NewsGoat

I know I’m excited

Get it? This is how Android will take over the marketshare battle in tablets. There are more of these uses than the ones people use iPads for. After all, how many schools need tablets? A whole lot. How many custom retail establishments need tablets? A whole lot. How many manufacturing machines need tablets built into them? A whole lot.

Thanks to this single [Vizio] tablet I can now see how Android is going to get the market share numbers it needs to get developers excited.

Since then:

But don’t call it an iPad competitor, OK?

Don’t worry, we’re not.

8 months ago
0 notes

Missing e {browser extension for tumblr}: The future is not bright for 'Missing e'

missing-e:

Moments ago, I participated in surprise conference call with Tumblr staff members. They have indicated to me that they continue to take issue with Missing e even with the removal of usage of the Tumblr API.

They interpret the Tumblr API License Agreement in such a way as it continues to apply…

Every time I start thinking about developing things for Tumblr, I reach the conclusion that Tumblr doesn’t want me to. They talk a good game about APIs and developer support. But their API is poorly documented and incomplete. And then there’s this. Cutler’s Missing E Extension is the biggest improvement made to Tumblr in the past year. And those in charge of Tumblr want it shut down.

When it comes to the API, that’s Tumblr’s platform and they get to choose who can play. I may not agree with their choices, but I respect their rights over what happens on their system.

Browser extensions are a different story. They run in my browser, on my computer, altering content that resides on my hard drive and in my RAM. My computer is my platform, and I get to choose who can play.

When you create a work, you have the right to distribute it however you want. If you give me a copy, I cannot redistribute it without your permission. But within my home, for my own use, I can do whatever I want with it. That’s not just the way it should be, it’s how courts have interpreted copyright law. In fact, that’s the way it has to be: If you don’t have the right to interpret and modify the content of a web page when it’s sent to your computer, then you don’t have the right to use a web browser.

So Tumblr’s objection to the Missing E Extension is bullshit. It would be interesting to take a tour of their office and see how many of their employees are using extensions that modify Google, Amazon, Twitter, etc. I suspect there’s a few.

Still, I’ll understand if Cutler decides to pull the plug. Dude loves the Tumblr community. From a practical standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to stubbornly insist on developing for a platform if it gets you kicked off that platform.

For me, I’ve forked the code on Github, and I recommend any other developer types do the same. We may not be able to distribute it (without getting into a legal fight), but we can make sure the code stays out there, and anybody who wants it can get it. As it should be.

(via missing-e)

What If Apple Used Their Cash To Buy T-Mobile Or Sprint?

bananacasts:

parislemon:

A nice thought by former Apple executive Jean-Louis Gassée, but not gonna happen.

But as a carrier, Apple would have to worry about things like upgrading networks, getting local governments to approve towers, even more customer service, etc. It would be a huge distraction from the core business: selling devices.

Apple buying one network in one country is an unreasonable proposition, moreso if they were going after multiple networks around the world. They could be a disruptive service across all carriers without having to do this. How?

My nutty prediction, in horrible tech blog parlance: the next iPhone will be an iPod touch killer and a carrier killer of sorts, on steroids. Apple will offer a “universal” iPhone that will be completely unlocked and available to use on almost every carrier on the planet. I’ll go one step in the nuttier direction by saying it’ll be 4G compatible. I mean, hell, they waited this long to release the next iPhone. Let us assume they figured out the proper power management for 4G use and standby.

I have no doubt Apple could do that, but I don’t think they will. Bypassing the carriers means selling unsubsidized phones. They sold a bunch of the original iPhones without subsidies, but they’ve sold a hell of a lot more by making people think they’re paying $200.

Study: Android is least open of open source mobile platforms

Ya don’t say.

9 months ago
0 notes

"We’re looking intensely at a number of ways to do that. We’re encouraged that the Department of Justice forced the group I mentioned earlier to license the former Novell patents on fair terms, and that it’s looking into whether Microsoft and Apple acquired the Nortel patents for anti-competitive means. We’re also looking at other ways to reduce the anti-competitive threats against Android by strengthening our own patent portfolio. Unless we act, consumers could face rising costs for Android devices — and fewer choices for their next phone."

Official Google Blog: When patents attack Android

Notice what’s not on Google’s list of things to do about patents: Namely, lobbying for reform of the patent system. So why aren’t they doing that? Maybe because they’re more interested in being on the winning side of patents than doing anything about them.

Understand, I hate software patents. Patents destroy innovation. What Apple and other companies are doing with their portfolios is a misuse of the system.

But Google is being disingenuous here. The reason they are railing against patents is not because they think patents are bad, but because Android is getting sued and they have nothing to fight back with. Does anybody think that if Google had a significant patent portfolio, they wouldn’t use it the same way?

Update: Google took down the post. Guess they didn’t get the sympathy they were hoping for.

Update 2: It’s back. Weird.

9 months ago
1 note

Hey Bandcamp, let’s talk about this.

I’m sure when it was written, this little message got a big round of high-fives at the office. For days afterward your guys would imagine Steve Jobs encountering this message and they would mumble “sick burn” to themselves. Even now I’ll bet you revisit that page from time to time, look at each other, and say, “nailed it.”

Thing is, the limitation here is you, not iOS. If you’d just given me a direct link to the file, I actually could use it on my iPad. Because, you see, there are many third-party applications for iOS that allow you to download files and do something with them. Don’t believe me? Search the iTunes store for, well, “download files”. And that’s not even all of them.

In this case, I would have used GoodReader, which could then send the file to my Dropbox account. Once there, it would fly through a series of tubes to my desktop computer, where it would automatically get sucked into iTunes. Next time I synced any of my iOS devices, that song would be there.

It’s kinda magical that way.

Yes, it would be ideal if I could download any MP3 from the web directly into the Music app, with no worries of hackers using this to attack my device. But no system is perfect. In this case—and in lots of cases, actually—the simplest solution is best. Just give the user a file link, and let them determine what to do when they reach the limits of their device.

But ya know, snark is useful to. Not to your users, necessarily, but whatever.

High five!

9 months ago
4 notes

"Finally, the first things you should blame when your browser screws up is your horribly poor memory for past browser failures and your faith in the concept of a kind and loving God."

Facebook’s video chat shows site is all about connecting with people - Chicago Sun-Times

You do read everything Andy Ihnatko writes, right? Because you should, you really should.

This quote was my favorite of the article, but his section on Google+ was most interesting. I agree with a lot of what he has to say. Google has something here. It may never be as big as Facebook, but it just might be Facebook for people who hate Facebook.

10 months ago
0 notes

Build Once, Run Everywhere

dascola:

Maybe as I designer I don’t “get” the concept entirely, but hearing that as an argument in favor of a specific development technology seems fundamentally flawed. Shouldn’t the most appropriate technologies be used to solve the specific problem at hand? I don’t have the belief that I can design once and it works everywhere, so why should development be any different?

Jon is absolutely right. There’s a couple of things that drive this idea, though. The first is management. It’s cheaper to hire one developer that knows one technology than multiple people that know multiple technologies/platforms.

I think you could also argue the web is sometimes to blame. For a lot of companies, their first encounter with software development was creating a website. They built it once, then tweaked it for each OS/browser combination. Now those companies want native apps, and they don’t understand why it’s different.

There’s also simple laziness, something I’ve been guilty of before (waves to Adobe Air). You want to release something on all platforms, but that means learning those different technologies and spending time writing essentially the same code in different languages. In that situation, “Build Once, Run Everywhere” is very tempting.

The underlying assumption in all of these situations is that the resulting product will be “good enough”. It may not look quite like a Mac app, but it’ll be good enough. The UI may not be designed for touch interaction, but it’s good enough. In my experience, once a developer cares enough to not be ok with good enough, then they stop looking for shortcuts.

11 months ago
5 notes

Live from Las Vegas: How iCloud works with a shared Apple ID

brianstucki:

As I was watching the most recent Apple Keynote, it became clear that your Apple ID was going to become more and more important. Among it’s many uses, it’s used to interact with iCloud, to make purchases at the iTunes music and App Stores, and can even be used to log into a Mac with Screen…

I’ve seen a lot of people confused about this. It really is simple to set up.

(Source: macminicolo)

11 months ago
48 notes

Me, reblogging Richard back in February:

Action at a Distance: On Apple’s subscription payments
actionatadistancermg:

Apple finally launched the long-rumoured iOS subscription pricing for content producers. The important bits are:

“Apple today announced a new subscription service available to all publishers of content-based apps on the App Store, including magazines, newspapers, video, music, etc.”

“Apple…
Read this if you’re at all interested in this whole Apple subscriptions thing. Richard does a great job of explaining the situation and what it means for users. He’s covered a lot of the stuff that’s been bouncing around in my head since Tuesday. One thing I’ll add is I expect Apple to change their policy in some way within the next six months, probably before iOS 5 is released. They have a problem, which is that if they leave it open where any app can provide its own payment processing, they risk a growing number of developers bypassing them completely. The way things have been, there was nothing stopping, say, Rovio from giving away Angry Birds with just one level, then selling “subscriptions” for the rest of the levels from their websites. That’s an unlikely example, but if enough developers take that route there is a risk that the App Store will go from a profitable business to a break-even or losing one. That same problem exists if they offer a cheaper rate (say, around 3%, more like a payment processor) for subscriptions and other digital content. Developers will switch to those types of in-app purchases to avoid the 30% rate. Apple needs a way to differentiate between different types of in-app purchases, so that the App Store remains profitable for them and developers. It’s a tough problem, and I think they simply haven’t solved it yet. So for now, everybody’s getting charged 30%. It’s far easier to charge everybody now and drop the rate later than to not charge folks now, then up the price in the future. But I think they have to figure this out before the next major iOS release if they want to keep developers from jumping ship.

Looks like I was right, though I certainly didn’t expect them to completely drop the in-app purchasing requirement. Seems they’re solving the problem I mentioned above by specifying in the guidelines what types of content (media, basically) can be sold outside the app.

I’m sure a lot of different factors went into this decision. I have to think the Kindle app was a big part of it, though. From a technical standpoint there simply wasn’t any way for Amazon to use IAP. But if Apple kicked them out, they’d be kicking out one of the most popular apps on the platform. That’s not something they’d want to do, especially when Amazon is rumored to be developing their own tablets. But if they gave Amazon a pass, it would cause ill-will with the rest of the developer community. So my guess is they looked at the potential income from subscriptions and decided it wasn’t worth the trouble it would cause to enforce it.

11 months ago
33 notes

About

Hi, I'm Billy. It's possible you know me from Twitter or my other Tumblr. This is the nerdy stuff: Apple, mobile development, programming, etc. Pre-Tumblr stuff can be found in the archive.