy mechanical aspects and motors and read/write heads and replace them with chips, and you've got a system that can pull stuff from the drive very, very quickly.

This dramatically improves boot times, app loading times, document saves, and more.

Now, this may muddy the waters even further, but if you want performance AND the fastest computer you've ever used, forget the Air and custom order one of the MBP's with the SSD option.

I just purchased and received a 17" MBP 2.3GHz Quad-Core i7 8GB with a 512GB SSD... and this thing simply screams. (Hey, it's my job.)

Simple example: There's an app called Pixelmator that does many of the things that Photoshop can do. In fact, quite a few people have both on their computer, and launch Pixelmator to do really quick edits and changes.

On the MBP with the SSD, Photoshop launches, from dock-click to ready-to-go, in just 1.8 seconds. Bye-bye Pixelmator.

Most MacBook Pros can get a speed boosting 128GB SSD for an additional $200. A 256GB SSD is more dear, at an additional $500-600. The 512GB... well, let's just say that you either need to be extremely well heeled, or able to deduct it on your taxes.

Preferably both.

But man, is it worth it.

[via TUAW]

Where's The New MacBook Pro Form Factor?

Apple just introduced new MacBook Pro models with faster processors, GPUs, high-def iSight cameras, and Thunderbolt, a new high-speed 10 GB/s data transfer technology that twice as fast as USB 3.0.

But read the comments regarding these announcements, and you'll find a ton of complaints about how Apple didn't deliver on the rumored change to the super-slim, ultra-light MacBook Air form factor.

(Of course, if they had, then everyone would be complaining about how they dropped the internal SuperDrive DVD player/recorder. But that's another story.)

So. What happened?

Thunderbolt happened. But Thunderbolt is a new technology, and even though it's bundled in all of Apple's new MacBook Pros, not all of the pieces are in place yet. In fact, as of this moment, the only Thunderbolt-enabled piece of technology you can actually buy is an Apple MacBook Pro.

Which means that we should see the new form factor next year.

Why next year? Because it gives all the vendors (including Apple) a year to ramp up Thunderbolt products in terms of drives, monitors, docking stations, and various adaptors (USB, FW, EN).

When that happens, Apple will then introduce new MBPs in the Air form factor, with a MagSafe power port, a Thunderbolt port, and a USB port or two. That's it.

Bye-bye FireWire-800, bye-bye Ethernet, bye-bye ExpressCard, and bye-bye internal SuperDrive.

Everything else goes over-the-air by WiFi, Bluetooth, or through NFC (near-field communications).

We've seen it before in the first edition of the Air. Apple dropped the Ethernet port and the modem port to save space. If you absolutely, positively had to have them, then Apple had a couple of cheap adaptors you could buy and plug into your USB port. Some did. Most didn't.

The same will happen here. Apple will drop all of the legacy ports in favor of the new king on the block, Thunderbolt. If you really, really need FireWire or Gigabit Ethernet, then Apple or Belkin or Griffin or someone will sell you a Thunderbolt adaptor for $20.

The rest of us get to carry smaller, lighter, infinitely cooler notebooks.

So, remember: Next year, not this year, but next year, Apple will completely revamp the MacBook Pro line.

And then (sigh) we can talk about how Apple ruined their "Professional" line by dropping the internal SuperDrive....

Can Verizon Execute?

Verizon is getting a second chance at the gold ring, but even with the iPhone success is NOT guaranteed. Verizon is going to have to execute and make their customers happy.

The question is: Can they pull it off?

This is more than an academic question.

Yesterday, for example, it seems that interest in the Verizon iPhone was so high that Verizon's web site suffered several outages and disruptions in service. All eerily similar to the way AT&T's servers were slammed during the initial release of the iPhone 3G and 3GS.

You'd think that maybe, just maybe, someone at Verizon might have had the foresight to realize that one or two or even three people might just be interested in a Verizon-based iPhone, and made sure they had enough excess web site capacity to support the load.

They didn't.

And if their web site can't keep up, what about the rest of their systems? What about activation services? Support staff? Hell, what about their NETWORK?

There's a big difference between talking the talk and walking the walk, and Verizon's corporate executives have a very, very, very good chance of ending up with a good-sized egg on their faces if they're not too careful.

Time will tell, but Tuesday's little fiasco does not bode well.

[Harvard Business Review]

Google's H.264 Double Standard

Google just announced that they're dropping support for the H.264 video codec in their Chrome browser.

Instead they will support WebM, Google’s recently introduced open-source, royalty-free codec. They're also going to support Theora, another open compression technology that no one uses.

Is it just me, or is this a clear double-standard? Google states that they're dropping H.264 in order to support more "open" technologies. Okay, fine. But why, then, are they supporting a proprietary technology (Flash) on their Android devices?

There, and I quote, they say it's because people should be "free to choose".

Sorry, but Google needs to do a dictionary search on their own web site. The word is "hypocrite".

[All Things Digital]

Scared Of The Cloud?

Adam Jackson at GigaOm recently ranted on why he's scared of Apple and Amazon and the coming content cloud. He gives the usual reasons: corporate control. Locked-in content. Potential business failure and content loss.

But why the focus on Apple and Amazon? It's not their fault that iTunes and the Kindle store have DRM'ed content.

Adam needs to be ranting at Time Warner and Viacom and New Corps and Bantam and Random House. It's the studios and the publishers who are hanging onto the old models, much as the music studios did earlier on.

It's the studios and the publishers who demand that their precious content be locked down and protected from their own customers.

Actually, when you get right down to it, it's the studios and the publishers who're afraid of the cloud.

The iTunes store accounts for a mere 6% of Apple's revenue. In case you're bad at math, that means that 94% of their revenue comes from selling hardware: iPods, iPhones, iPads, and Macs. Cheap, easily available content helps Apple sell hardware. That's their bread and butter.

Not netting all of twenty cents on a single music track or TV show rental.

iTunes store revenues in the previous quarter were on the order of $1.5 billion. Not bad. But when the studios and publishers take 70% or more right of the top, you're now left with $450 million. Not as good, but still not bad.

But now subtract administration costs. Development costs. Server infrastructure and bandwidth costs. And suddenly the pie gets quite a bit smaller. Apple wants people to buy content from iTunes, sure. But they want to make sure they're doing so from iPads and iPhones and Apple TVs.

iSuppli reported that Apple makes $250 per iPhone. That's one device. Just one sale. To match it, Apple would need to sell or rent 1,250 songs or TV shows.

So don't rant at Apple. Rant at the studios and the publishers. Tell them you want DRM-free, device-independent content. Tell them to get off their well-cushioned behinds and to get with the program.

The music industry did it. So can they.

It won't be comfortable. It won't be easy.

But it's necessary.

[GigaOm]

Why Android Will Win The Smartphone War

While reading yet another iPhone 4 review, one reader comment caught my eye. "Do these iBoys really believe the iPhone can win against the onslaught of Androids?"

Do we?

Well, maybe we need to first define "win". Are we talking mere numbers? Or shall we talk about profitability and margins?

Apple seems perfectly content to have let Windows "win" the PC market, while they have, what? Over 80% of the high-end personal computer market? While they sit on billions in cash? While their market cap now exceeds than of Microsoft?

From my perspective, I see no reason why phones will be any different. Android manufactuers are going to be handicaped trying to differentiate themselves from the scores of other Android manufacturers all installing the exact same software on the exact same commodity hardware. So what can they do differently?

Well, changing the color of the case always works. "We run Android 3.1 on our blue phone," says manufacturer A. "Don't buy a blue phone," says another. "Blue is so last season. Red plastic phones running 3.1 are much better!"

Alright, maybe not. Maybe they'll do an EVO, and talk about their semi-pocketable phone being a half-inch larger than the next semi-pocketable phone. But unless we get radically redesigned pockets in the near future, that feature can only scale up so far. (They could try for the smallest phone as well, but unless they're going to ship a microscope with every phone...)

So. With every phone running the same, identical OS, and no clear hardware differentiation, the end resul will be just like that the Window's PC market. Watch as, like Dell and HP, each manufacturer then races to the bottom in a consumer-price war, cutting costs (and quality). Each one, oddly enough, vying to get the least number of pennies per phone.

Being free actually works against Android in this situation, as that becomes another place to scrimp on software and design. "Skinning" Android will go away. It costs money, and manufacturers are also going to get tired of perpetually being behind the version number eight-ball.

"We have Android "Sense" 3.2!" They'll proudly proclaim. But while they were working on skinning 3.2, 3.3 was released, and 3.4 was just announced yesterday. Oops.

So, yes. Android will eventually "win". It's numbers can only grow, and in the process it will become the dominant OS on every POS "free" phone given away by the carriers.

If you can call that winning...

When Is New Not New? On The App Store, Of Course!

Apple recently pulled the "Show All New Applications" menu item from the iTunes based version of the App Store, apparently deciding that the "New" applications block at the top of the page served the same purpose.

It doesn't. Especially when the "New" applications are cherry-picked from all of the new submissions and--worse--the entire list is only updated once a week. If that.

As the above screenshot shows, as of today, October 6th, the most recent "New" application listed is from September 26th. Ten days ago. And this despite the fact you can dive into practically any category and see more recent applications. Some released as recently as October 5th. Yesterday.

Apple needs to return the "Show All New Applications" list, or add a "Just Added" block that automatically shows ALL of the new submissions during the last week, or get their store editors off their sorry rear ends and actually update the store listings.

New indeed.

Is Apple stealing ideas from iPhone developers? No.

iPhone Atlas is running an article asking if Apple stealing ideas from iPhone developers. The Atlas article, in turn, is based primarily on accusations being made by Jonathan Zdziarski, best known for the iPhone 2.0 "emergency call" passcode hack.

Fundamentally, Jonathan accuses Apple of attempting to patent a home screen idea previously used by an application called Intelliscreen.

He writes, "At the worst, this is an attempt to steal a concept. At the very best, it's an attempt to patent something that was so obvious, a competitor figured it out long before Apple did."

So is it true? Is the big Apple ripping off some poor defenseless developer?

Quick answer: No. Apple did not rip off Intelliscreen.

Intelliscreen, however, could have ripped off Apple. Keep on reading for the proof.

Worthless App Store "Reviews"

Is it just me, or are you also getting tired of all of the application "reviews" on the App Store that say nothing more than "first post", ask "who would want this", complain about the price, or offer some other in-depth opinion of an application... that they don't even own.

I'm especially fond of the "reviews" that complain about features and point you to some other application, often free, that supposedly does the same thing... when it's obvious they haven't used either one, and as such have no way of knowing that app B is actually and in fact a true replacement for app A. Who cares? It's free.

Personally, I think you could increase the quality of the reviews considerably if you limited the ability to review an application to those customers who have actually purchased, downloaded, and installed the application in question.

Another issue relates to the current mess with Electronic Arts, Spore, DRM, and Amazon.

Plug In Your iPhones: Software Update 2.1 Is Ready

If you have a 3G iPhone, or an original iPhone that you've upgraded to 2.0.2, then it's time to plug it into iTunes 8 and click that "Check for updates" button.

Why? Because the new iPhone 2.1 update is now available from Apple's servers. Weighing in at 237.8 MB , it promises:

• Decrease in call set-up failures and dropped calls
• Significantly better battery life for most users
• Dramatically reduced time to backup to iTunes
• Improved email reliability, notably fetching email from POP and Exchange accounts
• Faster installation of 3rd party applications
• Fixed bugs causing hangs and crashes for users with lots of third party applications
• Improved performance in text messaging
• Faster loading and searching of contacts
• Improved accuracy of the 3G signal strength display
• Repeat alert up to two additional times for incoming text messages
• Option to wipe data after ten failed passcode attempts
• Genius playlist creation

Will it deliver? I'll know in approximately 27 minutes.

Visit the Apple iPhone Software Update page for more information.

What's Apple's Mystery Product?

According to AppleInsider, Apple's chief financial officer Peter Oppenheimer revealed that the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals.

As such, the forums and chat rooms are busily dissecting each and every word and attempting to apply them to Apple's product line. Are we talking new MacBooks? New desktops? New iPods? What?

Personally, if Apple's serious, and if they REALLY wanted to take a crack at an aging product line with the highest price and fattest margins... I'd look at the Cinema Displays.