Entries in apple (4)

8:29AM

Apple's Big Ass iPod Touch

This was an article written for the 12/18 issue of the Megaphone.

A few weeks ago, Apple announced it was releasing a tablet known as the iPad. The iPad ended up being a giant iPod Touch, but with enhanced applications that make use of the bigger screen of the iPad, as well as having a version of iWorks. The only other difference is that it's running an entire new hardware (using Apple's own silicon which probably destroys the chance of someone running Linux on it). It runs an enhanced version of the iPhone OS, which means you get no multitasking capability. So, there goes the ability to listen to Pandora while writing up a Word document (or Pages document, in this case).

People range from blasé to downright angry to completely enthusiastic about the iPad.Engadget actually closed down their commenting for a good day because people were engaging in rather immature conversation about the iPad. Everyone has an opinion about it, and there are not a lot of people in the middle - people think that it's either the greatest thing since sliced bread, or they think it's the death of the computer.

For me, I was rather underwhelmed. I was underwhelmed because I wanted something that was even more minimalistic in design, like an edge-to-edge screen. I wanted something I could multitask with. I wanted something with a better name, for Christ's sake! There's no Flash, and the only reason for that is that Steve Jobs is extremely pissy and stubborn. Yes, Mr. Jobs. That one Mac that the Megaphone editors use that always break? Yeah, that thing freezes up whenever Safari is open to any page, Flash or not.

However, as time passed, I realized that Apple is simply an opportunist, a scavenger of sorts. During the presentation of the iPad, Jobs announced that Apple was trying to make something in between an iPhone/iPod Touch and the MacBook. However, believe it or not, the Apple tablet is not by a long shot the first tablet. In fact, tablet computing was spearheaded by Microsoft way back in 2001.

One thing that Apple excels at is taking an existing, dying industry and rejuvinating them. For some reason, the presence of Apple in a marketplace calls attention to not only Microsoft, but also the attention of open source enthusiasts. There were MP3 players before the iPod. There were all-in-ones before the iMac. And there were definitely phones before the iPhone. In the iPod/iPhone case, it was definitely a software issue. The software of MP3 players and smart phones before the iPhone was clunky, confusing and even worse, downright user-unfriendly. Apple, which is a god when it comes to user design, comes along, make things better, which brings about other competition. Competition is a good thing, especially in the computer business - it brings about innovation. In fact, if it wasn't for the iPhone, smart phones would still only be used by corporate businessmen and not whizkid college students. If it wasn't for the iPod, MP3 players would still be confusing little sticks that only offered 256 MB of storage and relied on a 16-character black and white LCD screen.

Once again, with the iPad, Apple is rejuvenating the barely alive tablet industry. Here's the problem however - now they are competing directly with PC manufacturers hardware wise (Dell, HP, Lenovo and Fujitsu mainly), and Microsoft on the software-wise. They are also competing against Amazon and Barnes & Noble for some reason. Who in their right minds would read a book on an LCD screen anyways? Screw the fact that the iBook app is pretty. It's still a pain to spend a long period of time reading on an LCD screen. That's why electronic text books have not been as popular as they should be! Here's the biggest thing - for the cost of today's tablet or convertible laptop (i.e. a laptop that can easily turn into a tablet), you get the tablet, an operating system that mostly everyone knows how to use and is comfortable with, a camera, the ability to multitask AND a DVD drive (or even a Blu-Ray drive!). You also get Flash support! Because it's (usually) Windows, you can run much more the number of applications in the Apple App Store. Of course, not half of them are fart machine applications. You do, however, have to do some research to make sure you're not downloading malware, though.

The biggest thing is multitasking. As of iPhone OS 3.5.3, there is no multitasking (the ability to run more than one program at once) or backgrounding ( the ability to run more than one program at once, but they are not displayed to you) are not present, and any attempt to circumvent this will result in your app being banned in Apple's App Store. Only Apple apps can have backgrounding, and they do it in varying ways. Having a single-tasking operating system on a phone or an MP3 player is okay - it is not okay in something that is trying to be full fledged computer.

This wouldn't normally be a problem. It's okay to write the iPad off as "baby's first computer." However, there are people are trying to replace their work PC or laptop with the iPad. Here's the problems with this - your Mac or PC will not have all the applications available on a iPad. Second of all, your computer is surprisingly upgradeable. You can change out the battery on laptops or change the RAM. On desktops, you can pretty much swap out the internals of one system to another. Anyone can work on a laptop or a desktop. My guess that if your iPad breaks somehow, you'll have to send in to Apple. Which is bad for you, as you'll probably have to pay somewhat. Computers, including existing Macs, you can at least teach yourself to fix, at a much lower cost than Geek Squad will be happy to bill you.

There is no reason at all for a consumer to replace their laptop with an iPad or even buy an iPad to supplement their computer fleet. There's a reason to have a phone, a reason to have an MP3 player and even a reason to have a computer. There's no reason to have an overpriced product with such a limited feature set. My current laptop is an Asus EeePC 1005PEB that I bought at Best Buy for $320. It has 10 hours of battery life. I run all the programs I need on it - Microsoft Office, Google Chrome, Visual Studio 2008 and even SimTower! I can even run Windows Movie Maker, Skype, and a bevy of other applications. I can even go to websites that serve Flash content and even websites that have Silverlight content. Oh, and I can even read books, thanks to Kindle for PC. Sure, I may not always be connected onto the Internet, but I usually use my laptop where WiFi is present anyways. Do I really need to be on the internet when I'm on a country farm? Or out in the middle of nature?

Even then, the cheapest iPad is $499, and just like me, you're only on the internet if you get a WiFi connection. And guess what? You're paying $180 extra for a slower processor and an inferior (no multitasking, no camera support, less applications) OS. Good consumer choice. The only thing that will make it better is if Apple comes out to release an updated iPhone OS with multitasking capability - then maybe, just maybe, it'll be a wise choice.

To be honest though, the iPad will be successful, because it has Apple's name on it. However, I do believe that one market that the iPad will succeed in is in the education market. Schools were waiting for something like this to come along. Something that students can carry around instead of an expensive book bag, take notes, and if they really wanted to, sneak a game of Bejeweled in. But still, my point remains: There is no point for a real consumer to buy this, unless they want to show how much money they make. Let the schools buy it, save your own damn money, for heaven's sake.

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.

7:55AM

Dashin' Code with Dashcode

At around 9:45, my boss told our team to look into Dashcode.  About an hour later, I completed a small currency converter with help of a video tutorial.  About two hours later, I created another small application, which was a timer, without using the "Countdown" template that Dashcode provide.

I can see how useful Dashcode is - since it's all Javascript (and even better, allows you to use common Javascript libraries, so you can use jQuery and JSON objects), and since you can use Dashcode to create web applications, you have an (albeit weaker) alternative to the traditional iPhone route of developing with XCode and Objective-C.

The interface builder is easier to use then XCode's Interface Builder, and more like Visual Studio's - simply drag and drop objects down, right click and then choose a handler to implement.  That's it, really.  Then you have a working button.  If you're new to Javascript, you can drag and drop code samples from Dashcode's Code Library.  

It's easy, and I can see this bieng a good way to teach programming for the unexperienced.  Why not?  Javascript, although it has soft typing, is not that bad of a language, and in the realm of Dashcode, you get a working application in around one or two hours.

I do have a few gripes.  Tutorials are sparse (especially ones that use the 'Custom' template, which is useful if you want to figure out how Dashcode works), and during searches you often come across the same ones.

I understand that there's a reason why Apple includes those templates, but sometimes, I want to reinvent the wheel to get a better grasp on the concept.  I'm sure I'm not the only one that does this.  To help this, I'll be writing a tutorial on how to write my timer program in Dashcode later today.

Other documentation is also hard to find.  For instance, I was trying to figure out how to add a timer.  Google came up with nothing, so I made my own using setInterval() and clearInterval().  It works, but it's probably not the optimal solution.  Looking in the "Countdown" template didn't give me any leads either.  

One last gripe: it's buggy, or at least my copy is buggy.  The Javascript code completion (which is probably why I couldn't find any information on methods of various objects that Apple includes), doesn't work at all, and sometimes it likes to "eat" the objects on the canvas, sending them to no man's land.  However, this only happened when working on a web application, and working on an actual Dashboard application was not frusterating at all.

I like Dashcode.  It's simple to use, intuitive and there's a reason why it's used for rapid prototyping of iPhone apps - because it's quite easy to get basic functionality up and going!  My personal hope is that Apple includes some features of Dashcode into XCode to make XCode easier for new programmers jump into, but that's just me.

8:53PM

The Philosophies of An Apple and a Window

Apple is releasing the next iteration of OSX called Snow Leopard September 2009 for an astonishing, but understandable $29.

Microsoft is releasing a new version of Windows, Windows 7 October 2009, but a variety of prices which I will not list here.

So, essentially, it'll be a mess of a battle, and both sides are going to sling dirty, dirty mud.  Most tech blogs and gadget blogs are going to compare and contrast the differences between the two - I don't think this is exactly correct.  In fact, I'd say that the type of user you are depends on which operating system you should go with.  For the difference between OSX and Windows is actually quite large.  I'm not talking about code base here, I'm talking about that dirty little word - design.

OSX and Windows are designed differently, and have different philosophies about the design of how the user interacts with the operating system.

The Window

Windows has a (duh) window-based design, meaning each iteration of an application that is open.  To the end user, the application itself doesn't matter - all you see are iterations of the application.  When you have Firefox open, you don't have just Firefox open, you have one window of Firefox open.  While each window has a menu bar, that allows you to change application-wide settings, some settings are only windows-specific settings.

The image to the left is the Windows 7 taskbar.  It's an evolution of the traditional Windows taskbar - each item is grouped by application, and there are no text labels.  However, this taskbar specifically allows you to grab instances of individual windows - if the application has a window open, there is a semi-transparant square around it.  If there are multiple windows (for instance, in the picture, firefox) open, it'll give you a visual cue.  If you hover your mouse over, for instance, Firefox or Evernote, you'll se a preview of each opened window, allowing you to choose the window. 

Of course, launching applications is done in an application-centric way, through the Start Menu, or Quick Launch only, but you can think of it as essentially opening a window of that application.  For instance, Alt+Tab doesn't give you a list of every opened application, but a list of every window that is opened.  When you close a window, the application remains running unless it is told to be specifically closed when the window is closed.

So, essentially the design philosophy behind Windows is pretty simple and true to the name - it's based on Windows!

The Apple

This is a picture of OSX's dock.  It's mostly used as an application launching pad.  Each application is one entry on the dock.  It's not a taskbar, and a small light appears under each opened application.  However, there are no way to tell how many windows are opened (although you could always use something like Expose to see that easily).  If you close the application, it closes all windows.  If you close a window, there is no gaurantee that the application is closed.  Each application has one menu bar, which is displayed at the top of the screen.

Alt+Tab reveals a list of all opened applications.  Clicking on the application on the dock that is already opened brings focus to all the windows of that application, but not a specific window (which is how Windows does it).

OSX, in this way, is more consistent through - launching the application is application specific, closing application is application specific, bringing focus to the application is application specific.

Which is better?

The answer to this question is easy - it depends on who you are.  What user are you?  Do you like to have one singular entry point, or do you like to have different tidbits of information all over the place? Would you rather view your display as an array of windows or applications?  In my opinion, none is better then the other - in fact, I find it easy to switch from Mac to Windows and back again (with some help using Expose).  Readers (all fourteen of you), what do you prefer?  Application-centric or Windows-centric?

And I apologize for the long image of my task bar.

 

 

...I should've really cut it down.