Fresh Apple: TheAppleBlog (4 сообщения)

rss2email.ru

Реализация финансовых возможностей

Что Вы знаете о белье? Свой размер, всё?

Спецпредложения отелей Санкт-Петербурга

Лучшие Партнерские Программы!

TheAppleBlog
TheAppleBlog, published by and for the day-to-day Apple user, is a prominent source for news, reviews, walkthroughs, and real life application of all Apple products.
http://theappleblog.com
рекомендовать друзьям >>

Bill Gates Unimpressed by the iPad

Bill Gates, in case you thought otherwise, is a genius. He really, really is. Not only was he building a software company at a time when no one believed software had a meaningful future, but his vision of "a computer on every desk and in every home" was nothing short of crazy hugely ambitious.

Even so, geniuses do get things wrong sometimes. In an interview with BNET’s Brent Schlender, he suggests netbooks will be the devices of choice in a post-iPad world;

"You know, I'm a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard – in other words a netbook – will be the mainstream on that."

Hardly shocking, coming from the man who co-founded Microsoft. He adds;

…it's not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, 'Oh my God, Microsoft didn't aim high enough.' It's a nice reader, but there's nothing on the iPad I look at and say, 'Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.'"

As TiPB’s Rene Ritchie pointed out, this is remarkably reminiscent of Gates' dismissal of the iPod in a BusinessWeek interview in 2004;

There’s nothing that the iPod does that I say, “Oh, wow, I don’t think we can do that.”

I am not surprised Bill doesn't "get" the iPad, in the same way he didn't "get" the iPod, either. Gates’ vision of "a computer on every desktop" was a grand vision. But that's as far as the vision went; he certainly didn't describe the computer as an appliance. From the Microsoft perspective, the "computer" is, largely speaking, a screen with a keyboard and a pointing device. In fact, it's even more specific than that; as far as Microsoft is concerned, a computer is a screen with a keyboard and a pointing device powered by Windows. And if you really want to push the boat out, you can add some flavor of Office into that mix, too.

Disguise

Since neither Windows nor Office are particularly suited to pervasive, intuitive touch control, the Microsoft definition of "the computer" simply doesn't accommodate anything like an iPad. Tablet PCs are a bit easier for Microsoft to swallow – at least most of those have a keyboard (making them notebooks in disguise).

And while Microsoft knows Tablet PC's don't sell, it also knows that the interest in Apple's iPad might translate into a short-lived boost in Tablet PC sales, too. But let's be honest; Microsoft isn't committed to tablets in any meaningful way because tablets don't fit into Microsoft's vision of how we use computers. Or, more accurately, tablets don't fit into Microsoft's vision of how businesses use computers.

It’s ironic that Microsoft – popularizer of the ubiquitous spreadsheet software – still have not made Excel (arguably the most popular spreadsheet editor on the planet) touch-friendly. Meanwhile, Apple, considered by some to be makers of shiny toys for posing artistes, have a business-class spreadsheet app ready to go when the iPad launches. (Former Microsoft exec Dick Brass offers a possible explanation for this bewildering oversight in his revealing article on the NY Times last week.)

Just Enough

Apple's vision has always been diametrically opposed to Microsoft's. Steve Jobs has long-pursued a desire to make the desktop computer more intuitive and, paradoxically, less like a traditional computer. So, while Windows exposed increasingly complex functionality in each successive iteration, Mac OS X did the opposite, hiding or removing as much complexity as possible, leaving behind just enough to get the job done.

When it came to mobile devices, Microsoft’s desktop vision proved inescapable, and it tried to squeeze Windows into everything. (Only the Xbox and Zune break with that tradition.) Meanwhile, Apple demonstrated that a device’s software must reflect its form factor (like an iPhone OS on a tablet device is an obvious fit).

Therefore, the iPhone OS is designed to be so simple and intuitive that multitasking is intentionally restricted, reserved for a select-few apps. That's not a lack of vision or coding acumen, but rather a terribly bold statement of intent. Apple has a vision for how people should interact with computers, and they believe it’s better than anything else we currently have. What’s more, it’s willing to stand by that vision, despite the cries of inflexible critics who fail to understand it.

In short, Apple doesn't sacrifice form for function – rather, Apple allows form to dictate function.

Dream Come True

Back in the early noughties, it was Gates who championed the Tablet PC, and more broadly, the slate form-factor, boldly predicting in 2001 that, "…within five years I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.”

Microsoft's hardware partners dropped the ball when executing his vision, helped, no doubt, by Microsoft's decision to crowbar-in a barely modified version of its full desktop OS – the exact same mistake it’s making again today. Not enough people got their hands on a Tablet PC to arrive at an informed opinion on its utility. Not enough software was developed that made good use of it, either. So, while the iPad is far from Microsoft's ambitions, it’s the closest the industry has ever come to the realization of Gates' tablet dreams.

Gates is obviously loyal to Microsoft, but he's clearly prepared to say when he thinks Apple has done something remarkable. I don’t believe he fails to grasp what the iPad represents, despite his comments yesterday… and I’m pretty sure he’s disappointed Microsoft couldn't learn from its earlier tablet mistakes. For a man who invested so much in the tablet dream, it must be pretty galling to see Apple succeed where he failed.

Related GigaOM Pro Research:
Переслать
How-To: Connect to a Cisco VPN Using Snow Leopard or the iPhone OS

Snow Leopard has more than its fair share of improvements. If you work in the corporate world then Cisco IPsec VPN is a great addition.

Before Apple added this feature, you had to use Cisco’s client to connect up to its VPN. With Snow Leopard and the iPhone OS, this support is built in. You may need to get together with your Network Admin to get all the correct passwords, group name and such but anything that can be done in the OS versus a third-party app is good by me.
1. Open up Network in System Preferences.
2. Click the + sign to create a new connection. Select VPN as the interface, Cisco IPSec as the VPN Type and name it what you want.
3. The VPN connection will now be in your list. Fill in your Server Address and Account Name. Our VPN checks authentication against Active Directory so my Account name is domain\username. Also be sure to check the Show VPN Status box so you can easily start and stop your VPN connection.
4. Click Authentication Settings and enter your Shared Secret and Group Name. Once again, your Network Admin should have this information for you.
5. Go ahead and apply your settings and close System Preferences. You should see a new VPN status icon in the menu bar that when you click, gives a drop-down menu to start your VPN connection.
6. Click Connect and you should receive a Password prompt.
7. After you are connected, notice the menu bar icon indicates how long you have been connected. This can be a nice reminder to disconnect if you aren’t using the VPN anymore.
Setting up your iPhone or iPod touch is just as easy.
1. Launch Settings and then click on General.
2. Click Network.
3. Click VPN.
4. Click Add VPN Configuration.
5. Click on the IPSec button and fill in all your information just as you did in Snow Leopard. Click Save when you are done.
6. Try it out by flipping the VPN switch to On.
7. If all is good, you’ll see you are now connected.
Things to remember when accessing shares over a VPN are that you may need to use fully qualified domain names or IP addresses. Every network is different so get friendly with your Network Admin and he/she will hopefully help you out. It’s nice to see Apple developing things like this on the business side of the market. It does it so simple and to the point, that it puts everyone else to shame.

Related GigaOM Pro Research: Cisco's Big Bet on Consumer Telepresence

Переслать
Sponsor post: Atimi Software to Be Showcased During 2010 Games in Vancouver

Atimi Software has been added to the top 20 Vancouver-based wireless and digital media companies that will be showcased in the city’s Robson Square during the upcoming Winter Olympics Games and Paralympic Games. The installation is part of VX — short for Vancouver Experience — which is aimed at highlighting the city’s world-class wireless and new media industry. It is a great honor and opportunity for Atimi and its iPhone clients to be able to both demonstrate current applications and reveal two new ones that will soon hit the marketplace.

Atimi Software Inc. is a cross-platform development company that specializes in Macintosh applications; porting applications from Windows to the Macintosh; and iPhone, BlackBerry and Android mobile application development for the new generation of smartphones. As a pure services company, Atimi handles high-value intellectual property for some of the largest technology companies in the world. Its processes ensure those companies reach their projected targets reliably and efficiently, allowing them to focus on building strong, lasting relationships with their own customers.

Переслать
The Dollar Show: Cheap TV and What It Could Mean for the iPad

The Wall Street Journal is claiming this week that Apple is testing out 99 cent episodes of TV shows on iTunes with the intent of offering the same deal much more broadly across its library when the iPad launches in late March. The information comes courtesy of people familiar with the talks between Apple and the networks regarding pricing changes.

Shows already being offered at 99 cents are cited as examples of testing for this new scheme, but the shows in question aren’t exactly the most popular, so it seems almost as likely that the discounting is designed to stimulate sales in these specific cases. MTV’s “Wonder Showzen” and Warner’s “Children’s Hospital” are among those on offer at the reduced rate.

Still, we’ve heard rumblings of this before, and the article in the WSJ fits almost exactly the description of what an intentional leak from Apple looks like. Also, I have no doubt that while networks might not be that crazy about this idea, there’s no reason Apple wouldn’t want to see the price of standard definition TV shows cut in half (they currently cost $1.99 per episode).

There are plenty of reasons why they would want that to happen, though, and the biggest of all is iPad marketability. To people who, for example, think a ReadWriteWeb post is actually the Facebook login page, the iPad is a mysterious device indeed, with few sellable qualities. Why would such people pay for the ultimate web browsing experience, for example, when they’re terrified of the web? What they will pay for, and what they do understand, is TV.

Bestselling shows offered at a dollar isn’t only an attempt to woo iTunes TV-viewers to the new platform, although it will probably help do that. The advantage of such competitive pricing for a single, popular type of media is that it will make the iPad a destination device for said media, in the same way that the iPod has become the digital music player. Apps might sell the iPod touch and iPhone now, but make no mistake, what sold their predecessors and allowed them to even exist in the first place was music.

TV could do for the iPad what music did for the iPod, and Apple knows it. Sure, the iPad has apps, but I’d be willing to bet that apps still remain mostly untouched territory for a massive number of people who use the media playback capabilities of their iPods and iPhones. Books aren’t priced competitively enough, nor do they appeal to a wide enough market to create the kind of consumer rush Apple is looking for with its new device. No, it has to be TV, and for that to become a reality, consumers have to see prices that compete with or improve upon cable subscription models.

Offering cheaper TV is a step in the right direction, but there is an alternative if talks break down and Apple can’t offer steep discounts on its current TV prices, which by all accounts are fairly high. Apple should merely open the platform a little by either developing easy conversion options itself for .avi files and other formats, built right into iTunes, or by encouraging third-party companies to do so. In short, make it easier for users to get their own files onto the device, and you broaden the hardware’s appeal immensely.

Apple currently makes it somewhat difficult to get your own differently formatted media onto its devices because by doing so, it encourages content providers to offer their media for licensed use with the device. It gives Cupertino the ability to negotiate with those providers, since Apple is actually protecting their interests by discouraging piracy.

But if networks don’t begin to take Apple seriously as a contender to cable companies and other TV service providers by offering competitive prices, I say the Mac-maker is well within its right to go its own way and open the platform up. Consumers will reward them with big hardware spends to make up for lost media revenue.

Переслать