All Articles Tagged gruber

Like a moth to a flame or a Blackberry addict to email, I am drawn once again into the train wreck that is Flash on the iPhone. This time it’s courtesy one Robert X. Cringely, and it’s a brain bender!

Cringely says:

It seems obvious to me, however, that there is only one real reason why [rumors circulating the National Association of Broadcasters show suggested] Apple would sell off its professional applications [like Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, Shake, and Aperture] and that’s to avoid antitrust problems when/if Apple buys Adobe Systems as I predicted at the beginning of the year.

Gruber responds:

I Think Cringely Is Off His Meds Again

Daring Fireball’s John Gruber goes on to say that while Apple may (or may not) sell off its Pro Apps, it would only do so to downsize and maintain focus, something buying Adobe would pretty much be the opposite of.

Personally, I think Apple stands to benefit immensely one day from controlling the media pipe end-to-end, and part of that control is the high end content creation tools, the Pro Apps. That’s Apple end game, the media hub and all its satellites. And if you want that, you don’t go selling off your launch vehicles.

What do you think?

While the interwebs stroke themselves into a furor over rumors that AT&T might just subsidize the iPhone 3G down to $200, Daring Fireball’s John Gruber once again asks that he be allowed to retort:

So says one report, using one anonymous source, from Scott Moritz, a “reporter” with an appalling track record regarding Apple and the iPhone. The same Scott Moritz who reported in July last year that Apple had cut back its production order on iPhones based on a “trading note” from Miller Tabak, a note which, it ends up, didn’t actually exist. And, as we know now, Apple went on to sell more iPhones than expected in 2007, not fewer.

Speculation ensues as to whether or not the AT&T exclusivity extends only to the current iPhone, and not the so-called iPhone 3G, and whether or not AT&T may want to take a price hit to keep Apple close. Gruber, however, quickly points out:

This comes so close to uncovering the obvious and glaring problem with a $200 AT&T iPhone subsidy, but, alas, Hesseldahl and his keen economic mind walk right past it. The problem is this: why would Apple allow AT&T to sell iPhones for half the price of what iPhones cost in Apple’s own stores (including this one)?

What do you think?

John Gruber and the Macalope have made an artful science out of reasonably, logically, and methodically skewering the most pathetic punditry and junky journalism surrounding Apple and the iPhone.

Case in point is Gruber’s recent and rather succinct dismantling of Simon Brocklehurst’s complaint that Apple chose Objective C as the language behind the SDK. And while he certainly doesn’t need my help, there are a few points I’d like to add.

First, anyone (but especially Simon) who thinks Apple just now (or even recently) decided to create an SDK for the iPhone knows little about SDKs and less about the polish and maturity easily observed in even the beta SDK Apple released at their special Roadmap event. The briefest look at actual developer blogs and tweets — including developers with substantial experience in jailbroken iPhone apps — would see the flood of remarks on the maturity of the beta SDK. Bottom line, if Apple hadn’t been planning the SDK for a long time (perhaps since the launch itself) they have a hidden supply of killer engineers capable of truly mind-boggling delivery.

Second, I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that, while I don’t know anything about Brocklehurst’s background, quoting Jonathan Schwartz indicates some level of Java-centricity. By serendipitous contrast, I just this week had a conversation with a developer at work who was being brought onto a new project. Since he’d recently done a lot of C++ and PHP, he was looking for a new language with which to stretch his skills. He wanted to try Ruby or Python, wanted to see what Rails could do. Gruber’s right, good programmers can (and want to) program and can (and want to) stretch themselves to do it (even when it’s not so far a stretch). Good programers who want to make good iPhone apps won’t think twice about adding Objective C to their skill set.

Third, the iPhone/iPod halo is clearly helping Apple gain traction in their Mac market, and there’s no reason to think the iPhone SDK won’t help Apple gain traction for Objective C and Cocoa via Cocoa Touch. Apple has shown time and time again — to the point of frustration on some occasions — that it is a future thinking company. Getting a bunch of convenience-oriented programmers now by putting out a Java or C++ iPhone SDK pales to insignificance when compared to the mindshare Apple could gain by delivering a powerful, delightful Object C/Cocoa Touch development environment (and experience) to the uber-keen developers of the next generation, whose newfound skills — and more importantly, tastes — will flow right back into the Mac and future Apple products.

While Apple certainly fumbles the ball on occasion, this time they look to be smashing their way clear to a touchdown.

Sorry Simon.

As part of his piece on the continuing confusion surrounding the $99 iPhone SDK program acceptance/pending/rejection letters, Daring Fireball’s John Gruber also dropped this very interesting nugget about the equally continuing and confusing situation surrounding the apparent Apple ban on multitasking and background apps:

[A] source confirmed to me that the iPhone AIM client AOL demoed during the iPhone Roadmap event does not cheat by continuing to run in the background — it quits when you switch to another app, but doesn’t log you out of AIM automatically. Such a client can’t notify you of IM messages from the background (a la the way the iPhone notifies of you SMS messages), but when you switch back to the AIM app, messages you missed should appear. Be wary of claims that “An app that does X is impossible without background processing.”

If accurate then that, as they say, is that in terms of any hope for multitasking apps before June. If Apple didn’t grant AOL “special dispensation”, they certainly won’t give any to Johnny “Next Big Social Perpetual Ping App”.

But is a non-background running AIM of any use to you? A welcome break from the constant connection demands of IM? A way to keep AIM second class to an eventual Mobile-iChat Touch app? Smart thinking on Apple’s part or just a train wreck in the making?

Following up on the cryptic “I Hate You - Don’t Leave Me” letters Apple sent out last week to many (all?) would-be iPhone developers who had coughed up the $99 for a certificate all signed and legal, Daring Fireball reports on whether or not anybody has made it in already:

I believe there are a small handful of developers who are sort of “in” already, but they were hand-selected by Apple. Perhaps, as with the ones who came on stage during the event to demo their “two weeks worth of work” apps, they were involved before the SDK was even officially announced.

But everything I’ve heard suggests that last week’s email from Apple was sent to everyone who applied for the program. I.e., there are developers who’ve been let in through the back door, but no one has gotten in through the front door yet.

John Gruber goes on to quote two sources who’ve told him that Apple has received over 10,000 applications alone for the $99 package and couldn’t meet demand for certificates this fast if it wanted to (and no one seems sure whether they do or not, nor how badly).

Massive over-reaction by the Twitterati? Yet another example of Apple’s dwindling communications skills? And will we have to wait until the June (30th at 11:59pm?) release to know for sure?!

Developers want them their multitasking. They want them popping up, one after the other, like Agent Smith replicants in the Matrix sequels. What? Viruses incarnate from poorly conceived follow-up movies is a bad analogy?

Not according to some leading Apple pundits.

Witness Daniel Eran Dilger’s iPhone 2.0 SDK: The No Multitasking Myth from Roughly Drafted Magazine:

By limiting the amount of background processes running, the iPhone’s OS X can offer more of that available RAM to the foreground application, along with a less distracted processor. The iPhone is not a general purpose computer; it is primarily a phone, browser, and iPod. Due to the restrictions imposed by the SDK, it will also be a credible gaming platform and pack the power to run significant productivity applications, all without giving up the ability to be a responsive phone, browser, and iPod. Other devices can’t make that claim.

Sure, Dilger is sometimes considered on the extreme-end of Mac’tivism. Let’s see what Daring Fireball’s John Gruber has to say when he takes on One App at a Time:

Why has Apple imposed this limitation? Easy: the iPhone is severely resource constrained. Battery, RAM, and CPU cycles are all severely limited. If third-party apps could run in the background, all three could suffer. RAM would suffer for sure; all running apps consume memory. The iPhone has just 128 MB of RAM, and no swap space. CPU performance and battery life would suffer when background apps do something — and if they’re not doing anything, what’s the point of keeping them running? I noticed a significant increase in battery life after I switched the Mail app’s auto-checking interval from 15 minutes to 60 minutes. That’s just one app.

Okay, but they’re not developers. They don’t understand the needs, the passion. But then developers aren’t pure consumers either and developers don’t always understand consumer needs. Sometimes developers are so busy with the abstract coolness of what they can do, they don’t always stop and consider the colder reality of whether they should.

For every OS-changing Switcher app, there are dozens of buggy, crash-inducing WinMob and Palm fetishware. (As I can personally attest to, when even major apps from major developers rendered my Treo unusable).

No developer goes out there with ill-intent (malware aside), but their concern is app-level, not device or OS level. That’s where Apple comes in. The overall user experience isn’t the developers concern, nor should it be. It’s Apple’s concern, and right now Apple is imposing that concern via no-multitasking guidelines.

Note: John Gruber, quoting Hank Williams, also gives us The Flip Side of the Multitasking Argument. (Hit up the Roughly Drafted link above for some excellent back-and-forth between Williams and Dilger in the comment section as well.)

UPDATE: Gruber follows up in Foot, Meet Bullet, a point-counterpoint with Ian Betteridge.

What do you think? Is the ban on multitasking good or bad for the general user-base (i.e., our moms!)? For power users? Will Apple make exceptions for certain big developers (like AOL for AIM)? Will they relax the policy after the initial development rush is over, the space shakes out, and only cooler, more seasoned and reasoned heads remain in the game? Will some crafty devs will figure ways around the rules? (creativity thrives under constraint!). Or will things just stay the way they are?

John Gruber skims through the iPhone updated HIG (Human Interface Guidelines) and reveals the following:

Only one iPhone application can run at a time, and third-party applications never run in the background. This means that when users switch to another application, answer the phone, or check their email, the application they were using quits. It’s important to make sure that users do not experience any negative effects because of this reality. In other words, users should not feel that leaving your iPhone application and returning to it later is any more difficult than switching among applications on a computer.

Will there be a function to preserve state between App uses? (The way iTunes remembers what song you were playing and where you were in that song) Or will each App have to load fresh each time? (The way photos gives you the album chooser, rather than the last photo/state screen upon launch).

Treo users have been stymied for years by lack of true preemptive multitasking, while Windows Mobile has been criticized for letting Apps pile up like splattered bugs on an speeding windshield. But functionality like background music playing, downloads, data (i.e. email checking now that it’s push) seem like no-brain must have’ems. What’s the deal Apple? And what do you think?

There are some reports that some folks are finding that the 1.1.1 firmware update for the iPhone has been pulled from Apple, and that the most recent version of iTunes is now reporting 1.0.2 as the most recent version. And if they haven’t, maybe they should.

Read the rest of this entry »

If you hate the Marker Felt font in the iPhone and are willing to go the extra mile to remove it, then John Gruber is your man. Just so we’re clear, this does void your warranty. But it goes without saying that if you really hate marker felt, you won’t care.

iPhoneRingToneMaker (Windows, shareware) has been updated to work with iTunes 7.4.1, as has iToner (Mac, shareware). There’s also a bit of software that automates the free ringtone method called iRing, though the last one isn’t available yet. You can also use MakeiPhoneRingtone to automate the iTunes extension hack, and that one works with both iTunes 7.4 and iTunes 7.4.1. Oh, and Apple’s ringtone service is now live.

Actually, the only thing that I can tell that they’ve launched is a website. Anyway, they’re supposedly going to start selling unlock codes today. No, I’m serious! They’re really going to do it. They don’t just want to stay in the news, that’s unpossible. How could you even think that?

figure 1:component video cable support

It looks like the Composite AV cable and Component AV cable both officially support the iPhone. This is definitely an exciting new development.

figure 2: composite video cable support

Jeffery Harrell has as as good a reason as any to nominate Apple for the Nobel Peace Prize.

In the new version is support for the iPhone. If you want to copy music from your iPod iPhone and not just to it, this is probably the way to do it. Hey that rhymes

Apple is hosting another media event today. iPod Nanos are expected, and they look drastically different than the current nano. Not everyone is happy with the new look, but from what I can see it looks pretty functional. I think I’m withholding judgment until I’ve seen what all of their iPod lineup looks like.

Meanwhile, ThinkSecret basically guarantees touchscreen iPods. They also say the iPod nano, featured in the above Gizmodo link, will pack some seriously updated iPod software, and it will be great; it will be revolutionary. Or evolutionary. One or the other, really.

Please note that the screenshots from ThinkSecret above include albums from the Beatles that aren’t yet available in the iTunes Store.

Microsoft always seems to pop up with a little snippet of news on event days like this. I think they do this so they can play the ’sour grapes’ role of the day, now hints that making a Zune phone is ‘not unreasonable.’ This is more or less the opposite of what CEO Steve Ballmer said at the D5 conference, so I’m glad to see that they’re still talking from both sides of their mouth. They’re champs of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Emphasis on the ‘uncertainty’ part here. And now you know why they play the sour grapes role — it gets them in the news. But everyone knows somebody that can’t tell the difference between negative attention and positive attention, and it’s not like there’s surging demand for a Zune phone, though I’m sure Windows Mobile users would be happy for the extra functionality.

But back in focus, there’s no shortage of hype — read a paragraph and you can see why Apple’s stock is so volatile after announcements. Taken from Jeremy Horwitz of iLounge:

I seriously believe tomorrow is going to be different. I think it’s going to be the day when iPod die-hards, technology geeks, and mainstreamers alike are all going to be genuinely excited by what Apple is going to show. In short, if the release of the iPod mini signaled the start of Apple’s dominance of the digital music player business, and the nano and 5G signaled the end for most of its small competitors and beginning of its video initiative, tomorrow is going to be the final nail in the coffin for Microsoft, Sony, and the bigger players as well. Yes, even with their recent announcements. The only people who will be upset are those who aren’t already on the bandwagon, or the few who (sorry, NBC) jumped off early and got hit by it.

You know though, the scary thing is that he could just as well be right. John Gruber thinks so, so it must be true.

And in other news, T3 reports that a 3G version of the iPhone will be announced today. I think that’s a pipe dream; there’s no way Apple would update a flagship product 2 months after it came out for the first time. That would flat-out anger the almost-1-million purchasers of an iPhone here in the U.S.A.

Of course, any time Apple updates iTunes, it’s always possible that they will also update the iPhone, so I’ll be keeping my ear close to the news to see what they have planned. There’s plenty of speculation for iPhone Games and ringtones. And it’s not just the iPhone Ranch that’s expecting it, it’s also the New York Post.