I’m often very critical of Apple devices, mostly due to their closed approach to the software ecosystem. But say what you will about Apple and their business practices, there have always been two significant upsides to buying their products:
1. Attention to detail – Apple is famous for taking their time to fully test everything before release
2. Support – Even after your model has been replaced, Apple never makes you feel like your product is obsolete. They are famous for still offering software updates and support instead of pressuring you to purchase the next model (unlike certain other companies).
While I have never considered an iPhone for my main phone, I will admit those were two things that always impressed me, and perhaps even made me jealous. Their original iPhone couldn’t copy/paste, send MMS, multitask, or heck even allow 3rd party applications at first… but for all the things that it did not do, the things it DID do were done with elegance and style. Back then, my Symbian and Windows Mobile phones ran circles around the iPhone in both features and power (and in some ways they still do), but lacked the instant response and super smooth scrolling Apple seemed to have perfected on their first try. And when they updated the software to introduce the App store and more features, even the older models got the update. Meanwhile, I found myself scouring XDA-developers.com for the latest ported software of Windows Mobile, since HTC had decided not to offer updates to last year’s hardware.
It was a compromise I was willing to make since I found Apple’s platform too limiting, but boy did I wish Nokia or HTC/Microsoft spent that time on attention to detail. With the release of iOS4, however, it seems that Apple is trying to make me feel better.
First, we had the reports of problems with the iPhone 4 and the supposed “faulty antenna”. Honestly, I think that’s kind of silly. Sure, many phones have faults, I remember the HTC Wizard and Tornado on T-mobile would sometimes get stuck in “Searching…” if you slipped into a roaming agreement area until you reset. On my wife’s Samsung phone, if she tries to initiate a call while someone calls her, the phone will lock up and not allow her to pick up or ignore until the caller stops ringing (very annoying when we get disconnected and try to call each other back at the same time).
Honestly, I think Apple’s whole antenna fiasco really wouldn’t be a big deal except that Apple is being held to a higher standard. Heck, even Senator Chuck Schumer wrote an open letter to Apple demanding they address the issue. Really, I’m not kidding about this one. Its absolutely ridiculous. Like Apple owes everyone an apology.
Funny how lots of phones have little quirks or issues, yet no one makes such a big stink about it. But everyone expects the iPhone not to have those. Why? They’re not created by celestial beings or anything. They are consumer electronics, same as everything else.
Then there was the version of iOS4 for the iPhone 3G… This is my favorite! If you own an iPhone 3G and haven’t tried this yet, DON’T!
Not only did they leave out the goodies of iOS4 such as multitasking, its also much more demanding of the hardware and can slow your phone down to a crawl. I’m talking about the kind of crawling that iPhone users make fun of other phones for having.
Does anyone remember that first iPhone ad on TV? Everything moved so silky smooth, we all thought it was just a dramatization for TV. Well, we found a video someone made of the original commercial being remade with an iPhone 3G running iOS4.
Lets just say the “new” commercial had to be extended past the 28 seconds of the original in order to perform all the tasks.
Sometimes my phone lags like that when running too much at once. Thankfully not often, but it can totally happen. Yet, Apple fans poke fun of other devices for it. Well, look what we have here. Apparently Apple feels that this is acceptable, otherwise they wouldn’t have released it, right?
My point here is that Apple is not some “magical” company that only makes perfect products and controls their ecosystem for the sake of the user experience. Some of their hardware is flawed, and some of their software decisions could use some more quality control.
But make no mistake, I’m not saying Apple is bad for either of these things. I’m saying they are just like every other phone choice out there. Contrary to popular belief, Apple does not make products “for the good of mankind” or anything like that. They’re in this to make money, just like everyone else. They have to try only hard enough for people to trust in their brand name, then they can cut corners a little here and there.
According to the Gizmodo’s telling of the story, the person that found the phone realized it might be something important, and tried to return it to Apple.
However the customer service representatives who spoke to him took it for a hoax- obviously, the folks answering phones at a company with as much secrecy as Apple aren’t privy to confidential information such as a missing prototype (or even what the prototype would look like should he describe it).
Assuming it was a chinese knockoff or hoax, they turned him away.
So, our lucky finder took the next logical step… tell the media.
Gizmodo offered to pay $5k for exclusive rights to review it (and help the finder return it), and went on to throughly examine, photograph and report on the alleged new iPhone. They admit, the prototype seemed pretty legit, however they had their doubts. That is, until Apple sent an official letter from their legal team and asked for their lost device back.
Well, that ends the story. Apple got their device back, Gizmodo got an exclusive scoop, and some lucky guy got $5k for sharing it after trying to return it to its rightful owner. They all lived happily ever after, right?? Wrong.
The story continues, and gets considerably uglier from here. Apparently, Apple is furious about what happened, and things are just getting started. Around dinner time last Friday, Gizmodo editor Jason Chen found his home being raided by the police, who were issued a warrant break in and confiscate his computers. On top of all that, Wired.com reports that the original finder of the phone (who has remained anonymous as of yet) may be under investigation as well.
And as if that isn’t enough, I’m sure that Gray Powell (the Apple engineer who apparently lost the prototype in the first place) is in a world of pain right now. Its no secret that Apple is very protective about its devices, often aggressively so. Does anyone remember Sun Danyong, the Foxconn employee who committed suicide after accidentally losing one of Apple’s prototypes in China last July? Yeah. They tend to not just let things go.
The silly thing about all this is that the original finder of the phone actually TRIED to return it! Even Gizmodo sent it back, very politely, without even a hesitation once it was confirmed to be an Apple product. As far as I can tell, they did nothing wrong! If anything, the original finder should be commended to trying to return a valuable product, when so many people might just pawned it off on ebay!
Apple may be upset, but they appear to be taking it out on the wrong people!!
The uglier side of Apple has managed to stay below the radar mostly, but it seems people are taking notice this time. Even the Daily show had something to say about it:
About a month ago, the NY Times printed a fascinating article about the now infamous tension growing between Google and Apple.
Apple has claimed that Google stole ideas and concepts from the iPhone to fuel Android’s success. Not only that, but Google’s presence on the iPhone may continue to be a liability.
Since Google is the default search engine for the iPhone, they can collect data on the search habits of users. This means they’ll know what iPhone users search for, what they want and what they like, and even know where they do it using Google Maps. This, according to sources, can give Google a competitive edge to use that data and create solutions before Apple can.
The solution? Remove Google from the iPhone.
There has been speculation that Apple will consider using Microsoft’s Bing, since they offer a competitive search and mapping engine to Google. Oh, the irony!
Once upon a time (back in the glorious Bill Gates days of Microsoft), one of the big reasons Apple and Google became allies was to rise up against monopolistic companies such as Microsoft. However, it was immediately apparent that there is a considerable difference in their philosophies. Google is famous for being open and pushing for standards, whereas Apple has always pushed for proprietary and closed models to protect their user experience. The only way these two could possibly work together was to unite against a common enemy. However, what happens when your ally appears to be more of an enemy than your common one? Partner with the “other” enemy?
All this has been met with a considerable amount of speculation from analysts and fanboys alike.
There is a second, more far-fetched theory however. According to Business Insider, top Apple analyst Gene Munster of Piper Jaffray says that there is a 70% chance Apple will create their own search engine in the next 5 years.
That’s a bold prediction. Does anyone think this would be a good idea? I mean, Apple has ZERO experience in search engines, and the market has evolved so much, it would be kind of late for a newcomer to enter the area. Even if Apple makes their own search default, why wouldn’t users just switch to the familiar Google to do their searching (just as a majority of Windows users don’t use the default Bing)?
Unless… Perhaps Apple is really so driven to keep Google off the platform that they actually actively BLOCK access to it.
Would Apple do that? I would like to say no, but then again this is the same company who enforces the rigidly ruled App store. Apple is all about control, and I’m not sure I can say this is beneath them. On top of that, what if Apple decides to enforce a similar set of rules to filter your web searches?
Apple has famously denied App submissions as harmless as a dictionary due to objectionable content (curse words included in the definitions). Can you imagine a search engine that only showed you results pre-approved by Apple?
Ok, perhaps that is going too far. Apple can not be that controlling, can they?
My personal opinion in all this?
Let it go, Mr. Jobs. Competition is good, as we all know, since it drives innovation and keeps technology affordable. Stop being so defensive about your products and go back to innovating like the Apple days of old. I miss the Apple of the 1980’s.
A couple of months back, Opera announced an upcoming iPhone-version of its popular mobile web browser, Opera Mini. As I mentioned then, this was a surprising and bold move from Opera.
For those who are unfamiliar with it, Opera Mini (not to be confused with Opera Mobile) is a lightning-quick low-profile web browser that can pull down and display web pages in a fraction of the time that a standard mobile browser can. This is achieved by first having the images and content compressed by Opera’s powerful servers, then sending the simplified compressed stream to the device to display. The end result is a claimed 90% reduction in data transfer, which translates into significantly faster page loading and less bandwidth required (for those on limited data plans).
The announcement to bring the already popular browser to the iPhone, however, was met with much speculation: Apple is notorious for rejecting “Duplication of Services”, which means any app which could potentially compete with any of their own products. That includes alternative dialers, media players, and of course web browsers.
Yet, somehow, Opera managed to squeeze the lightning quick Opera Mini browser right by Apple’s draconian App store gatekeepers, despite the direct competition with Safari. How the heck did they manage that?! (more…)
If you haven’t heard of Grooveshark yet, you really should check it out- Unlike other streaming music services such as Pandora and Slacker Radio, Grooveshark will let you pick any songs you like in their extremely extensive database, and create your own playlists. Since there is no restriction on playback, its like having a limitless library of MP3’s at your disposal!
The advantages of a mobile version are obviously appealing. Imagine being able to play any song you want, any time you feel like it, wherever you are, and without worrying about the limits of your storage space… as long as you have a data connection, that is.
Enter Grooveshark Mobile, the official application for Android, WebOS and Blackberry phones. Grooveshark, however, was denied access to Apple’s App store, so there will be no official iPhone version (unless you wish to Jailbreak, in which case they DO supply an at-your-own-risk version to show Apple what you think of their policies). Also glaringly absent is Microsoft’s platform, Windows Mobile.
Not to fear, all you WinMo fans out there. The development community has stepped up to the challenge and created their own Grooveshark applications to fill the need. The best of the bunch is undoubtedly Nanogroove, which has playlist support and album art.
The best bit of NanoGroove? Its free! Well, sort of- they offer 5 minutes of use each time you run it if you don’t register. Registration costs a one time fee of $5, and after that you are free to use it as much as you want. A worthwhile investment for unlimited music, if you ask me.
But wait, isn’t GrooveShark also free?
Yes, technically, however they reserve their latest-and-greatest features for VIPs only, which costs $3 a month for membership to. All the mobile apps are VIP access only, which means your unlimited music is going to cost a monthly subscription. Three bucks a month isn’t anything major, however compared to nanogroove’s $5 one time fee to register, it seems like Windows Mobile users come out on top this time!
Opera is a name familiar to the mobile world for bringing desktop-style browsing to a wide variety of phones.
In some unexpected news, Opera just announced that they have developed a version of their “mini” browser for the iPhone, and will be showing it off at Mobile World Congress next week as they wait for approval from the App store.
Now, this is very odd news for a variety of reasons.
To start, Apple is infamous for their strict “duplication of services” policy on the App store… it seems kind of arrogant of Opera to think that Apple would approve them, when they have denied every other browser, music player, etc that offers some sort of alternative to a key feature of the device.
Beyond that, Opera’s choice of using their “Mini” app seems confusing as well… Their browser traditionally comes in two flavors: Opera Mobile, and Opera Mini.
For phones that are powerful enough to support it, Opera developed the Mobile version, which is a native app based on their desktop rendering engine (Yes- they do in fact have a desktop browser, a lot of people seem to not know that). It comes pre-installed on many current Windows Phones, supports many browser plugins such as Flash, and can easily be made the default browser on the device.
The “Mini” version, however, is a solution for standard phones that are otherwise deemed not powerful enough to have anything resembling a desktop browser experience. Using a clever trick that resembles remote desktop access, Opera Mini doesn’t actually connect directly to the internet. It connects to Opera’s servers (located in the Netherlands, I believe), which load and render the page, then send a snapshot of it to the handset which can be viewed, scrolled, and clicked just as if they were using it locally. Since this server side compression takes the bulk of the work off the handset, the end result is a page that loads in seconds, and looks like a desktop browser- even on something as simple as a Motorola RAZR.
The lightweight mini version is also not traditionally a native app, preferring to exist as a device-agnostic Java application so it can work on almost any legacy phone out there.
So why does Opera think they can get through the store this time, and why did they choose the “Mini” version as opposed to the Mobile? Clearly, the iPhone is capable of running a full blown desktop browser experience as evidenced by Safari?
I think the two questions together may yield the answer: Opera Mobile on the iPhone would clearly be a duplication of services, since it works so similarly to Safari. However Mini, with its unique server-side compression, is a completely different animal. The result to the user may be a fast loading webpage, however since it doesn’t actually connect directly to the site, some interactive elements of web pages do not respond as expected (sort of like browsing a super fast cached version). Therefore, it could be seen as an interesting web application for large sites that bog the iPhone down, but perhaps not a replacement for Safari.
Could that be their reasoning? And better yet, will Apple buy into it?
I may have a new favorite toy. Miccus has this interesting line of products they call “BluBridge”. The arguable centerpiece of the line is the BluBridge Mobile Speaker. While not exactly pocketable (well, maybe with cargo pants), it lets you pair any A2DP device with it for some stereo audio fun. Sure, it also has a USB and 3.5 line-in, but why bother? This is made for on-the-go sound.
I’m hardly a huge audiophile, and as such my Pre’s sound never bothered me. I’d taken to carrying it from room to room as I worked, with Pandora on, playing whatever popped up. However, the difference between just my Pre and my Pre with the BluBridge is like night and day. There’s the occasional “pop” when nothing is playing, but music streams easily and smoothly, with no stuttering. I was able to walk up the steps and almost made it to the far end of my (albeit small) house before the connection was lost. I was also able to fire up my video player and stream the audio to the BluBridge. Another plus is that it has a separate amp/volume control instead of just boosting the volume on the sending device, like some headsets do. It makes for a nice, clear, loud, portable, stereo alternative.
You know what else is neat? The BluBridge is a speaker phone. So if someone calls in the middle of your music, you can have a nice conversation without taking the phone out of your pocket. It’s an elegant solution that I don’t believe many devices in this class feature.
Like I said, I’m not an audiophile, so I got a second set of ears. My test case was rather impressed- to the point that he wanted to know where to buy one. You’re not going to use it for a dance party any time soon, but if you want to have something in the kitchen or a conference call in your house or just a quick stereo speaker, the BluBridge is a solid choice.
But wait, you ask? What it your audio device doesn’t *have* Bluetooth? Not a problem. Miccus makes a bunch of BluBridge adapters. There’s the almost-expected iPod adapter one, and it’s great. It didn’t work with my 5.5 gen iPod Video but it worked fine with a new model Nano. It also worked great with an iPod Touch. Sure, the Touch/iPhone have their own Bluetooth option, but they’re heavy on the battery. We felt that using the BluBridge instead of the internal Bluetooth option gave us slightly better battery life. Still, this is more for the Nano and the like.
More impressive is the mini-jack, a rechargeable device that hooks to any 3.5 device. That’s right, I said any. Once you plug the BlueBridge in and pair your older device to your speaker of choice… boom, you have Bluetooth. This means your aging laptop just got with the program. This is a great product and might even eclipse the BluBridge speaker in some ways. Why? Because it works with *any* Bluetooth speakers (that accept the passcodes 0000 and 1234). I used it with my aforementioned 5.5 Gen iPod Video, coupled with one of Miccus’ ChargeBlocks.
At just $99 the BluBridge, $59 for the MiniJack or iPodBridge, these are really great stocking stuffers. They’re even better when you check out Buy.com and see that they’re all on sale.
When you visit Buy.com you’ll notice that there’s an additional member of the Miccus family, the auto-talk. I’m still testing this device out and there will be a full review soon. However, you may want to take advantage of Buy’s 50% off price and get this. Main reason? Solar-powered hand-free Bluetooth speakerphone for your car.
This is too funny… I just can’t make this stuff up! According to an editorial article by Chris Matyszczyk on Cnet news, the market analyst minds from independent mobile consulting firm Strand Consult are under the opinion that most iPhone users are, well, quite nuts.
You’ll always find people who love/hate their various gadgets, but I personally have always been under the impression that Apple products illicit an emotional response from users- that people love them and will defend them to the ends of the earth. Especially when their shortcomings are mentioned. I will admit that some of the arguments in Apple’s defense are rather silly, however in this article, Chris takes it to a whole new level, and compares it to brainwashing-cult status:
“When we examine the iPhone users’ arguments defending the iPhone, it reminds us of the famous Stockholm Syndrome–a term invented by psychologists after a hostage drama in Stockholm. Here, hostages reacted to the psychological pressure they were experiencing by defending the people that had held them hostage for six days,” Strand declared.
The implication is surely that Apple has mugged millions of people with its beauty, dragged them off to a very dark cellar in some barren land, turned them into slightly bonkers Barbarellas, and then recruited them as soldiers for the cause.
This is the sort of thing of which the Church of Scientology is normally accused. But for some strange reason, it’s a rather chilling but pleasant shower to read something that isn’t mere worship.
Them’s fightin’ words, if you ask me. I’m not sure how much of what he says I agree with, but he and Strand’s consultants make some pretty valid points.
I very highly recommend everyone hop on over and read the post here: CNET news.
I get a lot of statistics thrown in my face by various marketing groups trying to make a point one way or another. As an endless critic, I can’t help but question every number or “fact” presented to me without any background data.
Last time around, I mentioned why the carrier reviews from Consumer Reports seemed fatally flawed. Today, I stumbled upon something new that I find almost as questionable. The iPhone blog posted a pie chart from AdMob, which apparently displays the percentage of web traffic coming from various mobile devices.
According to the chart (click the image to view full size), the iPhone makes up a very healthy 55% of all web requests from mobile devices here in the United States.
Android follows with 20%, RIM Blackberries with 12%, and moving down to the bottom of the list are WebOS at 5% and Windows Mobile accounting for a measly 4%.
I am not surprised one bit that Apple’s iPhone is in the lead. It is clearly the most popular consumer oriented smartphone in the country. What DOES surprise me is the Android numbers, especially compared to Windows Mobile and WebOS.
In fact, speaking of WebOS and WM, the very notion that Palm’s new system has a higher percentage of traffic than Windows Mobile indicates that something is awry with these “facts”.
These statistics represent WebOS at a time when it is on a single branded device, the Palm Pre on Sprint. Sprint, meanwhile, is lagging behind in third place with national carriers as far as subscribers. Windows Mobile, meanwhile, may not be as media spotlight friendly as the other mobile OSs, however we’re dealing with an OS that exists on every one of the 4 major carriers, and in multiple handset styles by multiple manufacturers.
So, yes, it would seem strange to me that WebOS, as great as it may be, is reportedly being used for more web traffic than Windows Mobile. That got me thinking… how is this test being performed? What are the details behind these numbers? What sites are being monitored and what determines the the data?
Clutching onto my Nokia E71 (one of the 3 cell-phones I use on a daily basis) I just read on Mashable how Nokia announced the slow phasing out of S60 for the iPhone / Android competing opensource-asized Maemo. The phase out is expecting to occur on all Nokia Smart Phones by 2012.
Could Symbian really not shape up and build a killer touch phone OS the way Palm did? I mean if Palm could do it… maybe Maemo is the hiatus they will need.
Stan at Mashable was a bit bold indeed when he said S60 is not good enough. For what it is it is very good. I often feel a sense of ease when using it on my E71. But he is right, it is no flashy Android iPhone killer. If Stan is right in reporting that Symbian will remain the main platform for E-Series devices that makes sense. I have friends that work in regular corporate jobs who runaway screaming when it comes to using an Android or iPhone like device for work… its just to much, to distracting and not capable of dealing with the fast blackberry like pace of business as usual.
But Stan also makes a good point. “While we’re thrilled to see more Nokias on the powerful Maemo platform, running two mobile smarpthone OSs and two separate app stores will definitely cause confusion to the customers.” From a branding perspective he is correct.
Nokia can lessen the confusion a bit if they market it well. Symbian as a business like device, Maemo for everything else.
But the larger question here in the US is, does anyone care. I mean, I am a Nokia fan boy that for the most part does not use a Nokia (my main phone is still the iPhone). I am still convinced that as far as phones go, Nokia builds the best of them…I mean a majority of the world cell phone users cannot be wrong. But the question remains, will Americans pick up the Maemo lingo like they have picked up “Android” and “Windows” and “Palm” and “iPhone.” Or will these just remain fancy and expensive Nokia’s. It seems these days the Operating System is king, so they better hope not.
I’m often very critical of Apple devices, mostly due to their closed approach to the software ecosystem. But say what you will about Apple and their business practices, there have always been two significant upsides to buying their products:
If you haven’t heard of Grooveshark yet, you really should check it out- Unlike other streaming music services such as 
Opera is a name familiar to the mobile world for bringing desktop-style browsing to a wide variety of phones.
This is too funny… I just can’t make this stuff up! According to an editorial article by Chris Matyszczyk on 
