Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts

Friday, 23 April 2010

Apple Rules!

I’m at once both loving and despairing over the spat between Apple and, primarily, Adobe.

In cutting off Adobe and other companies with their rules limiting of the source code requirements of applications (which as a developer strikes me as being quite strange) other tools apart from Flash have been affected. The nature of the development beat these days relies on a variety of tools to get applications delivered, not just a few chosen languages with massive do-it-all libraries.

Add to that the fact that Apple takes advantage of many closed APIs in the OS which other developers are expressly forbidden to utilise (for example the iBooks application uses closed APIs to do things as simple as adjust screen brightness, from what I’m lead to believe), and a lot of developers are getting… frustrated.

If the iPhone/iPad apps keep selling, then they’ll keep being developed, but as more and more competing operating systems rise through the ranks, the appeal will start to waver, developers who have been rejected or withdrawn from the App store will start to question where their time is better spent, and the flow of new apps may (just may) be directed to alternative devices.

Slowly the iPhone will be less appealing, sell fewer units, and the process will enter a cycle like Microsoft is now trying to get out of on their mobile platform (although this was for different reasons, mainly neglect of the OS at Microsoft).

I doubt there will be any measurable effect on Apple sales any time soon, it may not happen at all, but I suspect Apple may currently be sowing the seeds of its own destruction. That would actually be a bad thing as fewer players may lead to less innovation. Having said that, the mobile economy is so large at the moment that this is unlikely to happen any time soon.

Footnote: Don’t give me any rubbish about keeping the iPhone interface consistent over applications in the OS, have you seen iTunes on a PC? Even Sun introduced a Windows look and feel for Java.

Friday, 16 April 2010

WPF Phone

I can already hear the iPhone owners: "Windows Phone 7 UI is a copy of the iPhone UI". I will understand this, but it's only looking at the UI from the perspective of an iPhone user.

I've not used an iPhone, primarily because I know that however good the OS looks (and it does look good), it doesn't offer the features I want (neither does Windows Phone 7, as mentioned many times before). However I was just browsing through a few screenshots of apps on the iTunes web pages and one thing repeatedly kept hitting me: "These apps look like they were written in WPF!"

WPF has been around since (AFAICR) the release of Vista, and at that time, as far as I was aware, Microsoft weren't trying to ape the iPhone UI to the desktop (although I dare say some inspiration was drawn from there, as is the nature with these things, although reading some of the documentation and tutorials on WPF I would say they were after a version of HTML for creating Windows clients originally).

WPF is the brother to Silverlight (with the alleged intention apparently to end up with a single technology at some point)

And  of course Windows Phone 7 is based on Silverlight and XNA.

I can see where this is going...

On an aside, several years ago there were hot rumours of Microsoft going into competition with the Sony PSP and Nintendo DS. I can't think of any device they are scheduled to launch in the fall that may be doing this...

It's been argued before, but finally I can see mobile killing the likes of the PSP and DS. Perhaps it's a shame NGage never caught on after all.

Sunday, 31 January 2010

iPad Initial Thoughts

Way back in the early turn of the century (probably about 2003) I had a Palm Treo phone, I believe it was a 180g, a monochrome device that was one of the earliest ‘smart phones’ around, although it wouldn’t look too smart now. I loved it, even though it was old technology even when I got it.

Around the same time a friend and work college of mine, John McDougall, purchased one of the early iPaq devices, a glorious device running a colour screen. It was amazing. Remember, the market at the time wasn’t concerned that these devices had no phone, phones were supposed to be separate from your PDA back then, despite the best efforts of a few manufacturers.

I remember one conversation where John derided my Treo (and I don’t mean that in a nasty way John) for running an OS which did not “properly” multi-task. “It’s a phone!” I told him, “Who cares?” “I can still have multiple applications running – or at least open, at the same time”. However his harsh words still lingered on toiling in the back of my mind...

Both our devices had hundreds of applications, both free and paid for, that we could source from a variety of locations on the web with little effort, and both were a joy to use in different ways.

That was about 8 years ago.

Soon after I bought an ordinary Nokia phone and an iPaq 4150, mainly as the Treo would often crash when answering an incoming call, and it was as uncomfortable as hell to hold against your ear for any length of time.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make here.

This week Apple announced the iPad (apparently Version 2 will have wings!), a device running the iPhone OS. That means it currently doesn’t multi-task. That means it has no Flash support. That means you can only use Apple approved applications purchased via the App Store. That doesn’t mean rouge diallers and other nasties don’t already exist.

You may not even be able to buy ebooks for it in the UK (at least not initially). It hasn’t even got phone functionality (which would be odd I suppose), so in essence it’s an iPod touch with a very big screen. All this in a device that’s going to be “perceived” as a computer.

Don’t get me wrong, the iPad is a lovely piece of engineering from what I can tell, but it’s only an evolution in the hardware stakes. As far as the OS goes… well I didn’t want it on a phone, but on this, you’ve got to be kidding me! It is beautifully designed as far as presentation goes though, Very slick. However, I guess I’m not an average user. I think I’ll let Mr Stephen Fry buy, and keep, my one.

It’s not that I don’t even like this form factor, I really do. I loved my (now demised) HP Tablet PC (you know, one of those things that had a touch screen, a keyboard, and could be put into slate mode). This was however bulky to use and the battery life was only a couple of hours or so, 10 hours from this device will be very good and sets the benchmark for other devices to follow.

I think my ideal form factor could be something like the Apple iPad (and to me the big bezel around the screen could be a good thing) that slots into a keyboard or other portable type docking station to allow a real keyboard to be used (essentially like a laptop, plonk it into the bottom half of a laptop, with hinges and the additional ports!). How about if this was Bluetooth so I could use it or another keyboard wirelessly too?

It’s no secret that I’m a Windows man primarily, and in this rare case I actually feel a little pleased that the HP slate and others will be running Windows 7, you know, a real OS. Let’s hope the hardware measures up. If only Apple had seen fit to put OS X on the iPad. I still wouldn’t have got one, well, probably not, but I’d be more impressed.

Summary: Fail.

That’s possibly a bit harsh. Let’s just say it’s not what I’m looking for, it ticks the wrong boxes for me. It's a 'consumer device' not only in terms of market, but also in terms of functionality; it's designed more for consuming media than creating it. That's not what I'm after, but many will be, however even on this front I want to say "Must try harder".

Of course, Mr Fry and others will be snapping them up and I'm absolutely sure most people who do will be happy. It does look and will perform well, for what it does. It certainly doesn't deserve some of the accolades it's been getting, at least not in my eyes. Then again, some reviews have also been too harsh.

If you can’t wait to try one out I only have one suggestion to you. Get an iPod touch and put your face very close to it. It’s the next best thing to being there.

In the meantime if somebody brings out something similar, with the detachable wireless keyboard I mention above, and running Windows, well let’s just say I’m reaching for my wallet just at the thought.

Google is probably hoping the “Me Too” manufacturers will adopt either Android or Chrome, and I wonder where Windows Mobile 7 will fit into all of this. Any plans from Symbian in this arena, the last I heard the Nokia web device (MID, or whatever you call it) was running a variant on Linux, but at least this is a capable OS and can be made very pretty too. Not that Symbian isn't, in fact I do have a soft spot for Symbian as the underlying OS, but the UI plastered on top has let it down badly in the past.

I’d still prefer Windows 7 though, that’s where all my investment and knowledge is. Oh if only Windows 7 were multi-touch capable…. Hold on a moment ;-)

Tuesday, 15 December 2009

Just a quick one...

This quote from The Register made me laugh:

When Jobs petulantly pouted that Windows stole the Mac's look and feel, Gates countered with "Hey, Steve, just because you broke into Xerox's house before I did and stole the TV doesn't mean that I can't go in later and take the stereo."

I think I may be using that particular quote in future.

Here's a thing, reading a book by an ex-Microsoft employee a few years ago I seem to remember the said employee reminising on development of Windows 1.0. The first (or at least an early) version of scroll-bars in windows had a dynamically sizing thumb area to reflect the proportion of the window visible compared to its overall size. When Gates was shown this he ordered it to be removed, not because he didn't like it, but because it looked too much like the Apple OS, so the fixed size area that some of you may remember was born.

It seems like such a bad choice to make now, but there you go. Interpret that as you will, to me it says Gates didn't want to be seen copying, but knew that a WIMP environment was the way to go. Of course, these day's the whole concept would have probably been patented by Xerox on the drawing board and never implemented. Still, that's progress.

Either way, I know who I'd rather work for...