Sunday, January 31, 2010 at 5:32 PM
5:32PM

Closed Application Stores are a User's Best Friend

Recently, there has been a lot of rhetoric regarding the closed Apple App Store found on the iPhone and the (underwhelming) iPad. 

Some people say that a closed App Store is bad for developers, not giving them freedom, and furthermore, the users do not have the freedom to install what they want.  This is somewhat true -to develop apps natively on the iPhone you must use Objective-C (although there are alternatives out there, such as Appcelerator or Novell's Mono-Touch).  

However, some say that that a closed application store is good for developers and consumers, because they allow for the developer's publicity, and the consumer doesn't have to worry about nasty bugs or programs that steal information.

The point of a closed App store is looking at a computer as an appliance rather than a computer.  The appliance style of thought requires a set of activities that the computer is allowed to do, rather than allowing the user to understand these commands.

While this seems bad for the user and the developer, I do believe this is the computer will end up being an appliance.  I believe this is best for the user and the developer.

A closed application store (and thus the computer as an appliance) means that for the most part, the user is safe from installing bad software, and thus ties the developer's hands behind their back to prevent them from coming out with shoddy software.  In fact, I honestly believe that Apple should tighten their app store even more to prevent subpar or buggy software from coming in.  I do believe that some of their rejections are complete nightmarish though (such as blocking a dictionary app for having naughty language).  

In the end, the user is not only safe, but also saves time - no more researching on what applications are the king in the sea of subpar apps (for an example of this, take a look at the sea of CD Burning software that is available for Windows).  Furthermore, it just works.  There's no need to worry about installation (a process that really needs to die) or worry whether or not what you downloaded is actually a rogue antivirus. 

I also believe that this is good for developers.  Yes, it removes them from having complete freedom, but that can actually pay off.  It inspires creativity from solving the additional problem of not being able to access the file system, for instance, as well as inspires more education to make their applications up to snuff.  This would increase the quality of developers, and inspire more competition in the marketplace, especially regarding price.  Furthermore, the tools are right there. For instance, with the iPad, you need to use 

I am, however, not going to engage in the doublespeak that I've seen regarding how a closed app store actually gives developers or users more freedom.  It doesn't, but it does make users more secure, and it makes developers produce high quality apps (in a perfect universe).

For instance, I asked my father to go and download Microsoft Security Essentials on his new laptop.  He asked what it was, I said it was an antivirus.  He downloaded an antivirus, but it was the infamous Antivirus 2008.  Now when I go back home, I not only get to deal with that infection, but any other infection he picked up while not having an antivirus on.  What I should've said was go to Ninite and told him to download MSE there.  While Ninite is not an app store, it's a repository of apps that are chosen by the owners of the site, and probably the best compromise of what is out there - safe, reliable apps that are chosen to be there because they are of high quality.

AuthorLane S. Hill | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , , in , ,
Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 9:07 AM
9:07AM

The iPad Underwhelms Me

So, the iPad was announced and launched yesterday, and I was very, very wrong with my predictions of it.

And as a result, I'm a bit...underwhelmed.  

The design is the same as the iPhone.  We're running off of a design for the last 3 years.  I was expecting something even more minimalistic from Apple.

Yeah, it's thin, but it's still not pocket-friendly (unless you wear JNCOs).  

It can run all software that the iPhone can run...but in a tiny square in the middle of the screen, or double the pixel size.  Which is good in games, terrible at text based applications.  The Facebook demo just looked disgusting.

This is not a paradigm shift or anything similar.  The people who know about technology are slightly turned off, but they are doing what Apple goes best - go after the people who think they are technology savvy, but are truly just following a crowd.  They are not developers or programmers, but are simply know the Apple name, understand that they provide a good user expereince, and that's it.

Why pay $499 for an ebook reader, when you can buy a great one for half that cost, AND you get free 3G (without a contract, as well)?  Why pay $499 for a tiny, 16 GB consumter when you can pay $320 for a computer with 250 GB of memory, the ability to MULTITASK (a feature that's been in OSes since the Xerox SPARC), and the ability to run much more than 180k apps (and half of them aren't stupid little "hello world" apps or fart machine apps).  Oh, and the $320 device can be customizable, and you can run whatever OS or software you want on it.  

Why pay $499 for a music player, when the $320 device can also act as a music player, or you can simply buy an iPod touch for at least 200 less, and get pretty much just a smaller version of the iPad.

The only reason why the iPad should be interesting is the fact it uses Apple's own chip, instead of something Intel or Qualcomm did.  

This device is really Apple's folly, something where there are much better and cheaper alternatives out there.  And what depresses me is that it will STILL sell like hotcakes.

 

AuthorLane S. Hill | Comment1 Comment |
tagged , in ,
Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 8:23 AM
8:23AM

Let Them Eat Cake(PHP)

At work, we recently had a request for a mobile app for our university to use...and the kicker was that we also wanted other universities to use it and adapt it. As a result, we couldn't use our standby for web applications, Ruby on Rails....

Click to read more ...

AuthorLane S. Hill | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , in ,
Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at 9:26 AM
9:26AM

Apple Tablet Predictions

And what is Apple's latest creation?  Well, obviously, it's some sort of tablet.  TechCrunch revealed that the Apple execs are "giddy" about the tablet.  Odds are, on Wednesday, Apple will reveal a tablet (and probably iPhone OS 4, but who cares about that?  We want a revolution in tablet computing!)

Usually, I disagree with the mainstream press, but I do think the Apple Tablet is going to be big, and if it is just like a giant iPhone sans voice capability, than I think that'll be good.  I don't know if it'll be popular enough to revolutionize tablet computing - it needs to be cheap enough subsidized to do that, and especially rugged enough to survive day to day work.

This post is not about whether or not the Apple Tablet will revolutionize the industry.  This post is about predictions.  For every prediction I get wrong...I'll do something.  I'm not sure what, but I'll do something.

Name: iSlate.

Design: Similar to their current iMac line up, with glass to the edges of the device, with possibly a small bezel on the bottom.  However, I'd rather bet there is no bezel at all, so that you can orient the device in any possible way. 

Operating System: A version of the iPhone OS that will take advantage of the iSlate's increased size, and will also allow for multitasking.

Size: It'll be about diagonal 8 inches in a 16:9 aspect ratio.  It'll also be a little thinner than the iPhone, probably more similar to the iPod Touch.

Buttons: No buttons, but probably some sort of heat touch sensor on the back, similar to the sensor that the Adamo uses. 

Battery: No replaceable battery, but it will probably last for 6-8 hours on a charge.

Camera: If there is a camera, it'll be a front-facing camera.  I don't think there will be a camera though.

Back Cover: It'll be aluminum similar to what is used on the MacBook Pro.

Processor: I think it'll actually be Atom based, especially the N450.  Can you imagine the N450's battery life on the iPhone OS?  It'll make Windows 7 look like Linux.

Apps: All the original iPhone apps (except Camera), plus a book store of some type, iChat and a drawing/painting app.

Price: They will probably release a 16 GB and a 32 GB model.  The 16GB model will be $599, the 32GB will be $699, unsubsidized.

Cellular: I don't think that it'll be an exclusive device.  If it is, I think it would go to Verizon rather than AT&T, which can probably spell bad news to AT&T if Verizon also gets the iPhone.

Take these predictions with a grain of salt. I don't claim to be from the future or anything, I just like to make predictions.

AuthorLane S. Hill | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , , , , in , ,
Sunday, January 3, 2010 at 11:14 AM
11:14AM

Nike+? More Like...F-.

Running is one of my addictions.  It is a much better addiction than drugs or Coca Cola.  The moment after you run is one of the greatest feelings ever.  You're hot and sweaty, your legs are shaking, and you feel like you've accomplished a great and wonderful thing.

Fitness enthusiasts and the gadget sector really doesn't cross a lot.  Apple took a chance in a partnership with Nike to create the Nike+iPod, which essentially allows your iPod (or iPhone) to keep track of how far you ran, calories you lost, etc.  It's a killer app of sorts, essentially because it allows you to upload your running information to the Internet, and share with the world.

To be honest, I was excited to be a Nike+iPod user when I recently bought my iPhone.  I thought it'd be a great thing - I can keep track of how far I ran, calories lost, and etc.  Amazing, right?

Well, this is one device Apple should be spurned for - which, even though the sensor was probably created in association with Nike, it still has Apple's logo on it.  I've heard that for everything with the Apple logo, Steve Jobs approves or disapproves.  This is one of the rumored reasons why the Apple's tablet hasn't been released yet (and supposedly will, soon).

Let me explain why I think Apple should be spurned for it.  First of all, I've gone through two of them.  The picture above shows both of them.  One was bought at Amazon, the other was bought at Best Buy.  One quit working midway through a run, the other one won't connect at all. 

Let's take a look at these sensors:

 

The front of the device shows Nike's and Apple's famous logos.  The color scheme of the sensor is quite lovely - orange and white go great with each other, and it reminds me of fitness and creamsicles.  The back of the advice shows the sensor's "Wake/Sleep" button, as well as some manufacturing information.  Made in China, serial numbers and FCC ID.  Fun stuff like that.

That little button is a switch that will either put the devices to sleep or make it awake.  Problem is that unless you have an iPod or iPhone, there is NO WAY to tell whether the sensor is asleep or awake.  From a user interface standpoint, this is horrible.  It is similar of pressing a button...and then nothing happens.  Something apparantly does happen, but there is no user confirmation.  There is no mode light, nothing. 

Using a simple toggle switch would've fixed this: instead of a button, use a switch.  Yeah, switches are ugly, but this way you don't need a light: the switch will say that the sensor is asleep or awake.  Or even better, use an On/Off pop button - On represents one state that the button is, Off represents another state of the button. 

Sure, it's not Apple-ish to have a switch, but it is NOT Apple-ish to have such a frusterating interface.  Apple is renowned to have great UI...but why does it suck on the Nike+ sensor?  Furthermore, even if Apple didn't design it, it still has Apple's logo, which means that it must've been approved by someone, whether it was Jobs or some lacky underneath him.

So, yeah.  I don't like the Nike+, and I think it was very frusterating.  But, fortunately, the iPhone has a healthy ecosystem of apps, and I found an app that is leaps and bounds greater than Nike+iPod (of course, people with iPod Touches and iPod Nanos will be left out of the dust).

The screen to the right is the "Walk Around to Activate Your Sensor" screen.  You need to walk around to activate the sensor, but this isn't good if the sensor is put to sleep.  Of course, this screen doesn't give you any help at all.  If the sensor times out, it simply either fails silently, or it just says "Oh, the sensor was not found.  Try again?".  For some reason, I had both things happened to me.  Of course, even if this screen fails, there could be a variety of reasons.  Not only is it possible for the sensor to be turned off, maybe there's something wrong with the Nike+ sensor sensor on the phone itself.  Or maybe a gamma ray hit your phone, and it's a living bieng insead of a phone.

Fortunately, with the way the iPhone app market is, it is possible to find an alternative.  And I found a great one.  It uses GPS technology, so you don't need to buy a sensor.  And there's even a free version.  I'm talking about Runkeeper.   Runkeeper will even has a nifty internet application that allows you to see where you ran, and the elevation versus the speed in which you ran.  It's actually really nifty and cool, and from a brief experience with the Nike+ online app, much more indepth.

 There's a free version of the app, along with a Pro versio for $9.99 which has no advertisements and allows you to take photos and keep track of run times.  The free version does fine for me, but this is a great little application, and this way, I don't have to deal with horribly designed little sensors.

AuthorLane S. Hill | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , in , , ,
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 30 Next 5 Entries ยป