tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84148272024-03-13T11:21:57.444+01:00macnews.net.tcapple stories with common sense™Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.comBlogger523125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-65563375555788877462011-12-27T20:12:00.003+01:002011-12-27T20:22:57.622+01:00Gottverfluchte erste Erfahrungen mit einer PS3Dies ist eher eine Ausnahme, aber dieser "Rant" muss sein. Ich habe mich gestern entschieden, mir endlich eine Spielkonsole mit HD-Auflösung anzutun, weil die Wii auf einem 55" Fernseher einfach nicht ganz der Zeit entspricht. Also heute zum Händler, eine PS3 Slim 160 GB mit Fifa 12 und GT5 geholt. Dazu noch eine Blu-Ray, schliesslich kann das Ding das ja.<br /><br />Zunächst die Zusammenfassung: Es sind genau zehn Stunden vergangen, seitdem ich Besitzer der PS3 bin, und ich bin noch nicht in der Lage, GT5 zu spielen.<br /><br />Stellt sich die Frage, warum. Und ja, sie stellt sich mir. Klar: Es gibt ca. 2.5 GB an Updates für das Spiel. Bei einer 20 Mbit-Leitung sollte das im Normalfall, bei 2.5 MB/s, die ich auf meinem Mac regelmässig erreichen kann, ca. 1000 Sekunden dauern. So über den Daumen gepeilt. das wären dann ohne es auszurechnen etwa 20 Minuten, weil eine Stunde ja 3600 Sekunden hat. Warum also statt 20 Minuten mehr als 10 Stunden? Es ist unerklärlich. Vor allem aber ist es so ziemlich das Gegenteil jeder Erfahrung, die ich jemals mit einem Produkt aus dem Hause Apple gemacht habe.<br /><br />Denn seien wir ehrlich, selbst wenn der Download "nur" 20 Minuten dauern würde, wäre nicht auch das noch so ziemlich unerträglich? Ich kaufe ein Spiel, lege es ein und muss dann eine längere Kaffeepause machen, bis ich es spielen kann? Das erinnert an C64-Zeiten, als der Spielcode noch von der Datasette auf den Computer überspult wurde. Dass allerdings GT5 auch *NACH* dem Downloaden all der Updates noch einmal ca. 8 GB herunterladen wollen würde, entnehme ich den Google-Resultaten, wenn ich nach "PS3 slow download" suche. Heisst das jetzt, dass ich die PS3 die nächsten 7 Tage heisslaufen lassen werde, bevor ich tatsächlich sinnvollerweise das Spiel beginnen kann?<br /><br />Als ich mir mein iPhone 4S in Hamburg kaufte, packte ich es aus und stellte es übers Apple Store WiFi Netzwerk aus dem iCloud Backup wieder her. Auch das waren ungefähr 2.5 GB an Daten, und knapp eine Stunde später konnte ich mein neues iPhone mit all seinen Einstellungen benutzen, ohne dass ich die 1000 Kilometer nach Hause an meinen Computer reisen musste. Welch Gegenteil von einer Erfahrung. Wie gut bin ich Apple gesinnt nach einer solchen Erfahrung, und wie dürfte ich wohl Sony gesinnt sein nach dem heutigen Tag?<br /><br />Ich wünsche einen schönen Abend. Mir wurde ein freier Tag vollständig zur Sau gemacht von einem nicht durchdachten Konzept und seiner Umsetzung. (Wieso, beispielsweise, kann ich nicht während der Download vonstatten geht, bereits mal eine Strecke befahren und mich im Rekord aufstellen üben? Das wäre doch, wenn die Downloadzeiten unumgänglich sind, zumindest eine Art Wiedergutmachung?)Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-69935445556262623832011-11-24T13:32:00.006+01:002011-11-26T19:32:24.721+01:00Tagi: Es geht weiter...Dass Tagi Online die Texte einkaufen könnte, war eigentlich schon irgendwie klar. <a href="http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/digital/mobil/So-gut-ist-Amazons-Tablet/story/29725071">Aber dass dabei sogar vergessen wird, Von "Deutschland" auf "Schweiz" zu wechseln, darf durchaus kritisiert werden, wobei vermutlich klar wird, dass die Artikel nicht bis zu Ende durchgelesen werden, denn erst im zweitletzten Abschnitt erscheint dieser Fehler:</a><br /><br /><blockquote><span style="font-style:italic;">In den USA werden die Konsumenten also vor eine nicht ganz leichte Wahl gestellt, in Deutschland stellt sich die Frage so nicht, denn ob und wann das Kindle Fire hier auf den Markt kommt, steht noch nicht fest.</span></blockquote><br /><br />Auf zwei Zeilen heisst es darunter dann, dass das Gerät in der Schweiz nicht von Amazon vertrieben wird, sondern z.B. über digitec bestellbar sei. (Wobei auch nicht erwähnt wird, dass es sich dort derzeit lediglich im Katalog aufgenommen findet, aber keinerlei Lieferdatum bekannt ist, weil auch digitec es nicht in die Schweiz importiert derzeit.)<br />Immerhin war der eingekaufte Artikel so ehrlich, das Gerät mit fast all seinen Fehlern zu beschreiben. Fehlte eigentlich nur, dass der Webbrowser sehr langsam funktioniert und dass man den Ein-/Ausschaltknopf beim Lesen ständig aus Versehen betätigt.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-15153518142304740952011-11-23T20:19:00.002+01:002011-11-23T20:39:54.042+01:00iPhone 5 soll grösser werdenBlick.ch übertitelt <a href="http://www.blick.ch/life/digital/iphone-5-soll-groesser-werden-187795">den Artikel</a> mit "Gegen Steve Jobs' Wille". Davon abgesehen, dass der Akkusativ von "Wille" am Ende durchaus ein "n" vertragen würde, und auch davon abgesehen, dass Steve Jobs' Wille (kein "n" weil hier Nominativ) bereits erloschen sein dürfte, zumindest im unübertragenen Sinn, handelt es sich auch bei diesem "Artikel" hauptsächlich um eine Repetition von <a href="http://iLounge.com/">auf Gerüchteseiten</a> Gelesenem.<br /><br />Genannt wird im Blick.ch "Artikel" iLounge als "Quelle". Dass das an und für sich schon falsch ist, weil iLounge sich selber auf "eine verlässliche Quelle" bezieht gemäss dem Blick.ch "Artikel", findet sich auf iLounge <span style="font-style:italic;">kein</span> solcher Artikel. Zumindest verlinkt Blick.ch nicht auf einen solchen. "iPhone bigger" als Suchbegriff findet auf iLounge nichts, "iPhone larger" findet als neuesten Artikel, der irgendetwas mit einem grösseren Bildschirm zu tun hat, eine Gerüchtediskussion aus dem April. Keine Ahnung also, was genau der Autor des "Artikels" meint, wenn er auf iLounge verweist.<br /><br />Natürlich gibt es tatsächlich Gerüchte, welche besagen, dass Apple gleichzeitig zur Arbeit am iPhone 4S (also dem iPhone 5) auch an einem anderen Prototypen mit grösserem Bildschirm gearbeitet hatte. Ich möchte hier gar nicht in Zweifel ziehen, ob es diese Gerüchte gab oder gibt, oder ob an den Gerüchten irgendetwas dran war oder ist. Nur: Jetzt über Gerüchte eines iPhone 5 zu reden, ist aus mehreren Gründen falsch. Erstens: Das iPhone 5 ist bereits auf dem Markt und heisst "iPhone 4S". Das nächste iPhone wird die sechste Generation iPhone darstellen, und dürfte deswegen kaum iPhone 5 heissen. Es könnte zum Beispiel iPhone 6 heissen (als sechste Generation) oder auch iPhone 4G, sofern es denn LTE oder eine andere Funktechnik der 4. Generation zum Einsatz bringen wird. Viel wichtiger aber: Ob das nächste iPhone nun im Sommer 2012, im Herbst 2012 oder im Frühjahr 2013 erscheint - auf alle Fälle sind wir jetzt noch viel zu weit von einem Release entfernt, um ernsthaft sinnvolle Gerüchte mit besserer Basis als "ein Freund von mir hat einen Onkel, der als Anwalt für Apple in der Schweiz arbeitet, und der wird's wohl wissen..." zu erhalten. Dass sich Apple-Gerüchte-Websites um solche Dinge kümmern, darf erlaubt sein. Es erwartet ja auch niemand einen überprüften Artikel von so einer Website. Aber warum muss Blick.ch sich darum kümmern? Und warum sollte Blick.ch iLounge als Quelle nennen, wenn iLounge laut Blick.ch einen "Cupertino-Insider" (heisst das, dass der in Cupertino wohnt oder dort mal einen Kaffee getrunken hat?) als Quelle nennt? Und warum wird als Bild ein iPhone mit Steve Jobs' Todesanzeige darauf verwendet? Und warum steht darunter: "Das iPhone 5 wird nicht so, wie Steve Jobs sich das vorgestellt hat. (Reuters)?"<br /><br />Ich könnte ja verstehen, wenn jemand behauptete, Steve Jobs sei in Wahrheit nicht tot, er spiele draussen im Garten mit Elvis und Michael Jackson Verstecken. Aber wieso die Nachrichtenagentur Reuters mit in einen völlig sinnlosen "Artikel" involvieren?<br /><br />Klar: Es sieht dann so aus, als hätte sich irgendjemand Gedanken darüber gemacht, ob die ganze Chose irgendeine Relevanz besitzt. Oder viel wichtiger: "gsc" hatte den Auftrag, einen Artikel für Blick.ch's "Digital"-Abteilung zu schreiben, und er war halt grad auf irgendwelchen Gerüchteseiten, wusste nicht mehr, wo er was gelesen hatte, wählte "iLounge" als Verlinkungspartner und schrieb noch "Reuters" unters Bild (das übrigens ein iPhone 4, kein iPhone 4S zeigt).<br /><br />Lieber "gsc": Das Geld, das Du für den "Artikel" bekommen hast, es war zuviel.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-46658258161852317622011-11-20T11:22:00.003+01:002011-11-21T08:02:42.357+01:00Jetzt hört aber mal auf...In einem neueren Artikel <a href="http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/digital/mobil/Was-das-iPhone-5-bieten-koennte/story/11211871">verbratet der Tagi einmal mehr sehr unkritisch</a> die Gerüchteküche. Dass die Tatsache, dass die 5. Generation des iPhones nun "4S" heisst, und deshalb das nächste iPhone wohl eher iPhone 6 heissen dürfte, überlegt sich der Autor (oder eher "Gerüchte-Übersetzer") schon gar nicht erst. Natürlich bin ich nicht grundsätzlich dagegen, dass die Online-Redaktion sich auch ein wenig um die Gerüchteküche kümmern darf, sollte aber bemüht sein, eigene Recherchen und zumindest Gedankengänge zu formulieren. Das würde nämlich auch zeigen, dass man nicht nur Drohnen beschäftigt, welche Quellen unkritisiert übernehmen und übersetzen, sondern dass der Begriff "Redaktion" auch im Zusammenhang mit "Online" einen gewissen Sinn machen würde.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-3225607929281153462011-11-11T12:30:00.006+01:002011-11-11T12:42:15.100+01:00iPhone Knappheit beabsichtigt? (fragt Tagi Online)Es gibt eine Theorie, die besagt, dass alle Schlagzeilen, welche mit einem Fragezeichen enden, guten Gewissens mit "Nein." beantwortet werden können. Natürlich ist es auch in diesem Fall so. <a href="http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/digital/mobil/Ist-die-iPhone4SKnappheit-beabsichtigt/story/17068321">Der Artikel</a> sagt dies auch am Ende, wie wir hier sehen:<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><blockquote>Wie ist die Situation heute? «Eine künstliche Verknappung können wir nicht bestätigen. Aus unserer Sicht haben sich die Lieferungen durch Apple gegenüber der Einführung des iPhone 4 deutlich verbessert», so Swisscom-Sprecher Olaf Schulze.</blockquote></span><br /><br />Wenn ich heute zu einem Apple Premium Reseller Store gehe, kann ich mein Orange, Sunrise oder Swisscom Abo verlängern und ein Gerät direkt beziehen, zumindest bei den meisten Modellen. Die Frage, die sich mir nun stellt, ist diese: War dieser Artikel überhaupt notwendig? Oder dürfen wir ihn zu all jenen zählen, zu welchen es in diesem Blog wohl am meisten gehen wird, nämlich zu denen, welche hauptsächlich Klicks generieren sollen, weil sowohl die Apple-Fans (weil sie nicht glauben wollen, dass Apple falsch liegt) und Apple-Hasser (weil sie wollen, dass es so ist) einfach gerne auf solches Flamebait aufspringen?<br /><br />Flamebait oder nicht? Ja. Die meisten Artikel, deren Schlagzeilen mit Fragezeichen enden, sind wohl genau das. Das Hauptproblem für mich ist, dass sich die Mehrheit der Leser nicht merken werden, dass selbst der Artikel aussagt, dass es sich um kein Problem handelt, sondern dass der Tagi online darüber geschrieben hat, und es sich so um ein Problem handeln muss. Vielleicht sollten wir einfach vermehrt Artikel schreiben, welche dieselbe Schlagzeilenmanier verfolgt, aber den Tagi betrifft:<br /><br />Schreibt der Tagi ohne gross zu recherchieren Flamebait-Artikel?<br /><br />Wir können dann im Artikel selbst ja schreiben, dass der Tagi auch viele gute Sachen publiziert. Hauptsache, die Schlagzeile wirft die Frage auf, egal ob sie sich stellt.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-56720568689046594282011-11-10T18:20:00.001+01:002011-11-10T18:20:14.966+01:00A New Start, But auf Deutsch...The next post will be the first in German. There's a need for calling out the Swiss (and German) press on all things Apple.<br />
<br />
Thank you and Dankeschön!Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-25441081338300233272011-02-07T15:57:00.002+01:002011-02-07T16:06:15.408+01:00Let the dinosaurs be wed..?Speculation is high about Nokia adopting Windows Phone 7 soon. I can't help but chuckle a bit about that. On one side, we have Microsoft, which has tried to succeed (and failed) in the smartphone market for a long, long time. On the other side, we have the second dinosaur, which once was the leader, but doesn't seem to grasp what has happened in this very market.<br />They're still the leading vendor of dumbphones, and their smartphones are still quite good form a hardware perspective (at least some of them are), but where they once led the curve, they're now playing a game of "me, too" they won't be able to win either way. Adopting Windows Phone 7 would even do them more harm than good, I believe, because it would relegate them to a hardware company. Maybe it's time for that, but I guess android would quite certainly be a better horse to bet on, because that still leaves some room open for innovation, whereas Microsoft has quite a bit of control over what an OEM can do with Windows Phone 7 and what they can't do. There's a reason why the specs of all Windows Phone 7 phones are practically the same.<br /><br />While I truly wish Nokia the best in their endeavours, I don't see a dinosaur (Microsoft) and a dinosaur (Nokia, which has been highly criticised for its overhead and time to market) creating the poster(love)child of the next generation of smartphones.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-90228224662074708412010-10-30T12:39:00.003+02:002010-10-30T13:30:49.346+02:00MacBook Air 11" (late 2010) Review<span style="font-style:italic;">(For the purpose of this review, I've used my personal base model with 64 GB SSD and 2 GB of RAM.)</span><br /><br />I've been waiting for a subnotebook by Apple for decades, it seems to me, and finally Apple has found a way to wrap its head around the idea of a really small notebook since the days of the PowerBook DUO, the last of which was released in 1997 (the PowerBook 2400, and it was not called DUO, although for all intents and purposes, it belonged to the same line). Some people would say that the PowerBook 12" model followed it, but it simply wasn't a subnotebook, not in its time and not afterwards. (Not small enough, not light enough, it basically was an iBook clad in aluminum.)<br /><br />The MacBook Air 13" wasn't enough for people who really wanted a subnotebook, because we really _do_ want a small screen and a small footprint, so you can put it in a _small_ bag, not a usual 13" notebook bag. The 11" model released now finally addresses these things, and although it doesn't go 10" or below, it's finally small enough, and the good thing about its screen size is that you still get a full keyboard (almost). And let's start there…<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The keyboard</span> is almost the same as the one you get with every other MacBook model. Three differences compared to the MacBook Pro's:<br /><br />1.) The top row (function keys) is vertically limited, so those keys are a little harder to hit and push down, because they're also close to the frame. This row includes the power button, which pushes eject and sound buttons a little to the left.<br /><br />2.) The bottom row, including command keys and the spacebar. I don't quite understand why nobody seems to mention that difference, because it's the one you're going to notice more in real life, as it also means the arrow keys are a tad smaller. They still work fine, but the bigger ones on the MacBook Pro etc. work better.<br /><br />3.) No backlight, no automatic screen brightness controls. I miss that feature, although I get around the keyboard blind quite well.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The trackapd</span>, by the way, puts every solution of any other subnotebook or netbook to shame: It's the same glass trackpad used in any other MacBook, only limited a little vertically. I find the other MacBooks' trackpads to be too large, rather, this one is almost perfect. You get precision control (ever used a netbook's trackpad?). Period.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The display</span> is basically a standard, LED lit 11.6" display with 720p resolution (same as all of those 720p "HD" TVs), i.e. 1366*768 pixels. It isn't lit evenly, most noticeable at the top and the bottom of the screen. Otherwise, the screen's beautiful to work with, its resolution being almost the same as the 13" MacBook and MacBook Pro screens, but in 16:9 format, which works well for watching movies, lets the MBA 11" have a full-size keyboard and has about the pixel-per-inch ratio of the 15" models' high resolution option or the 17" model (or the iPad's). I like this display, although I'd love to have it change brightness automatically.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The processor</span> is about the slowest you can get if you don't want to go netbook-style atom. Let's be honest here: This processor simply isn't fast, and you won't want to use the 11" model as your main computer, unless you really do just basic things. It's fine for wordprocessing, webbrowsing, your e-mail and every other task in the productivity department, and it also handles entertainment very well - but not because of the processor. That's the <span style="font-weight:bold;">good graphics</span>' fault, which is the same as you get in the 13" MacBook Pro. Perfect for playing high-res video and quite good for most games as well, although the form factor clearly isn't aimed at the "professional" gamer.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The SSD</span> instead of a harddrive is where the speed is at, though. Using flash memory instead of a harddrive enables this form factor, enables Apple to give the thing <span style="font-weight:bold;">enough battery life</span> (five hours of wireless work is not only achievable, but the norm) and is really, really what you want in all notebooks from here on out. With the earliest MacBook Air 13", I've always had problems with the battery. It worked fine if you used it for a whole day, but it couldn't keep the juice overnight. In sleep mode, it just seemed to use 10% per hour. Shutting the thing down completely solved the problem, but getting it back up was a long process (too long for mobile purposes), even when using the hibernation mode. With the new MacBook Air's power saving modes, it works very well, and although I've only had the thing for a couple of days now, I believe Apple about the 30 days of standby. The SSD is fast enough to come back from hibernation without needing an interface telling you that it's doing that. It looks just like coming out of sleep, although there's about a second or two delay before you get full control back. (That's only going to happen if your MBA slept for more than an hour, though.)<br />The SSD is, of course, completely silent and very quick for starting applications, rebooting the computer if needed (after the 10.6.5 update that's coming in the next week or the one after it) and generally reading data. Writing is perfectly fast as well, although slower than reading.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">So what's the verdict, fryke?</span><br />The verdict is that Apple has come around to creating a subnotebook that works. It's small enough, sexy enough, powerful enough and inexpensive enough. Although some sites complain about the price (as they always do about Apple products, forgetting not to compare crapware to actually useful computers), this _is_ the best subnotebook I've seen so far, and we've come a long way from 2000$+ subnotebooks of back when we wanted Apple to do one so badly. It costs the same as Apple's entry-level MacBook, but gives you more style, more portability and even more performance overall. (Don't forget, the white MacBook's max RAM is also 4 GB.) There's really only one downside to this otherwise perfect little machine, and it's understandable: You can't upgrade it much. The RAM is soldered to the motherboard, so if you think you need 4 GB, special order yours instead of getting the one they have at your reseller. For my purposes, 2 GB work well. (TextEdit doesn't _really_ require that much RAM.) The SSD, according to all I've read on the internets, will actually be upgradeable, although it will probably be a costly decision for some time, so I'd also advise you to get it in the configuration you want from the beginning. If 128 GB don't cut it for you, get the 64 GB model instead and use USB sticks for everything else. You can have a 32 GB USB stick for Parallels, for example, one for your iPhoto library etc. If you have to decide what to keep on the internal drive, anyway, a modular approach might be best. That way, your internal system stays lean and fast. And that's how I like my brandnew MacBook Air 11" best.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-27227903093398315602010-03-13T22:42:00.002+01:002010-03-13T22:57:41.431+01:00The iPad preorder madnessWe've heard it. A couple of times. It's a magical and revolutionary device. Of course we *know* it's not magical because there _is_ no such thing as magic. But anything that is technologically advanced enough *must* seem to ordinary users as magic. And revolutionary: Well... Not so much. It *is* a large iPod touch (with 3G if you choose that version of the iPad). I don't mean that in a bad way, though: The iPod touch (and the iPhone) _have been_ revolutionary products that work very well, and the iPad will take that on a next level. Which means it's an _evolutionary_ product. So: No Steve, it's not a magical and revolutionary product. It's a technologically advanced and evolutionary product. Of course that doesn't make that good a slogan, but at least it's more truthful.<br />So: Please stop the mumbojumbo blabla. It's a good product. We've seen it online and we'll soon enough see it in stores. And then we'll decide whether we'll buy one. It's too early to order it. That's just not good practice. iPad haters: Wait until it actually gets here. Get your hands on one and see for yourself whether it would make some sense in your life. If it doesn't: Don't buy it. If it does: Reconsider. iPad lovers: Get your pink glasses off and go about your life. Then reconsider buying an iPad once you've got one in your own hands.<br /><br />Back when Steve introduced the iPhone, he called it "the best iPod ever", and that message was truthful. I liked that, and I still like it. I hope Apple comes back to truthful advertising. Calling the iPad a magical device that is revolutionary sounds like Apple itself hasn't really found out what the iPad is all about just yet. Maybe we're seeing Apple starting to deteriorate. Maybe it was just a goofy marketing guru and Steve had a bad day when he approved of that message. I hope it's the latter. Apple needs to continue controlling itself. They need to create only the products they can actually do well.<br /><br />All that said: I'm going to buy a 16 GB 3G iPad, although I'm still considering going 64 GB. But I guess my iPad will only be with me for a year: Because then, I'll want the second generation iPad. (And yes I'm going to try an iPad before actually buying one.) ;)Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com69tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-75764810821275899772010-01-31T14:47:00.005+01:002010-01-31T15:14:14.667+01:00So it's called the "iPad".Ever since Steve Jobs killed the Newton in 1997-1998, I've been thinking about how the Knowledge Navigator concept that led to the Newton would come to fruition at a later time, and the previous post shows that my thoughts aren't so far off the mark, usually. <span style="font-weight:bold;">We're there now</span>, and it's certainly quite a bit different from what the Newton was, but hey: What _hasn't_ changed in those 12 years in computing and mobility?<br /><br />I personally did quite a bit of rumour-mongering in the years after the Newton was killed, but some of my thoughts that are visible in macosx.com forum posts - see: <a href="http://macosx.com/forums/apple-news-rumors-discussion/13216-newton-os-3-dubbed-navi.html">this link</a> - are spot on references to what actually became the iPod touch, the iPhone and now the iPad. Apparently, I wasn't so far off to call QuickTime a very central element of the "navi". You could say I was wildly guessing about, but hey: It could also be that Steven P. Jobs read my thread back then and thought: Hey, that guy has the right idea, let's do that. ;)<br /><br />The web-sphere is full of iPad-bashing and <a href="http://speirs.org/blog/2010/1/29/future-shock.html">iPad-praising</a>, and quite certainly, the iPad _will_ divide the world between those who simply don't need one and those who'll love one (and will keep hanging on, until it gets better and better...). If you think back to the introduction of the original iPhone, you'll certainly see that in the time since then, it hasn't changed much lookwise, but it's gotten a *lot* more interesting with 3rd party applications plus GPS etc. If I think about what 3rd party app developers will be able to do with the iPad, I see it succeeding without much doubt. OmniGroup <a href="http://blog.omnigroup.com/2010/01/29/ipad-or-bust/">has already committed</a> to developing its apps for the iPad. (Its Mac apps, that is!) Add to that a little Bento or even FileMaker. Heck: Even Adobe could provide some form of Photoshop Elements to the thing. But more important than what Microsoft or Adobe might do on the iPad, is what new and upcoming developers will do on it. The iPhone showed that innovative application developers can not only thrive on such a "limited" platform, but that they can actually improve the world (wow, don't go over that cliff, fryke...) with things like a 4-track recorder or a finger-drawing/-painting app etc.<br /><br />My father never much liked computers, although he had to use them in his line of work (an accountant). Since his retirement, he's found his way from the Windows world to the Mac, and while he never got his head around a mobile phone, he's in love with his iPhone (and my mum wants her own). I bet they both would love the iPad.<br /><br />The iPad might not be the answer to all of everyone's worries, but it truly *is* a computer for the rest of us. It'll do so many things so well.<br /><br />Two important things at the end of this post: 1.) Flash has to die. It uses far too many processor cycles for what it actually enables you to do. For video, HTML5 will take care of that in a much nicer way. The other stuff: Go CSS3 or standalone apps. Move over, Flash. 2.) That missing front-facing camera: You're going to buy the iPad that comes after this iPad, I guess. It's not _that_ much of a problem, really, although I, too would have expected the iPad to sport one.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-8700150518142712912009-08-03T23:15:00.002+02:002009-08-03T23:31:05.122+02:00The tablet is an iPod is a MacBook is a Newton...What many a blogger and PC magazine writer out there <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/169476/apple_tablet_prototype_is_real_nov_launch_expected_says_report.html">doesn't seem to get</a> is that Apple's choice isn't simply to either go "big iPod touch" or "MacBook gone tablet". If you thought the iPod would be "just another MP3 player" before it came along in 2001 or if you thought Apple would create something similar to a SonyEricsson T610i with the iPhone, yes then there are only these options.<br /><br />But Apple wouldn't be Apple if they weren't all about the whole user experience. The current interface of Mac OS X (as well as the changes coming with Snow Leopard in September) aren't enough for a tablet-style computer to work well. You'll at least need a nice keyboard overlay of some kind, but even so, the standard OS X menubar doesn't make much sense in a touch device, one of the reasons why we don't see such a feature-filled menubar on the iPhone (merely a statusbar). On the other hand, just scaling the iPhone/iPod touch interface to a bigger tablet isn't enough either. If you simply fill a huuuuuge 10" home screen with dozens of apps, it's not a very clever interface anymore. Four or five rows of three or four apps are the most you can view at a glance, I'd say. (But Apple has that covered with Spotlight, anyway.)<br /><br />Then there's talk about media. That's the easy part, really. Quicktime X looks as if it were <i>made</i> for such a device. How you handle video and music on the iPhone works _very_ well on a 10" tablet. The bigger screen would simply make it more enjoyable. Similarly, iPod touch style gaming would surely be very enjoyable on a larger touch-screen.<br /><br />But what about productivity apps? There certainly _are_ things such a tablet could accomplish. It's big enough for touchtyping much faster than on an iPhone, although I believe I'll still be at least twice as fast on a real notebook keyboard, just because I can handle it blindfolded, whereas a virtual keyboard is much more dependent on eyesight. Just think about how Mobile Safari or Safari would work on a tablet: It would be wonderful.<br /><br />Video chat could also be a big feature for such a device. It's not been talked about much, but it would certainly beat a similar experience on an iPhone with iChat AV.<br /><br />If, right now, you simply think a 600-900 dollar tablet would not find a market, think again. Because people thought similar things about the iPod as well as the iPhone. I've been hearing over the past several months that a "larger iPhone OS device" would enter the market in September, along with new versions of the iPod line. And I believe Apple will enter the holiday season with a bang.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-54326746371330250692009-08-01T16:22:00.001+02:002009-08-01T16:23:13.711+02:00The future is already hereOne important difference between the evolution of earlier smartphone platforms like Nokia's Communicators and Series 60 (Symbian) and the iPhone platform, to me, is that the development of the iPhone is actually _ongoing_.<br /><br />I remember very well having the Nokia 9110 at some point. It was a great communicator, and for a while, it looked like future upgrades and additional software from 3rd party developers would make it an even greater communicator. Sure, a lack of GPRS or even HSCSD was a hardware-based problem that couldn't be solved in software, but the users expected to see more and better software features in the future. But Nokia didn't look at it like this. Nokia, after a while, simply abandoned the 9110 (after releasing the 9110i) and focused on the development of the 9210 (9290 for US citizens) - hardware- and software-wise. This meant that all that was left were a couple of hobbyists developing for the 9110 and 9110i, which basically meant that the platform was going nowhere. As with *every* communicator release, the 9210 was a move forward (colour screen, HSCSD) as well as a huge step back (slower GUI). And when it was released, it was already outdated without GRPS/EDGE support. When the 9500/9300 arrived, the 9210 platform was abandoned for the new Series 80 series communicators. But those again were left in the dust when the Nokia Communicator e90 arrived, which brought it to the Series 60 platform, which again was a step forward as well as a step back. Nokia wasn't and isn't offering software upgrades for the communicators to newer versions. Bugfix releases, yes, but software upgrades to really newer versions: No.<br /><br />The 1st generation iPhone, however, runs 3.0 beautifully. Sure, the iPhone 3G brought along new hardware features like 3G connectivity and GPS, the 3GS brought a compass and a much speedier processor, but software-wise, the original iPhone can still keep up with (most) newer functions. Sure, they screw with their users as well (no MMS for original iPhones, what's up with that?), but not in a general way like it happens with the other platforms.<br />I'm sure some version (4.0, 5.0?) will leave the original iPhone in the dust, but by then most users will have moved on, anyway, and the others will either have bought their iPhone second-hand inexpensively (and probably won't expect every future update to work with their handset) or will be content with what they have, because after all, they've been using the great handset for _years_.<br /><br />I've bought my first iPhone in late 2007. Some Swiss company imported AT&T iPhones on quite a big scale, and we jailbreaked and unlocked them using one or the other software that was around, so we could use it on Swisscom, sunrise or Orange Switzerland's networks. I then moved to the iPhone 3G when it became available with Orange Switzerland, my network of choice. Luckily, Orange offers one-year contracts for a bit more money than the usual 2-year iPhone offerings, which allowed me to move to the 3GS when it became available, and this _will_ allow me to move to the next iPhone next year, which is going to be great, I'm sure.<br /><br />We'll probably see similar things happen to Android handsets. It doesn't seem like the users will be forbidden, somehow, to upgrade to newer versions of the operating system. And that's a good thing for smartphone users all around the world (or at least where the iPhone and Android handsets become available).<br /><br />You can cry "lock in strategies" all you want, I never felt really "free" with the Nokia platforms or SonyEricsson platforms. Usually, those meant that you bought a device with a particular OS, and you were locked into _that_ until you bought a new handset.<br /><br />With the iPhone I'm as free as I want to be. The jailbreaking community gives us options where Apple's a bit restrictive, but I must say I haven't been using jailbreaks on my 3G and 3GS, because the apps I needed and the functionality was available. (Other than push-notification, which only came about in recent weeks.)<br /><br />I still wish the iPhone would go true multitasking (and I'm sure still missing one or the other additional feature), but I guess that'll happen with newer hardware and OS 4.0, or maybe with even newer hardware and OS 5.0 in 2011.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-64665571325541920632009-04-06T23:01:00.003+02:002009-04-06T23:12:46.291+02:00Now what: iPhone G3? 4G? 3.0?With calling last year's model the iPhone 3G, Apple brought a bit of trouble into the naming schemes. With iPods, we just called the generations 1G, 2G, 3G etc., the iPod classic is the iPod 6G, although it's rarely called that. The current nano is the iPod nano 4G. The current iPhone (the "iPhone 3G") is actually the iPhone 2G, the second generation iPhone. They can't well call the next iPhone the "4G", since the 3G's moniker stems from the 3G networks it's using, and there simply aren't 4G networks around just yet.<br /><br />An iPhone Pro was mentioned in several rumours, which might mean that the 3G would stay on the market, at a lower price. It would be an interesting option, although it doesn't seem very "Apple". I personally hope they'll just call it the iPhone again. We'll call it 3rd generation or 3.0 or just "2009", but the standard iPhone model should just be called iPhone in my opinion, like the iPod was before the arrival of the "classic" (which basically meant that it was a dying breed, you don't call anything "classic" if it's not about to die).<br /><br />But what about the other models? If there really is going to be a larger format tablet and an iPhone mini or nano, we'll certainly have to forget about the generation naming scheme again.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-77062422146778295902009-03-17T00:09:00.003+01:002009-03-19T12:33:48.067+01:00The iPhone platformIts OS is simply called "OS X", removing the "Mac" moniker. It's going to be the platform for the iPod touch, the iPhone, the iPad maybe, Apple TV... But as long as we're talking iPhone, mainly, what feature upgrades does the iPhone really need? The following are the most heard criticisms and feature-wishes for the iPhone, but I don't think Apple actually will bring them to the platform, at least not all of them at once...<br /><br />1.) MMS<br />People who were using MMS extensively before going iPhone _are_ missing the feature. But it really _is_ just an expensive (at least in some places) replacement for real E-Mail. The iPhone does E-Mail really well. Adding MMS would basically mean to invest development hours into a vanishing technology. So I'm saying: No need, really. iPhone apps allow you to use Facebook and other platforms to share your pix online. If your contacts only have older phones that _don't_ do Facebook and/or E-Mail well, they should get a better phone. May I suggest an iPhone?<br /><br />2.) Copy & Paste<br />Many people call it "cut" and paste, but actually cutting isn't required, it's copying that's required. (You don't "cut" a number from an SMS, you copy it.) Apple's been trying to get on without such a feature on the iPhone. I think they've done well in some places, but bad in others. So I hope the rumour comes true, finally, with the news about OS 3.0 tomorrow.<br /><br />3.) Flash<br />Seriously? Well, I guess some websites depend on it, so the addition of Flash would certainly help make a point of the iPhone OS giving you the "full" web experience Apple always talks about. I don't see it as survival-necessary, and if Apple adds it (with Adobe's help), I sure hope it's a _full_ version of Flash and a mature one at the same time. We don't need more Safari-hangs or crashes on the iPhone, and I suspect any 3rd party plugin has the ability to really fuck things up.<br /><br />4.) Search<br />Actually, I haven't heard this call too much. But really, with Apple always talking about how great Spotlight is on the Desktop, it *is* curious how the iPhone does _not_ have a search function at all. We got one in Contacts, but the iPhone really needs Spotlight. I want to enter a person's name, for example, and see his contact information, messages, appointments etc. all on one page, so I can select and open from there without having to open the correct application first. With a lot of E-Mail messages, for example, it's really difficult today to find a text blurb you remember having read in a mail message earlier. Search, I find (heh!), has to make it into 3.0.<br /><br />5.) Background apps/background push notification<br />When Apple first talked about how many smartphones weren't all that smart, really, I had to state that the iPhone really just didn't cut it as a smartphone. It was a smart phone, but not a smartphone. One reason, of course, was that smartphones had exactly that differentiation from dumbphones. On Series 60 and Series 80 phones like Nokia's Communicator series, I could have my messages app open, my IM app open and some other stuff, and notifications were a breeze. Going to the iPhone meant that leaving the IM app meant logging out automatically and not being informed about new incoming messages. Not so smart indeed.<br />The worst thing about this is that Apple *really* got my hopes up when they were talking about the OS 2.0 software and its implementation of push notification. It seemed like a really smart idea. They wouldn't have to actually keep the apps running in the background, but notifications would still work, which was the main one of my gripes with the OS. But OS 2 came and push notification just didn't happen. A broken promise. One that, imho, has hurt Apple's image a bit. I mean: Whatever they promise us on Tuesday - will they actually deliver? Or will we buy into the "this'll come later on in OS 3" and end up wishing for OS 4? It needs to be solved. One way or the other.<br /><br />6.) Bluetooth<br />The iPhone has a bluetooth chip. It doesn't, however, have Bluetooth features. It supports some headsets, and that's it. They have to be mono, too.<br />But I want to push contacts, photos and other files via BT. I want to use my iPhone as a BT modem for my MacBook Air. I want to use my Apple Wireless Keyboard for entering text on my iPhone. I could leave my MacBook Air or lenovo S10e hackbook at home then. It's not about acknowleding that the onscreen keyboard is bad. It's quite good actually. I'm quicker on it nowadays than on my Nokia Communicator keyboards, which is quite a feat. But I'm not comfortable writing three or four pages of text on that keyboard, something which I *would* be able to if I could use the wireless keyboard. It runs OS X, I'm sure it can be done quite easily in fact.<br /><br />I'm quite nervous about the news in a couple of hours (well, about 15-20 hours, I'm guessing...). I want OS 3 to wow me in a good way. But I don't want to just hear about 2 great new features that try to wow me but forgetting about the stuff that users are actually asking for. Giving us things we didn't even _know_ we wanted is great. It's always nice when Apple's able to do that. But giving us required stuff is important as well. (I'm still very thankful I'm finally able to turn off auto-correction without having to do a jailbreak.)Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-48853768256586538262009-02-25T13:34:00.002+01:002009-02-25T13:57:34.823+01:00Safari 4 will continue the "we don't adhere" mantra...Apparently, Apple simply doesn't care about their own UI guidelines when it comes to iLife apps and Safari. The newest offender is of course Safari 4's "tab bar inside the window titlebar". It's very inconsistent, and sadly, you can only grab tabs from the top right corner of each tab. Grabbing the title, as before, will result in moving the whole window. Many people tend to arrange their windows. Me personally, for example, I like my windows to be hooked top-left. A couple of pixels below the menubar and to the right of the left display edge. Grabbing the tabs at the wrong place results in me constantly having to put the window back where it belongs.<br />Of course, you can solve the problem by typing "defaults write com.apple.Safari DebugSafari4TabBarIsOnTop -bool NO" without the quotes into a Terminal window and hitting return after that. Restarting Safari will then show you tabs the old way. (Do the same with "YES" to restore the new default-functionality.) But I don't want to have to hack my systems whenever I set them up. Nowadays, I have to restore a 2D dock via such a command, and now I have to restore a decent tabbing behaviour to Safari. Of course I also have to install LaunchBar and other utilities, but that's something I've come to terms with since, I guess, around Mac OS X 10.1. But to me, a couple of tabs in the window titlebar of Safari just looks kinda messy. I find the old way more logical.<br />Of course the new way reduces the vertical footprint of Safari windows, which could mean good things for a netbook. (Hint?)Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-72823842306785205532009-01-25T10:39:00.002+01:002009-01-25T10:55:50.387+01:00AppleTV Take 3?Christian Zibreg notes <a href="http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/41151/128/1/1/">5 "main" features of AppleTV Take 3</a> on tgdaily.com (link goes to second page, where the list of 5 points is). But I have to say no to at least a couple of those five...<br /><br />5.) Full HD and DVR capabilities.<br />This just shows a badly written article. Why do you combine those _two_ features as one feature request? One has nothing to do with the other, and quite clearly, Apple has _no_ interest whatsoever to bring actual OTA/OTC TV to AppleTV. The whole point of AppleTV is to bring us content _directly_ over the net. When we want it, without ads, at a price.<br />I of course agree that 1080i/1080p is a logical next step for the device or the software. Currently, AppleTV can put out 1080i, but it really just extrapolates 720p and lower quality to 1080i.<br /><br />4.) Built-in digital TV (ATSC) tuner.<br />No. It simply isn't Apple's goal. Apple wants you to get your media from the iTunes Store (whether it be free podcasts, paid movies/shows or rentals). A TV tuner and DVR would maybe expand ATV's appeal to customers, but Apple has a clear goal here. So: No. Very simple.<br /><br />3.) Built-in Time Capsule and AirPort Extreme.<br />Would be possible, feasible and certainly on my wishlist. Since it doesn't distract from Apple's main goal with AppleTV, I'd say this one's okay.<br /><br />2.) Premium TV channels via iTS.<br />The way Christian describes this, it sounds like he's talking "live TV" again. That's simply not what AppleTV is about. Whether they add higher-priced premium content to the iTunes Store: Who knows. It would make sense.<br /><br />1.) The App Store.<br />Games on the AppleTV would've been a better title. Of course it's an option. But the hardware is only up for "casual gaming" so far, i.e. it wouldn't really be a competitor for Wii, XBox 360 and PS3. Since you couldn't very well play iPhone games on the AppleTV without an actual iPhone as a controller, it would mean completely incompatible, separate development. And since AppleTV isn't the hit the iPhone is, so far, I don't just see it. It could be interesting, but it'd also distract from AppleTV's main goal.<br /><br />And that's the main thing that bothers me about the article. It ignores Apple's main goal. Just keep in mind that Apple wants to<br /><br />1.) have you as a returning iTunes Store customer.<br />2.) sell you content on top of what you're getting for free (podcasts and the likes).<br />3.) be the _next_ thing.<br /><br />With these three points in mind, it becomes very clear that any OTA/OTC TV tuner stuff and DVR capabilities are _not_ part of the AppleTV plans. See: iTunes doesn't let you buy an FM tuner and record it to AAC/MP3. It gives you free streaming radio instead. So _if_ there'll ever be "live TV" on iTunes/AppleTV, it'll be some sort of streaming stuff. But even that just isn't a goal for Apple. With streaming radio, Apple could simply "add support" for an already established service. There's no such thing for TV on the 'net. (Except video podcasts, of course.)Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-89688573427484162082009-01-06T19:28:00.003+01:002009-01-06T19:36:07.875+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 007(continuing the previous post...) Next up: <B>iTunes Music Store</B>. There's new pricing. Older songs (6+ years) are now 0.69 USD, new ones (0-6 years) are 0.99 USD, starting April 1, 2009. Some songs, however, will be priced at 1.29 USD. <b>All songs will be DRM-free.</B> (No, this is *not* an early April Fool's joke.)<br />Additionally, you can now get the iTunes store over 3G on the iPhone. Same experience, just a tad slower. You get the same music, of course (not lower-quality) and can synch back to your iTunes library. It's simply an addition of 3G to the mobile version of iTunes Store.<br />Tony Bennett on stage for the retro-outro. This is it, folks. No new iMacs, no new Mac mini, no new Cinema Displays, no iPhone nano. And still: It wasn't the most uninteresting MWSF keynote ever. What do I take from it? I want an eight to ten-hour battery in a MacBook Air. But I guess that has to wait 'til later in the year or next year. Until then, my 1st gen MacBook Air will have to do...Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-32110063856720959092009-01-06T19:15:00.003+01:002009-01-06T19:26:16.235+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 006Moving on to hardware: <B>The 17" MacBook Pro</B>. Features the same 1920x1200 pixel display at 700:1 contrast and 60% greater colour gamut. It has a 50 USD anti-glare option!!! Like rumours mentioned, the battery is not user-replaceable. But it lasts 8 hours (!!!) and should be rechargeable a thousand times. The notebook has a 2.66 GHz processor (plus CTO options), up to 8 GB of memory (4 GB standard), same graphics as the MBP 15", 320 GB HD standard, 256 GB SSD option, 3 USB ports, FireWire 800 (1 port), ExpressCard 34 slot, Ethernet, Mini DisplayPort, basically what we're used to. Same glass trackpad as MB/MBP.<br />The battery is talked about rather longishly in a tech demo video. Apparently, it's Lithium Polymer, takes on strange forms and has on-battery chips that adjusts currents, so the battery life (over its lifetime) can be as healthy as it can. (Instead of failing just as the warranty runs out.) I guess we're seeing the future of MacBook/MacBook Pro batteries here, so expect the next iteration of 15" and 13" models to also not have user-replaceable batteries. The RDF is in place, I'd say. Looking at it as they're putting it, it makes sense. It'll get slammed on forums and in the press, though, I guess, if the RDF ain't good enough... Shipments start at the end of January '09.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-15186912464250676022009-01-06T18:59:00.002+01:002009-01-06T19:14:08.816+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 005(continuing the previous post...) <B>Pages '09</B>. There's a full screen view that lets you focus on your writing. (Very important, I'm a writer after all.) There's the obvious new templates frenzy, but more importantly, Pages '09 includes MathType and EndNote. Scientists, engineers and students will appreciate these. "And that's Pages '09."<br /><B>Numbers '09</B>. More powerful formulas. Over 250 functions, all colour-coded. Very nicely done. (I'm sure there's new templates, too, but I won't mention it, even if it's specifically mentioned. I'm no fan of ever-more templates.)<br />iWork '09, btw., is shipping <i>today!</i> Apple will offer a 169 USD package (Mac Box Set) with Mac OS X 10.5, iWork '09 and iLife '09 for those who haven't upgraded to Leopard yet. (I guess Snow Leopard won't be mentioned, then, until it's suddenly released in Spring or Summer, now there's a ploy to milk the Leopard...)<br />One more thing with iWork: <B>iWork.com</B>. This service lets you publish your iWork documents and share them with contacts from AddressBook.app easily. Automatically shares documents in various formats (iWork/Office/PDF). Sign up for a free beta today, but later on, it'll cost a fee, so it's separate from iWork and separate from MobileMe, which is a pity, since that would have made a great MobileMe extension, I find. (So let's move on to the actual "Mac" stuff, as in hardware, please?) ;)Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-17220049895886623942009-01-06T18:47:00.002+01:002009-01-06T18:59:13.670+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 004(continuing the previous post...) still on GarageBand '09. Apart from the beginners' instructional videos done by "Instructor Tim", you can also learn "real" artist lessons: John Fogerty, Colbie Caillat, Patrick Stump, Sting, Sarah McLachlan, Ryan Tedder, Norah Jones and others (more will be added) teach you their songs. Very impressive.<br /><B>iLife '09 will be released in late January.</B> Same pricing as before, and of course new Macs will come with it preinstalled once it's available.<br /><br />Now, on to <B>iWork '09</B>. First up: <b>Keynote '09</b>. One new feature is "Magic Move". You set up your slides, and the feature does the animation of the various objects on one click. This is Apple's Core Animation implemented, of course. They've shown us similar stuff when Leopard was new.<br />More importantly: There's <b>Keynote Remote</b>, i.e. you can use your iPod touch or iPhone to remote control your presentations like you can do with a dual monitor setup, basically. This is nifty. Jokingly, Phil Schiller says: <i>"You can see we've already given it five star reviews."</i>Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-88046280090999387412009-01-06T18:30:00.002+01:002009-01-06T18:47:33.042+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 003(continuing the previous post...) next: <B>iMovie '09</B>. The new version offers a precision editor, advanced drag & drop, dynamic themes and animated travel maps. Plus automatic video stabilisation. These features are demoed by Randy Ubillos, chief architect for video applications. There's not much sense in repeating the demo in words, though. Since my input is basically words (and I've never even used iMovie, really), I wouldn't do it justice. Let's just say Apple has to some extent apologised for iMovie '08 (to iMovie 6 fans) and is hoping that iMovie '09 will be a much better product. Although in some ways it seems to me that they just added new features and didn't "bring iMovie 6 back into it", so to speak.<br /><B>GarageBand '09</B>: It can teach you how to play an instrument. This clearly shows that GarageBand is the introduction-application for everything music-creation on the Mac. With its roots still in Logic, of course, it'll try to take you in from the very start and take you to the logical (pardon) next level: Logic Express or Logic Studio. The instruction videos are in HD quality, of course, and show you, for example, how to play blues chords on a guitar. I guess I'll have to pickup a six-string now very soon. No more excuses, no more Guitar Hero on the Wii... Instead I'll do my own guitar samples instead of faking them on a software instrument.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-2765768211207950492009-01-06T18:15:00.002+01:002009-01-06T18:28:45.774+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 002(continuing the previous post...) Setting an event's location is based on Google Maps. There's also support for Facebook and Flickr in iPhoto '09, meaning that you can tag people on Facebook photos and that information is transmitted back to iPhoto. (Of course other Facebook users can tag your photos as well.)<br />There are new themes for slideshows in iPhoto '09. These use face detection to automatically zoom/center photos. Slideshows can be saved to iTunes and synched to iPhone and iPod touch. This, of course, makes a lot of sense. With the iPod family probably moving to an all-touch family (except the shuffle) in 2009, this'll mean <i>something</i>. You can also insert maps with pins into projects (books) to show where pictures were taken. Such a map can also be printed on the hardcover of the new books. Phil Schiller then gives a demo of iPhoto's new face detection feature and how quickly you can tag a person - and then places.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-79438414585201441552009-01-06T18:02:00.002+01:002009-01-06T18:15:20.446+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 001The show starts, and as usual (although not delivered by Steve Jobs, obviously) the audience is told first about how well Apple is doing, albeit with a touch of financial crisis, as in: Apple's not hurt as much as other companies, because Apple's got a lot of money. Phil informs the audience about some of the new international stores (Beijing, Munich, Sydney).<br />The ongoing retail effort is called very important because it offers people a chance to try out the actual products. "Today, we are focusing on the Mac."<br />Three new things, promises Schiller. <b>iLife '09 is first</b>. Of course we're led through each of iLife's already existing applications. The most controversial from last year's version is of course iMovie, since version 8 was a completely new version, leaving most of iMovie 6's features behind - so much so that Apple had to let iLife '08 users download version 6 of the app as well. We're certainly interested to see whether iMovie '09 can get things together again...<br /><b>iPhoto '09</b> offers a new organisational system: Faces. Based on face detection (to assist in tagging), you can quickly identify people in your photos. iPhoto will then show you photos of similar faces it believes is the same person. <i>"... isn't perfect, but this is incredibly good."</i> A third way to organise (after events and faces) is "places", i.e. geotagging. With more and more cameras offering GPS for automatically geotagging photos, this makes a lot of sense. iPhoto can show you a map with pins for your photos' locations. Additionally, you can add event locations for photo events that aren't geotagged.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-36551729564745496572009-01-06T17:55:00.002+01:002009-01-06T17:58:43.724+01:00MWSF, The Keynote by Phil Schiller, Part 000I'm not doing this live, since I can't be at MWSF this time around - and I don't have a direct contact over phone/chat. So what you're reading here is comment on the news that are dropping in from other sites. You'll still get the important stuff here, too, of course. I'll post these things every quarter hour, so we should end up with at least 5 such articles, the newest on top, but each to be read down, like, normal. The keynote should begin in a couple of minutes.Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8414827.post-26829357598235320552009-01-03T12:04:00.002+01:002009-01-03T12:15:44.760+01:00MWSF Keynote Expectations...Despite Steve Jobs' absence, rumours about what Phil Schiller (or any other spokesperson) will unveil next week are flying quite high. If all rumours come true, we'll see Apple's netbook, the iPhone nano, a new mouse, the new Mac mini, the new iMac as well as flying pigs and a car with zero emission and unlimited reach.<br />Putting the wishful-thinking aside, we're left with probably a new Mac mini, which has been hinted at in recent OS updates and it really _does_ need an upgrade, probably a new iMac - both of which will get the Mini DisplayPort and nVidia graphics from the MacBook/MacBook Pro lines as well as the iPhone nano, which will probably be the most discussed product after the whole show is over. Whether a new mouse is included with the iMac is certainly of lesser importance, although I hate its trackpaddiness and seven-finger gestures even before I've heard about them.<br />What I'm really looking forward to is the Mac mini. Of course it will be inexpensive - and of course it will remain seriously flawed in game performance and upgradability. It will not be the "headless iMac" proposed for so many years, because that would eat too much into the iMac's market - and Apple simply _wants_ to reign supreme with an AIO desktop.<br /><br />So what about the netbook or tablet route? Netbooks _are_ selling like hotcakes and Steve Jobs has personally said that Apple's looking at that market closely. Yet, Apple wants to seriously push the iPhone base, so my guess is that Apple's _not_ releasing a netbook now and instead is working feverishly on a larger tablet based device that _won't_ be a full Mac, but rather an expanded iPod touch-style device. This probably won't be ready for MWSF, though. And once it'll arrive, it _will_ seem too expensive to compete with netbooks, but it'll also be incredibly thin, so people won't mind the price tag (although a lot will be said about its price nonetheless).<br />Either way: I'm looking forward to next week's show. Let's see if somebody else _can_ create enough Reality Distortion Field (RDF).Patrick Armbrusterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11161249559899380169noreply@blogger.com0