mendax.org » apple http://mendax.org WyldKard's mental brouhaha. est. 1996 Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:40:46 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 What new Flash content? http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F08%2F31%2Fwhat-new-flash-content%2F&seed_title=What+new+Flash+content%3F http://mendax.org/2010/08/31/what-new-flash-content/#comments Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:40:46 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2125

We wonder what sites Dave Winer visits when he argues that ’s boycott of Flash for its devices isn’t working.

I see new Flash content several times every day when I catch up on the news with my iPad.

What Flash-heavy news sites is Dave visiting, because we don’t see them. Before the iPad was released, we’d routinely see video embeds in RSS feeds that were Flash-based, but most of these have now been replaced or supplemented with HTML5-compatible versions. In fact, other than Flash video, what new Flash content is being created on anything other than a fashion/designer web page? Most web-savvy companies have moved on, or at the very least, now offer non-Flash versions of their sites.

Winer’s claim is akin to the argument that Barack Obama is a muslim – outlandish claims not backed by facts. We suppose, if someone sought out Flash-heavy news sites, one could find them, but why try to skew the big picture? Sites that only offer Flash content nowadays are effectively cutting out their mobile audience, considering that most Android devices don’t even support Flash yet. So any site that cares about readership (i.e. a good news site) isn’t throwing Flash in your face. And really, it’s not even about just mobile readership anymore, as more and more people are using devices like the iPad at home.

When the iPad was released, there were those who refused to buy it based on its lack of Flash support (or at least so they claimed). But those voices are dying, and the longer it takes for a proper iPad competitor to reach the market, the more companies are foolish for not offering HTML5-compliant content. And no one’s going to support Flash long-term if HTML5 works for a broader audience, despite the fact that Flash was a preferred tool for many developers in years past. If that were the case, developers would still be writing code in FORTRAN.Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/08/31/what-new-flash-content/feed/ 0 Still no iOS app data backup in iTunes? http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F06%2F30%2Fstill-no-ios-app-data-backup-in-itunes%2F&seed_title=Still+no+iOS+app+data+backup+in+iTunes%3F http://mendax.org/2010/06/30/still-no-ios-app-data-backup-in-itunes/#comments Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:09:46 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2065

We’ve now seen four generations of iPhones, have witnessed iterations of the Touch, and seen the birth of the largest device, the iPad. And, of course, we’ve seen numerous versions of iTunes supporting the various releases, with app management advances such as folders and the ability to import files like PDFs from iTunes itself. But yet somehow, despite all these advances, we’re still without core app management functionality like off-device data backup.

In other words, when we install an app on one of our iDevices, we can backup related data when we sync the iDevice with iTunes. In the even that our iDevice gets lost, breaks, or has some sort of upgrade problem, we can always restore from our backup to not only get our apps back, but the respective data for those apps also. This means we don’t lose our app configurations, game backups, et al.

However, if we delete a particular app from our iDevice, even if we’ve synced the iDevice with iTunes in the past, any data associated with the deleted app is not only removed from the iDevice, but from iTunes as well. Thus, if we delete, say, a game, we lose all our associated achievements, and if we ever reinstall that game onto an iDevice in the future, we have to start from scratch. How is this good ?

One of two things should happen when one deletes an app from an iDevice:

  1. If the iDevice was not synced with that app on it before, the user should be prompted with a message saying that deleting the app means losing all associated data too, unless the user first syncs the iDevice to iTunes before deleting the app.
  2. The user should be prompted as to whether they wish to delete the app and its associated data, or just the app. If the latter is chosen, the next time the iDevice syncs with iTunes, it off-loads deleted app data that is still resident, and only deletes it once it’s been copied to iTunes.

Users should then be able to manage associated app data from within iTunes. This doesn’t mean they should be permitted to edit that data, but choose whether to keep it or simply delete it (assuming they never want to use the app again, else start with a fresh install).

Right now, too many issues still present themselves with iDevices not to have app data persistent somewhere, regardless of whether an app is maintained on a given iDevice. Just this past weekend, when we had to bring in our 3GS because it entered a restore-cycle, and ultimately handed a new 3GS, we were advised to set up the as a new device, and not restore from a previous backup. Getting our mail, calendars, and contacts back were a non-issue thanks to Mobile Me, but everything else was a hassle. We can deal with moving icons around to once again set up our interface like we want it, but getting every app set up again is a pain, and in the case of apps that don’t themselves backup to the (like games), losing all associated data is unacceptable. Do we really need to wait much longer for this problem to be properly addressed by ?

Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/06/30/still-no-ios-app-data-backup-in-itunes/feed/ 0 Upgrade to iOS 4 and lose cellular data? http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F06%2F25%2Fupgrade-to-ios-4-and-lose-cellular-data%2F&seed_title=Upgrade+to+iOS+4+and+lose+cellular+data%3F http://mendax.org/2010/06/25/upgrade-to-ios-4-and-lose-cellular-data/#comments Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:38:53 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2053

A number of people have reported losing data over AT&T when upgrading older iPhones to 4. The culprit isn’t clear, though many owners reported jailbreaking their iPhones in the past, though this doesn’t appear to be a universal factor. Regardless, the common solution for getting data back is to restore the from a previous state, sometimes using a different admin account on an OS X system in order to force iTunes into re-downloading the 4 update.

We underwent the same loss of data after upgrading our 3GS, and though a restore worked after setting the up as a new phone, we weren’t happy with losing all our data. (Restoring from a previous backup didn’t work, even after restoring the firmware and setting the up as a new device.) Fortunately, we found a solution that worked, which doesn’t require one to restore the at all.

It seems that the loss of data may be tied to AT&T’s carrier file, which may have ben corrupted/changed on older iPhones (possibly after jailbreaking or installing jailbreak apps). To fix this, get on a wifi network, and from the , head over to HELP.BENM.AT and follow the links to obtain the carrier file for your respective provider. Once the file has been installed, you’ll be back up and running with cellular data, without having spent the time to set up your as a brand new device.Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/06/25/upgrade-to-ios-4-and-lose-cellular-data/feed/ 0 Heat: an unaddressed iPhone issue? http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F06%2F21%2Fheat-an-unaddressed-iphone-issue%2F&seed_title=Heat%3A+an+unaddressed+iPhone+issue%3F http://mendax.org/2010/06/21/heat-an-unaddressed-iphone-issue/#comments Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:31:45 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2040

We didn’t give much thought to iPhones overheating last summer, when reports were going around about iPhones shutting down after a certain internal heat threshold was met. But that’s because we never encountered this behavior, since we evidently didn’t put our through these types of paces. Things took a turn when we began using our 3GS as a daily device.

The problem.

In the car, while we’ve experienced exceptional heat emanating from our 3GS, we still haven’t witnessed the device overheating and shutting down the active program. We guess that’s because of where we mounted the ; it sits right in front of a vent. During summer months on the east coast, we usually run with the air conditioner on, so the isn’t at the same temperature as the outside world. Since it sits so close to a vent, it’s also getting the benefit of air flow, which isn’t the situation in our second use case.


On a motorcycle, our is more exposed to the elements, or at least the heat. This is doubly-problematic because air flow is effectively neutralized since a motorcycle-mounted is generally enclosed for protection, so the doesn’t benefit from the motorcycle’s movement. On hot days, this means that whatever case the is in acts like a greenhouse. Eventually, east coast summers with temperatures in the 80s will shut down any mounted to a motorcycle, making navigation-by- impossible.

Possible solutions?


Moving the to an unenclosed case, snapped into some sort of mount, may be a part-time solution. Mounts like this exist, but their protection is questionable; do you really trust a mount where the “snaps in” and “snaps out” by pressing a plastic tab? With the vibrations common on motorcycles (not to mention bumps from off-road riding), it becomes a huge question as to whether such a mount won’t suddenly pop an attached off mid-ride.

A better mount system might still work here, but an off-the-shelf solution doesn’t seem to exist. Touratech makes decent aluminum mounts for other devices, but not for the (probably because the isn’t water-tight).

Relocating the ’s mounting location may be possible with the proper . For example, if the could be mounted in a position that offers more shade, where it’s not always getting direct sun, perhaps it would last longer before shutting down. Still, this likely wouldn’t fix the problem entirely, and coverage may be hit too.

Another solution may be to simply keep the in a vented pocket, so it’s not getting sun and benefits from airflow directed against the rider. Unfortunately, this means the rider only has access to audible cues, can’t see the map, and needs to pull the out whenever the navigation software needs to be accessed.

In the end, no obvious solution exists if one wants to use -based navigation year-round on a motorcycle (at least in areas where it gets hot).

The 4G .

The latest , releasing later this week, uses the A4 processor, which we know to be faster than previous processors. This new should also sport better power efficiency, which may imply cooler operation. However, we couldn’t find any claims as to how much cooler the 4G runs compared to the 3GS. For us, this becomes a major factor in whether or not we upgrade, because if this new can handle higher heat environments, then it immediately challenges other units for motorcycle use; potentially, with an aluminum case, heat dissipation may be easier for this latest .

For those early adopters, drop us a line to let us know if the 4G seems to run cooler than the 3G or 3GS.

Update (06/23/2010): TiPb is proposing that Apple may have down-clocked the A4 processor in the 4G in order to get better battery life and “lower the thermal impact.” This would mean that the new has more RAM than the 3GS, but a slower processor, explaining why the iPad may still be faster than the 4G . This still begs the question as to how much cooler the 4G would run than the 3GS, however.Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/06/21/heat-an-unaddressed-iphone-issue/feed/ 0 AT&T screwed up our iPhone upgrade eligibility. http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F06%2F15%2Fatt-screwed-up-our-iphone-upgrade-eligibility%2F&seed_title=AT%26amp%3BT+screwed+up+our+iPhone+upgrade+eligibility. http://mendax.org/2010/06/15/att-screwed-up-our-iphone-upgrade-eligibility/#comments Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:46:16 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2034

While we may not think that the 4G is an enormous upgrade, it’s all about the cameras, and that’s specifically the area we’re hooked on. So for some 5 megapixel camera love (plus flash and HD video recording), the new has us interested. We bought the 3GS upon release, so we should be eligible for the discounted upgrade, but… we’re not.

We pre-ordered our 3GS to replace our 2G on T-Mobile, activating it on day one of 3GS availability. About half a year later, we converted our plan to a family plan, and then added a line for our girlfriend. There was also some hooplah about converting the plan to be region-free, since we both ported numbers from different area codes. During all this reshuffling, her phone somehow became the “primary” number on the account, which was inconsequential until today.

When we checked to see if our phone was eligible for the discounted upgrade, we were told it wasn’t, and that we would have to wait until February. The second line we added, however, even though activated half a year later, was already eligible, even though the reverse should be true. Apparently, AT&T can’t fix this in the system, because even if they switch the original phone back to be the primary, that switch alone causes a three-month penalty for future upgrades. So because AT&T didn’t set things up the way initially requested (presumably because it was easier for the salesperson who set up our second phone), I now can’t upgrade at the lowest cost possible. Why AT&T can’t simply swap upgrade eligibility between remains a mystery, considering that both are on the same plan, billed to the same person.

For us, this is a major complaint against AT&T, especially since the customer sales representative we spoke to today had major attitude when we politely addressed the issue and the reason for our dissatisfaction. This from a company we’ve defended from daily onslaught by other users. Thanks, AT&T. You have one more year from us, and then you better hope you’re still the only US carrier.Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/06/15/att-screwed-up-our-iphone-upgrade-eligibility/feed/ 0 Verizon FIOS: non-basic install a nightmare. http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F06%2F15%2Fverizon-fios-non-basic-install-a-nightmare%2F&seed_title=Verizon+FIOS%3A+non-basic+install+a+nightmare. http://mendax.org/2010/06/15/verizon-fios-non-basic-install-a-nightmare/#comments Tue, 15 Jun 2010 18:44:56 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2030

We jumped on the FIOS bandwagon for our last move in hopes of super-fast speeds. While cable was long-touted as an outstanding alternative over DSL, our Comcast connection wasn’t perfect, and the 12MB advertised speeds were hardly that. So when we moved to a location previously wired for FIOS, we thought we’d be in for smooth sailing, since the only major complaints about FIOS we encountered were regarding a fresh install. Supposedly, once everything was in, people experienced ecstasy.

Making the order.

The process we went through just to get FIOS activated was nothing short of a monstrous affair, however, at least as far as activating utilities go. While we already scouted out the information we needed for the plans we wanted, we were ambushed by our electric company when we activated power at our new residence. They claimed to be a FIOS partner, and could go ahead and take out FIOS order, thus not necessitating a call directly to FIOS. If anyone ever tells you this, tell them they are liars, and immediately hang up.

We told them no such thing, and though the convenience worth it. Little did we know that our power company could only offer us plans that were not the lowest advertised, nor were the packages very customizable. Of course, we didn’t know this until the basic order had already gone through, so by the time we hung up the phone, we had to call Verizon anyway to sort things out. And so began our phone call march, because getting through to a human being at Verizon is no easy process, especially when Verizon bounces you from operator to operator, oftentimes dropping the call midway through. Complicating the calling chain was the fact that our mobile phone number, representing the only phone we own, was not bound to a local area code, which meant that we were routinely routed to a Verizon office hundreds of miles away, instead of dealing with someone who could handle local orders.

Hours later, we finally got our order fixed. Not fixed per se, because we basically had to start a new order, and the rep we spoke to promised to delete the original order once it entered their system (apparently there’s lag in this). It’s worth noting that when we explained that our power company took our FIOS order, the immediate response was, “Yeah, don’t do that.” This was a common thought among Verizon reps we spoke to, which begs the question as to why Verizon has affiliates like power companies in the first place, since even Verizon employees think it’s a bad idea. (Apparently, numerous calls are fielded every day in which Verizon employees need to fix issues with customer orders thanks to affiliates screwing them up.)

Of course, the original order didn’t get cleared when it should have been even after we lined up our correct order. This required even more phone calls to the local office after we received e-mails and phone messages concerning the first order.

Using .

There were two non-standard requests with our order, both of which caused us pain in getting things set up. The first was that we had a HD unit that we previously used with Comcast, which we were told would work with FIOS. When the FIOS installer showed up (mind you, they provide a window of four or eight hours, effectively making you take the day off of work), he didn’t know much about at all. He fumbled through the menus and eventually got a signal to show up, and was thus content with this part of the setup. He did not, however, make sure that the on-screen guide worked, so when he was done, none of the channels matched up with their descriptions. We would later find out that fixing this was a simple matter of re-running the setup process, but Verizon was useless in providing this information. Their response to my concerns that things weren’t working as intended was, “We don’t support non-Verizon supplied .” Yet they do, actually, because they bothered going so far as to install the Cable Card we’re leasing from them. In other words, they did a half-ass job; either support setting up the in full, or don’t do it at all and just hand customers their Cable Card.

Verizon’s shitty router.

The second FIOS install obstacle was that we didn’t want to use their supplied router, because we already had an Time Capsule which handled our routing needs. This was a non-issue with a cable modem, but as our brief time using DSL showed us, things would be more complicated if the supplied modem had a built-in router. We addressed this in advance with the FIOS installer, and he said it wouldn’t be a problem – he wasn’t authorized to make changes to the provided router, but the included manual had all the instructions necessary to disable the routing capabilities of the Verizon device, such that we could just hook our Time Capsule up to it. Liar.

First off, no manual was supplied with the router. There was a quick setup guide, but no in-depth instructions. Naturally, he took off before we could go through the supplied guides in depth, so we were left hanging. We explored the firmware options via the router’s web interface, searched the web, and came up empty-handed: the supplied device did not have a way to disable the router. Sure, we could have just sucked it up and used our Time Capsule for backup purposes only, but we liked Back to My Mac working as intended, didn’t want redundant DHCP, and are, quite simply, stubborn. So, back to the phone, being transferred from person to person, and ultimately coming upon a solution.

Originally, we thought we needed a networking interface module (NIM) to use as a basic modem, which we could then plug our Time Capsule into. It turns out that NIMs weren’t being distributed by Verizon anymore, however, despite the fact that not every rep we spoke to knew about this, so we were transferred to their business department twice because they could supposedly provide us with such a mythical NIM. The real solution, however, is simply to have Verizon deactivate the -over-coax signal, and enable the -over-ethernet signal on the main FIOS box (installed in our basement). This meant that we’d still have a coax cable running from the FIOS box to our television (not first through their router), and we’d have an ethernet cable running from the FIOS box to our Time Capsule. Figuring this out wasn’t easy, because one Verizon rep was insistent that the ethernet port on the FIOS box was for technician troubleshooting purposes only (this despite the fact that we pointed to resources saying otherwise).

Sadly, when the signal switching was eventually done, another Verizon rep refused to stay on the line to verify that things were then working as intended. Of course, they weren’t, so we were now back to having no . Calling back, and explaining the changes made to our setup, a new rep insisted that we needed to reattach the router such that they could try to query it, even though we explained that -over-coax was disabled. She was insistent that they could still query the router, though we knew she was wrong. Eventually, she agreed to send over a technician again to sort things out.

Of course, by then we were back on the searching for solutions, and we finally found one. It turns out that once the signal-switching occurred, the -over-ethernet worked so long as the Verizon supplied router was attache to the FIOS box over ethernet. This then required us to login to the router’s web interface and ask for the IP to be released and reassigned. Once we pressed the “release” button, we needed to swap out the Verizon router for the Time Capsule. The IP was reassigned to our own router, and we were up and running. Up and running about 10 hours after the original technician showed up.

Conclusions?

The biggest conclusion here is that Verizon employees who handle FIOS tech support (on and off-site both) have no consistency ins training. Some are positively clueless about Verizon-supplied , while a few have either been around long enough, or taken the time to research the equipment, and thus know enough to properly inform Verizon customers. Either way, the installation process is long and painstaking even without a fresh install.

Of course, if we had simply ordered a regular package, complete with Verizon’s comparatively poor DVR and configuration-limited router, perhaps the entire installation for us would have taken no more than two hours. But this isn’t 1999, and installing broadband in homes where many people have their own routers and DVRs shouldn’t be a troublesome experience for the customers or the on-site technicians.

Of course, now that everything’s installed, our has been rock-solid over the last month, so at least there’s that. Speeds are much faster than via Comcast (and for less money), which is certainly nice. But we knew to expect that going in, so while the end- may get an “A,” the customer during install gets a “D” a best. Not exactly what we expected considering all the AT&T slamming in favor of Verizon. Even Comcast, which as a comparatively poor reputation, has never caused us as much pain when we had a problem, and in most cases were responsive and better informed than the many Verizon folks we spoke to. Something worth keeping in mind if you ever make a similar leap over to FIOS.
Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/06/15/verizon-fios-non-basic-install-a-nightmare/feed/ 0 Some people might want a computer for their iPad. Some. http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F05%2F17%2Fsome-people-might-want-a-computer-for-their-ipad%2F&seed_title=Some+people+might+want+a+computer+for+their+iPad.+Some. http://mendax.org/2010/05/17/some-people-might-want-a-computer-for-their-ipad/#comments Mon, 17 May 2010 18:47:53 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2019

We’ve said before that the iPad is a fantastic computing solution for the average person, since the iPad delivers all the content most people need, and works very well for basic office work. Maxator points out a number of things the iPad can’t do, which necessitate also having a “traditional” computer at home.

CD/DVD burning/ripping.

Media issues are likely a short-term problem for adopters of iPad-like devices; how long can the optical disc remain viable in a world of digital distribution, especially when there’s little legitimate reason to burn anything anymore? Seriously, we’ve burnt a handful of discs in the last couple years, and most of those were related to a console hack.

We can’t imagine that our burning needs are much different than for most people. Burning audio discs is a thing of the past thanks to the , and most data (like office documents) are small enough to be thrown onto the . In what common use scenario is burning 650MB of data a reasonable solution compared to removable flash storage or simple network transmission?

As far as movies go, legacy media is one thing, but for all future media, online consumption will become the norm, so why not adopt it now? Arguably, one could obtain an online copy of media you already own, which is effectively the same thing as ripping the respective DVD yourself. Now granted, this doesn’t address storage issues, since the iPad maxes out at 64GB at the moment, but that’s not necessarily a deal breaker, as we’ll note later.

One obstacle for dealing with online media, however, is with tackling file distribution outside the iTunes store. This is great for the big labels, and , but not great for those who rely on things like BitTorrent. That’s because without a BitTorrent client for the iPad in sight, or similar apps for other peer-to-peer networks, downloading files of any sort to the iPad is impossible without something like FTP, which is ultimately limited.

Legacy software.

Faulting state-of-the-art technology because it doesn’t cater to legacy software is a questionable practice. Yes, people want backwards compatibility, but sometimes that compatibility needs to be balanced with a forward momentum, which has almost mastered. Thus it was with the floppy disc, so it is becoming with optical media, and so it will be for closed technologies like Flash. Faulting for not supporting a third-party plugin seems like misappropriating blame: if you’re upset that you can’t view all your favorite websites on mobile devices, maybe you should blame the respective website developers instead. After all, it’s not that their content doesn’t work on devices, it’s that it doesn’t work on any mobile device, since Flash doesn’t exist in a mobile form yet. (Adobe is “working” on it.)

Same goes for legacy software in general. Sure, it’d be nice to have TurboTax, Crossover, and Ulysses running on the iPad, but if the demand and capability were there, you can bet that the software will follow. (As far as TurboTax goes, does the web version not run in Mobile Safari?) The AppStore is a tour de force, with an amazing number of quality apps available designed for productivity. For most users, the AppStore either already offers an app you need, or will soon.

Backup/syncing.

The real hang-up to relying purely on the iPad for computing that entails massive storage is backups and data management. Right now, the iPad works well with iTunes, but this means you’re relying on at least a Mac Mini to serve as a data warehouse, which becomes an investment of around $500. It’s a fine solution for backing up an iPad’s data, but it’s not perfect. For one, uninstalled apps won’t retain their data in iTunes, which means that reinstalling an app on the iPad means starting from scratch. That’s bad , pure and simple.

What should do to address the backup issue is roll out over-the-air syncing, either at the local level with the Time Capsule, or via the with a an enhanced Mobile Me . A -based iTunes solution would be perfect, allowing you to keep all your media files on ’s servers, and choose which ones to stream or copy to the iPad directly. A Time Capsule solution would work similarly, with the Time Capsule serving up a local web page for accessing it’s own iTunes program for handling media, apps, etc. Both solutions could be implemented at the software level, and both would potentially allow users to upgrade their iPad firmware without physically tethering their iPads to a traditional computer.

In the meantime…

We still stand by our assertion that the iPad is a tremendous computer for most people, without them needing a traditional computer at home. This may require visiting the local Store, or a friend, to perform firmware upgrades and the occasional backup. But these are minor inconveniences at best, which will inevitably be addressed by as Mobile OS X evolves.

For the rest of us, who still need a server appliance to make the iPad something more than Average Joe’s computer, the additional investment in a pint-sized server isn’t a deal-breaker, especially when it means that 99% of our non-work computer use is on the iPad itself. Niche requirements like burning CDs and downloading torrents are easily addressed, and can likely be met without shelling out for a Mac Mini like we did, especially with how cheap PCs are these days. Maybe there’s a continuing market for low-cost PCs after all?Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/05/17/some-people-might-want-a-computer-for-their-ipad/feed/ 0 The iPod Touch is a baby iPad. http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F05%2F05%2Fipod-touch-baby-ipad%2F&seed_title=The+iPod+Touch+is+a+baby+iPad. http://mendax.org/2010/05/05/ipod-touch-baby-ipad/#comments Wed, 05 May 2010 20:14:02 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=2013

One of the common quips about the iPad is that it’s nothing more than a “large Touch.” It’s a statement the naysayers are fond of making, along with those who lash out at anything made by as though were still the only developer putting out a useful, solid operation system anymore; it’s not 1999, people.

We’ve now had an iPad since Friday, the day the 3G iPads were released, and we’re quite happy with it as a replacement for our now-sold 17″ Macbook Pro. We’ve fielded numerous questions, but the most common is, “Why would someone want an iPad?” And that’s a loaded question, because it comes with a pre-established bias. But let’s answer it anyway: “Maybe you don’t. Not everyone would.”

That answer isn’t side-stepping the argument, either. The reality is, if you’re already happy with an existing portable computer, or you don’t need a portable computer in the first place, then the iPad isn’t for you, just as a roadster isn’t the ideal car for a family of four. If you’re in the market for a portable computer, however, and what you need it to do is the same thing 99% of computer users need a computer for, then the iPad fits the bill splendidly. It’s a fantastic entertainment and news device, is great for writing, and the distribution system for apps makes the iPad a headache-free device which you won’t need to reformat every six months because something’s broken.

And for techies who need the latest and greatest, and have the disposable income to make that need a reality, then the iPad is an obvious choice over an existing sub-notebook: it’s snappier, has a great app library w/associated distribution system, has a longer battery life, and has a data connection built in.

With four days of iPad use behind us, we’re not disappointed with the device at all, and look forward to the benefits that OS 4.0 will bring later this year. One side-effect of using the iPad, however, is our changed perception of using the . Quite simply, the no longer feels as revolutionary, or as spectacular, as before. Indeed, we’re making an effort to not run apps on the iPad, because most simply don’t look great when scaled up. That’s not to say that the still isn’t the best smartphone on the market, but merely that the now feels more like a phone with cool features, and less like a backup computing device; the feels almost cluttered now, what with its dense app icon distribution on the SpringBoard, and the lack of “whitespace” in apps.

In this respect, the iPad has set for the computing industry a new standard. What early, greyscale sub-notebooks were to their later, more powerful notebook brethren, the Touch is to the iPad. In other words, the iPad isn’t a big Touch, in much the same way the modern Mini Cooper isn’t just a bigger version of the old Mini. Yes, there are keen visual similarities, but one was effectively a prototype for the other. In the end, the Touch is a smaller, more restricted version of the iPad, which is a more apt description if any can be made, and it pinpoints the answer to the aforementioned question as to why one would want an iPad: early adopters didn’t ask why they should pick up an instead of one of the many non- mp3 players on the market. Rather, the reason was obvious: the was better, not because it offered much more functionality, but because it was highly polished. Those who didn’t see this would end up buying an a year or three later. Same with the iPad: if you don’t get it now, just wait a couple years when the early-adopters have made the reasoning all to clear.

Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/05/05/ipod-touch-baby-ipad/feed/ 0 We’re lovin’ the iPad hate. http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F04%2F06%2Fwere-lovin-the-ipad-hate%2F&seed_title=We%26%238217%3Bre+lovin%26%238217%3B+the+iPad+hate. http://mendax.org/2010/04/06/were-lovin-the-ipad-hate/#comments Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:00:03 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=1993

And we love it because it just makes people sound ignorant, or flat-out trollish. That’s not to say that the iPad wasn’t over-hyped by much of the media and the faithful: in our hands-on with the iPad on release day, it lived up to our expectations but didn’t surpass them. It was definitely cool, we look forward to our 3G version arriving later this month, and getting a chance to play with iPad-specific software (the upscaled apps we tried didn’t look great). But the device was heavy – heavier than we thought it would, which doesn’t mean anything other than the fact that we wouldn’t hold it out in front of us for long periods of time, but we didn’t really expect to do that anyway.

But we still think the device is a potential game-changer. HP just announced their pricing and specs for their Slate, and if you think that’s a coincidence in light of the iPad’s release on Saturday, then you’re high. The Slate, after all, was announced before the iPad, and the Slate has everything to gain after critics’ lukewarm reception of the iPad on Saturday, versus a preemptive announcement that would have been drowned out by the iPad fanfare. But here’s the thing: the Slate is a Windows 7-based machine, and who the fuck wants that? And yes, we’re ignoring from the Slate-drooling-set the people who think they’ll be able to run modern Windows-based games and those who want to get their old-school emulation game on, because the iPad has already been hacked, and we’d sooner trust a jailbroken iPad than a buggy /HP product any day.

But back to the iPad hate, Gruber already refutes Dave Winer on the position that the iPad may fail because its users can’t develop applications for the iPad on the iPad: gaming have shown success for decades despite the fact that none have offered reasonable application development suites on the themselves.

But Winer has other arguments that need addressing, because they’re plain wrong. Especially when this one follows with Winer’s iPad-on-iPad-development argument:

It’s definitely not a writing tool. Out of the question. This concerns Jeff Jarvis, rightly so. This is something my mother observed when I demoed it to her on Saturday. Howard Weaver writes that not everyone is a writer. True enough, and not everyone is a voter, but we have an interest in making it easy for people to vote. And not everyone does jury duty, but easy or not, we require it. Writing is important, you never know where creative lightning will strike.

The problem with Winer’s argument(s) isn’t just his stream-of-consciousness blathering, but the missing evidence as to the iPad’s writing prowess (or lack thereof). Is he basing his argument on the fact that Pages is an extra $10 purchase? Or that a slew of high-quality writing apps isn’t already available on the AppStore? At what point does the iPad fail at writing where other mobile devices (e.g. netbooks) succeed? And don’t start with the multitasking argument, please, because if multitasking isn’t indeed a feature of OS 4.0, then state-saving between apps is still a work-around, especially if load-times between apps is negligible.

Winer goes on to condemn the iPad for not supporting his bookmark synchronization tool of choice: Xmarks. And a sillier argument he couldn’t make, because to judge an product for not supporting a third-party product is as nonsensical as us condemning every Android and Windows-based device because we can’t run Ulysses on them.

Three days into the iPad’s public availability, we haven’t seen one single, comprehensive review of the iPad where the final verdict isn’t positive. Those like Winer who paint a poor picture of the device either flatly refuse to adapt to the iPad’s new way of doing things, else simply don’t get it.

But here’s who did get it: when working with a computer illiterate family member this weekend, jumping back and forth between her and MacBook, she touched an icon on the MacBook’s screen, and later an entry field, because it’s a natural thing to do. And that’s the first time when we realized just how intuitive a touch interface is, because it’s finally a better input mechanism than a mouse. And when explaining how apps didn’t need to be installed by disc, and could be downloaded wirelessly, and how the chances of breaking an app, losing windows, overburdening a CPU, et al, we next to nil on the upcoming iPad, our family member wondered why it wasn’t so easy to begin with. Well, now it is, and she and thousands of others will pick an iPad up because it makes more sense than a traditional computer, and she and those thousands of people won’t be concerned with whether or not a random third-party app exists (because they’ll find one on the AppStore to do what they want to do), and won’t worry about developing iPad applications (ever). And that great force will undoubtedly trickle down to the unbelievers who want a lightweight computer, because the reality is, they too can do 99% of what they need a computer for, on the iPad.

And in the meantime, all the winers [sic] will realize that the iPad is as capable a writing machine as most any other.Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/04/06/were-lovin-the-ipad-hate/feed/ 4 The iPad should interface with the iPhone directly. http://mendax.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Posts+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fmendax.org%2F2010%2F03%2F29%2Fthe-ipad-should-interface-with-the-iphone-directly%2F&seed_title=The+iPad+should+interface+with+the+iPhone+directly. http://mendax.org/2010/03/29/the-ipad-should-interface-with-the-iphone-directly/#comments Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:15:53 +0000 WyldKard http://mendax.org/?p=1990

As we checked out ’s latest guided tours for the iPad, it occurred to us that since the iPad is capable of grabbing photos off digital cameras and memory sticks thanks to the iPad Camera Connection Kit, it should also be able to grab photos from an without having to rely on an intermediary computer. After all, some people’s digital camera is an , and they should be able to transfer pictures to the iPad just as easily as everyone else can.

Yet as we watched these guided tours, we also realized that the iPad’s Photos app, as cool as it is, doesn’t seem able to do a lot of other things we’d want, such as the ability to tag faces, perform basic editing functions, et al. In other words, the Photos app isn’t mobile replacement for iPhoto as much as it is a way to simply view photos on the go. And that’s a shame, because the iPad shouldn’t be a second (or third) mobile device in one’s bag, but a non-pro notebook replacement.

seems somewhat unsure of just how to market the iPad with this philosophy in mind. For example, while the Photos app seems to suggest that users stick with iPhoto for tagging and editing, they’re told that the iPad versions of the iWork suite are perfect mobile replacements for their normal OS X counterparts. Why the inconsistency?

Productivity-wise, it’s even a bigger shame, because we generally have more time when traveling to address tasks such as tagging, album management, etc, than when we’re at home or at work. The reality is that such photo organization simply doesn’t happen for us unless we’re on the road, and for the immediate future, that means we’d rely on the iPad for these types of tasks. To even argue that an expanded Photos app, with these features present, would somehow threaten iLife sales is laughable, and yet is holding off on adding (or revealing?) such features. Might they release an AppStore-distributed mobile iPhoto app for more money?

Understandably, relying on the normal OS X version of iTunes for synchronizing things likes movies may make sense to a degree (though not for movies taken with an ), but for smaller files, such as music purchased through the iTunes store, users should be able to synchronize the iPad directly with an , else the iTunes store should be changed to allow users to re-download material they’ve already purchased. The AppStore already allows this, but iTunes media seems to be an obstacle for this happening with multimedia.

So unless releases a dock-to-dock connector for synchronizing two mobile OS X devices, we may have to hold out for a media-in-the- solution from , else the long-sought-after wireless synchronization feature people have called for since the ’s debut.Similar Posts:

]]> http://mendax.org/2010/03/29/the-ipad-should-interface-with-the-iphone-directly/feed/ 0