The Geekologist

D-Day for iPhone OS sneak-peak, what I hope to happen

2010-04-08T09:00:00.005-04:00

Today is D-Day for the iPhone OS4 sneak-peak and. There are a lot of rumors. Weird. But they always talk about the obvious.

First of all, I would hope for a name change. iPhone OS sucks. Big time. And besides, it's not about the iPhone anymore.

Secondly, multitasking. This is imperative, now more than ever with the introduction of the iPad. I don't care what type or form of multitasking - Windowing, Expose-like or whatever. Frankly I don't care. It just needs any multitasking if its to have a serious future.

Thirdly, I expect Apple to talk a bit more about its acquisitions... specifically Quattro Wireless, a Mobile Advertising company - More specifically, the direct competition of AdMob a company that Google is trying to purchase. I mean, yeah of course, this is for helping advertisers reach customers but I would also use it to let developers monetize their free apps. Sometimes, I'm skeptic of a world where everyone needs to pay for apps, contents or services on the Internet for personal use. So, it would make sense to just charging for premium apps and regular apps through advertising. I expect Apple to WOW me with this. I'm that if they talk about this, it will be a whole new way to mobile advertising and online advertising in general, I expect nothing less from the company that probably has the most powerful advertising in Silicon Valley.

I really expect nothing less than something wow from Apple on Ads. I mean, a company that probably has the best advertising of all Silicon Valley should

I think that either they make it right from the beginning and ensure a future of dominance on the mobile OS market or are doomed to let Google takeover by implementing a similar tactic and start changing how stuff is to be done on its turf. The Internet.

And no, I don't expect any Flash. The only Flash news I would expect is that Adobe finally finished developing a similar technology based on its AIR runtime and that Flash apps and let them run natively on the iPhone OS and offer Flash apps at the Apps Store. This would allow developers unfamiliar with the iPhone OS SDK to develop Flash apps and capitalize on the billion-dollar apps game. But I highly doubt it, really.

Other than that, the rest would be just mere details.

Tech Sensationalism Suck.

2010-04-05T17:41:00.009-04:00

One of the main reasons I started to blog was because I felt that the main tech news hubs were too biased. Often recurring to Yellow Journalism, which I find pathetic and irresponsible - I know for a fact that there are people that only reads the headlines. And that's enough for them. Enough to craft an opinion.

While looking for any clues of what's up in the world of geekdom I found an article at TechCrunch, titled: Android Market Share Continues to Gain on The iPhone. If you look at the numbers on the survey he used on his article you'll notice that the truth is very far from his headline. I don't get this type of journalism.

This is the logic, Palm and Microsoft combined looses about 6% of market share. Apple's market dominance drop by 0.1% (that's zero percent, just in case) while Google's Android and RIM's Black Berry gains about 1% and 5% respectively. So if Apple market share remained (practically) the same while Microsoft and Palm combined loosed about 6% and Google and Black Berry gained about 6%, how could possibily Android-based phones are gaining on iPhones? Was this just a dumb title or just some sort yellow journalism tactic?

UPDATE: 4/5/10 10:57PM

Now that I think about it, what is interesting of these numbers is that BlackBerry is carier independent. Virtually all cellphone carriers have Black Berry plans and Android and Microsoft-based systems too.

But the iPhone however, is only available to AT&T customers. And even that way, a quarter of the entire market is Apple's.

I think that studying the percentage of iPhone's vs other brands

on the AT&T network should provide a more accurate perspective on actual brand popularity.

My Review of a Real Apple iPad Review.

2010-04-05T15:12:00.010-04:00

As everyone knows on the entire planet, just a few days ago Apple released its newest member of it's family, the Apple iPad. And after 700 thousand Apple iPads sold on one day, funny thing is that the 3G model isn't even out yet. Await for an iPad-mania.

Anyways I've kept myself busy reading some of, the literally, thousand reviews on the Apple iPad but one in particular got my attention. Because it really is like, all the articles that critiqued the iPad on just one. A good one.

Here's the article, from The Kmiec Ramblings

The reviewer gives a lot of his opinion on the uses it has (or doesn't) and he concludes his post with a thought that shows the blueprint of his opinion on the Apple iPad. To which I want to reply and add a couple of things. Here is his final thought in the article.

"Let’s just be honest for a second. What need does the iPad deliver on? What consumer problem does it solve? The answer to both is nothing. It’s essentially a bright shiny Apple object and that’s exactly why you’ll buy it. However, what I think you’ll find is that just like so many other bright shiny objects, you’ll be bored with it fairly quickly. Unless of course you’re a 3 year old; then you’ll love it and never want to put it down."

Lots.

What consumer problems does it solve? Well, let's start with the millions of laptop and netbook sales that are made for only browsing the Web. Yeah, some people just do that, they browse the web. check their emails, which are on the web, watch some videos (on the web), see where I am going? The world has been slowly moving towards the web, abandoning the whole software-centric trauma in the past. And regular people hate dealing with software.

What consumer need does the iPad deliver on? Simplicity. The need for simplicity, which traditional operating systems simply do not deliver. Do bloggers in the tech industry really think, non-techy people likes to know precisely in which folder all of their documents, pictures, music is located in the hard disk? to then be able to tell the music, pictures or whatever software where it is, so then it works? Crazy. People just don't give a fuck about that, they only want to get on (without hassles) with their own thing.

If People had a fuck and you asked them to trade it for computer maintenance, they wouldn't give it to you.

Trust me, regular Joes don't like to defragment their harddisks, or clean up for spyware, they just don't care about any maintenance. And this thing solves that. The industry knew that solving this need was imperative to solve. That's why companies such as Google and Intel have been working on their own perspectives of cloud-centric operating systems

The question the blogger failed to ask was, who is the target market? why take for granted that is only for people that already own computers? This sort of computers will appeal to older folks aswell to any sort of people (kids?) that NEEDS simplicity not necessairly WANT it for luxury. Especially, if they already own an iPhone or iPod touch. I was on Best Buy, and the number of older people playing with the demo and excited about it was, definetly a lot more than I expected. Brilliant, unlike netbooks that are cannibalizing on laptops, this will open an entire new market for everyone to profit. ;-)

Relax people. It's not Laptopmageddon. Just a new device that aggresively attacks a needy market.

I really don't understand why people think this stuff will replace the laptops and desktop people loves (and hate). If you only need to do browsing, pictures, social networking, IM'ing and all things web, this types of computers, be it Apple, Google or from any other brand, is the solution. If you are more specific, that is, you squeeze those CPU's to its limit a laptop and desktop will be the law. I think workstations will live a bit up to its name. */me winks*

The only seriously lacking stuff I find, is the multi-tasking capabilities. But, it's really not the end of the world, and really, there's definetly a large number of people that signle-task... you know, they just use a browser. But I think, this is must-have for it to scale to the levels of expectations of the future. And I seriously think that Apple is working on some way that changes how we multitask, I know they are that pricky. The durability of the batteries has been reportedly a lot more than advertised, which is 10 hours. Some people have claimed 11, 12, 13 hours of battery and the only reason I think is this way, is so that when they introduce a multitasking iPhone OS it doesn't drain battery to unacceptable levels. And really, the only thing between you and an multitasking iPhone OS is just an update over the Web.

Do you really need to be a 3 year old toddler to love this? Yes and No. Toddlers being part of the market that needs simplicity. But, also, if you WANT simplicity it may appeal to you. BTW, I totally bought my Apple iPad thinking in my toddler too.

Not Portable Enough? WTF?

It's called hands. And we should use it sometimes to carry and grab stuff. I mean, if you can at least carry a 5 pounds netbook you will definetly be able to carry around a 1 pound iPad. And really, it's just as big as a (literal) notebook. This will be the sort of things that you will carry with you everywhere and leave it on the car whenever you don't need it. Like we used to do with notebooks and books, and other shit. Sure, if you have an iPhone (or Android phone) you can do the same things, except getting an eyegasm with its 9.7-inch screen. People don't just watch movies on their iTouch or iPhones, I, as of, 2009 have seen people carry DVD players to the planes. The reason? Screen-size. I'm not arguing there aren't any people who dones't care about it, but there is people that do.

You know what?

Now that I think about it, the iPad is kind of like a Gadgetzilla. It will eat marketshare from eBook readers, Portable DVDs, Laptops, Desktops, Media Players, PDA's and I would go on as far as to say that even from Smartphones.

So is this just another bright shiny Apple object? Not at all. It's just another good Apple product that will definitely solve a lot of needs. Not necessarily the needs of geeks. It's a good product and proof of how good it is, will be evident in 6 months. When the first wave of this types of computers starts attacking the industry.

On the Hulu App: Subscription-based Business Model Sucks!

2010-04-01T07:58:00.010-04:00

Okay, ever since the first reviews of the Apple iPad started hitting the Web, the rumors of a Hulu app started getting stronger and stronger. Which is cool, Hulu is definitely a must-have for any decent browsing experience. That of course, along with YouTube. So, it seems as if we're getting a Hulu app!

... but not so quick. There's a catch. - the app will probably revolve around a subscription-based business model. Fail, I know.

Now, there are a million reasons of why that model is wrong for this. But, I'll just say the 3 points that I think make all the difference:

I can watch the same videos I'm paying in my subscription for free from my other computers.
I don't think people will ditch so quick their notebooks, and make their iPad a primary computer. So, if I were an exec at Hulu, I'd be careful with my assumptions. If consumers feel they are not taking full benefits off of their investment and decide to instead stay watching online videos on their desktops and laptops as they have been for the last years, this will be a setback for Hulu.
It's the god-damned Internet! I mean, I don't expect everything to be free, but certainly a service that is already free. I'm sure a lot of people feel this way.

Of course, I'm just ranting without details on what the price might be, maybe it's an acceptable price. But I don't think I would pay for it, regardless of how cheap it is. I already have my subscription to CableTV and Premium Programming and I only use Hulu when I'm looking for something specific. I don't watch every TV show on my computer.

In my opinion, they should stick to their ads-based revenue system. It's been working so far, they've had earnings for the past three quarters, it's obviously a system that is working for them and their investors. A Hulu app, with the same spirit of their website is only a win-win situation, whereas a subscription-based one, I'm skeptical of its success.

But to our luck, there's one more day until the Apple iPad is officially released. This should give some time to Hulu execs to think this through.

Hulu App might be available for the Apple iPad after all.

2010-03-31T22:50:00.009-04:00

... says the New York Times.

Can't say I'm surprised, I was completely expecting this. As I said on an earlier post, Steve Jobs is member of the Board of Directors of Disney, which owns a third of Hulu. Of course there was going to be a Hulu app for the iPad. Sad thing is, supposedly it will be subscription-based. And this for me, at least, doesn't make sense. Unless, this is going to be some April Fools joke. They can't be that cruel or can they? whatever, I'll talk a bit on that later on.

This is, by itself, kind of shuts the Adobe Flash on the browser argument. Unarguably, the major use of Adobe Flash today is Flash Video. Almost all of the videos embedded on websites points either to YouTube or Hulu. Both are covered, I don't see any problems.

At most, what Apple will allow is to use ActionScript to develop apps that could be delivered over the App Store and executed via a Flash runtime. This will help Apple retain its power over content, and Adobe to enter into the Apple Apps huge game.

Honestly, this pretty much seems like the Adobe AIR runtime, which is used to deliver Flash, Flex and AJAX-based applications to the Desktop, but instead to iPhone OS. It basically converts an web app into a Desktop-like app. I don't know what took them so long to get this thing done.

One thing is for sure, the web changed. You will no longer see Flash content as you are used to in the Web. I suspect a very Flex-like experience.And btw, there's also a rumor about multitasking capabilities, but just rumors, let's not get excited about gossip. Killer, I know.

All in all, the Apple iPad keeps gaining momentum, Apple keeps giving reasons for more people to seriously consider getting one. People is excited, the industry is excited and clearly waiting for what will happen to finally make the final plans on how they are going to approach the iPad.

Rest assured, within 5 years, maybe less, 3 years - Everyone will be holding an iPad-like device in their hands. I think it will be Google the one taking complete advantage of this success.

Finally on the Twittersphere.

2010-03-31T09:01:00.003-04:00

I have finally opened an account on Twitter for TheGeekologist.com. Feel free to Follow me, I won't spam. I hate people that updates every 10 seconds too.

BTW!, I received confirmation of my Apple iPad shipment. Can't wait to have it and see if it lives up to my expectations.

Why the Apple iPad will change your life. Yes, even if you hate it.

2010-03-25T13:46:00.009-04:00

If you've been following the news on the Apple iPad, it's clear that this is another success for Apple, that's if the numbers are right, so far they seem to be. Conservative estimates say that over 150 thousand iPads were sold on the very first day the pre-order launched. That's, ah, some pretty hard-core demand, oh, and they are not taking into consideration orders for pick-up at the Apple stores, reservations made at any of the stores or orders with multiple iPads. Not bad, it's comparable to the 200 thousand iPhones sold on the first week of its lunch. I think this clearly shows that yet another computing revolution is inminent. I bet Wall Street and sillicon valley execs must feel aroused, while some, I'm sure are feeling a bit lost of what is happening.

... all that while Steve Jobs points its pinky to his mouth, with a mad scientist laugh of course, enjoying the 60+ million profit his company did in a day.

It's all about demand, right?

And well, judging by the numbers of the iPad sales in the first week, there is demand and companies interested in jumping on that very boat too. HP released their HP Slate and Dell and there were rumours of Google working with HTC on a tablet computer. Make a prediction of where the market is heading to.

Bye, bye computers. Hello Internet devices. Oh, wait, the Internet is the computer.

Let's face it, most what is done today do not require a super-powerful computer. Today everything is about the Internet and general purpose computers are just a medium to access it. I don't think they are going to disappear, but they will certainly gain a new place in society. I suspect it will be more segmented market, you probably already know a few people that their primary Internet access medium is their mobile phones, not their computers and there's no reason to believe that that is going to change. Likewise, the number of sales of netbooks keeps increasing and that shows a discomfort with traditional notebooks, people just want a cheap and comfortable way to access the Internet and the apps (which most likely needs the Internet for something)

Google realized this trend a long time ago and are working to make sure that you don't need a computer. They have email, instant messenger, calendar, word processor, spredsheat, presentations and all are computer and platform-free, as long as you have Internet and Web access you are covered. Oh, and let's not forget about Android and Chrome OS, Google's Netbook optimized operating system. Apple (with the iPhone) just made it popular to not need a computer. But I suspect that ultimately, Google will be the one taking full advantage of this, especially against Microsoft. That is, unless Microsoft rethink its strategy towards netbooks, it's still not late, but time is certainly running out for the type of penetration Microsoft likes to make.

Now, again, I'm not saying that computers are going to disappear, just that there is a considerable amount of people that don't really care about them. That demarcation point as to what the uses of laptops, desktop PCs', and netbooks/netpads/slates or whatever name the market gives to this type of devices will become clearer and clearer. Just as today, people are willing to buy notebooks that are less powerful than their counterparts desktops, so they will start buying this sort of devices. It's all about needs, and there's apparently plenty of it. You get the idea.

If there are leaders, there must be followers.

Apple again set the standard, and now everyone is following. Just like with the iPhone. And, honestly, I don't expect Apple to be the most dominant player in the, netbook/netpads/slate tablets or whatever catchy names comes along. In fact, I'm pretty sure they won't be the dominant player. But, you all know how Apple is, they have this way of proving everyone wrong.

So what I believe is going to happen is that as soon as companies start attacking the different niches that Apple left unattended not to mention when cheaper devices appear on the spot, I believe that a new dominant operating system will arise, I'm betting it will be Google with its Chrome OS. Microsoft needs to rethink its operating system strategy, I don't think they will get that far or penetrate as much as they would like if they insist in loading a netbook with a full-blown OS, it doesn't make any sense from whereever side you look at it.

But something is for sure, within the next 5 years, you will be holding some type slate tablet in your hands. Any effort to deny that is futile.

On the Apple iPad and Adobe Flash: Business Reasons Why You Will Never See Flash on iPhone OS

2010-03-23T15:55:00.019-04:00

Ever since Apple decided to not allow Adobe Flash on its iPhone/iPod Touch, much has been speculated of the reasons to not allow Flash on them. This matter became more obvious with the launch of the Apple iPad, advertised as the best web browsing experience, but still without supporting Adobe Flash. One of the most commented excuses being performance. Apple doesn't want their batteries being drained by software that Steve Jobs himself considers buggy and much less being affected by the security issues that Adobe Flash has been subject to.

But surely there must be more to the story, I always keep in mind that Apple not only is comitted to good engineering but also to profit-making. Apple, also has been known to excersie a lot of control over their products. Profit-making and control - Now that seems more like the attitude of the Sillicon Valley companies I seen over the decade.

"No profit grows where there is no pleasure taken"

-William Shakespeare

In this cease, no profit decreases, and that is exactly what Apple is trying to prevent, Adobe with its Flash platfrom from doing in any of its "apps-driven" devices, such as the iPhone, iPod and now the iPad and any future iPhoneOS based device for that matter. As I mentioned earlier, it all boils down to control and profit-making. Okay, so, let's suppose that Adobe Flash works perfectly with multi-touch devices, that it isn't a security risk or that it won't drain devices battery -- If, Apple lets Adobe Flash to be executed in any of the devices that runs iPhone OS, Apple automatically looses control over what Apps are allowed and which ones are not. Period. Developers can avoid the Apps Store and Approval Process altogether and in essence host Flash apps outside the Kingdom of Apple. Which means, that if you are a developer and you are selling an app, guess what's Apple revenue from it? That's right, zero, nada., nothing. Apple loves revenue, more than any other company. Except maybe Microsoft. It's easy (from a business perspective of course) to understand why they probably will never, ever, allow Adobe Flash on iPhone OS.

Money-wise it is in essence, bad business for Apple. So is there any possibility of seeing Adobe Flash on the iPad? If the need for Flash proves to be convincing, and more importantly affects Apple's revenue, of course! - But I wouldn't have high hopes for a full-blown version of Flash or fancy Flash Apps, only a stripped-down version limited only to animations. Do I think there's going to be a serious need for Adobe Flash? Absolutely not. There hasn't been any monstrous need for Flash on the iPhone/iPod. I have not met any single non-tech user complaining how much his iPhone sucks because it lacks Flash. The major use for Flash without undoubtedly is video playback, or Flash Video how fancy people call it, their major user? and most of the videos embedded on websites are currently being hosted at the biggest online video hosting service in the globe, YouTube. Besides YouTube, the only relevant player is Hulu, which doesn't have any app for iPhone OS devices, but I'm expecting one. Why? Steve Jobs is on the Board of Directors of Disney and Disney owns about a third of Hulu. I don't know about Flash, but you can expect a Hulu app.

So in the end, in my opinion the only thing I'm going to miss for not having Flash, are pesky websites ads, which BTW, I don't mind ever seeing again.

On the Apple iPad and Adobe Flash: Technical Reasons Why Adobe Flash is Not Practical

2010-03-18T09:59:00.014-04:00

If you've been following news on the iPad, you probably already know that it won't support Flash and judging by Steve Jobs comments on Flash I don't think Apple will support Flash any time soon. Anyways I was just browsing the web on the topic, but this time for technical reasons... I mean, I am not a Flash developer but I've seen it on the Web for many many years to notice that there seems to be a more serious design disadvantage for Flash -- Which is that Flash doesn't behave like the Web does or like anything else does, it behaves like, well, Flash - a completely separate and independent platform. It turns out, I wasn't that far from the truth. You can read this article about An Adobe Flash developer on why the iPad can't use Flash to get better grasp of the issue.

Hell, even Adobe is aware of this - Which is why they are working on a solution, but in my experience when companies start doing this is when code usually breaks and backward compatibility ends up being non-existent. But I could be wrong.

So in a nutshell:

1 - Steve Jobs is betting on HTML5 and think that Adobe Developers are lazy and Flash is buggy

2 - That besides the usual performance-issue arguments against Flash there is a technical one to be made.

Oh, of and of course, there are business reasons as to why Apple won't ever, ever, allow Flash on any of its mobile products. But I will write about that later.

In my opinion Flash is being too overrated and above all overused. People overestimate its value, most of the things it does can be done with newer technology and even open standards, maybe Adobe needs to innovate and change the game with a different strategy. Flash is not that impressive anymore, it's not 1999. Get over it.