Fresh Apple: TheAppleBlog (5 сообщений)

rss2email.ru

Рейтинги, секреты Веб 2.0 и соц. сетей

Новости программного обеспечения

Новинки каталога Softkey

YESWAY.RU -необычное красивое интересное

TheAppleBlog
News, reviews, walkthroughs, and real life application of Apple products
http://theappleblog.com
рекомендовать друзьям >>

CBS Video Content Coming to the iPad Via HTML5?
Apple’s iPad is now only a matter of days away and in preparation for the device’s arrival, major U.S. television network CBS is preparing its website to cater for the tablet’s needs.

Keen eyed Apple bloggers spotted the change on the CBS website earlier this week, noting a number of “iPad test” links on various video content including the likes of CSI and The Young & Reckless. When clicked in a browser, these links navigate to just the normal flash version of the selected video. However, if the website is visited via an iPad, or an SDK iPad Simulator, the viewer is presented with an HTML5 version of the video page.
More on iPad
CBS’ experimental HTML5 pages do not currently have functional video, but the pages’ source code details several other HTML5 elements, including a full-screen mode. Despite the experimentally nature of CBS’ efforts the move hints that more mainstream content providers are beginning to adapt their content to work on as many devices as possible, including Apple’s iPad which controversially does not support Adobe’s Flash.

The use of HTML5 comes after Steve Jobs personally spoke out against Flash, and following the positive estimates as to how the iPad will sell it’s no surprise that major content providers are starting to make moves to accommodate Apple’s upcoming tablet.

Just how long it takes for all the major networks to play catch up and arrive on the iPad is unknown, but the sooner the better.

Переслать
New Skin: TheAppleBlog Redesigns
It’s been many months in the making, but this evening we launched an entire overhaul of TheAppleBlog’s design. This redesign is part of an overhaul of the entire GigaOM network that started back in November.

TheAppleBlog joined GigaOM back in September 2008 but for the past 18 months we kept our pre-GigaOm design. This was the last step in fully integrating TheAppleBlog as part of the GigaOM family.

The new design helps us do a better job of featuring new content as well as letting you explore popular topics a lot more easily. In addition, we’ll be able to feature relevant content from around our network more easily.

At the end of the day, this redesign is about surfacing content for you and helping you interact with our little community more. There are a lot of intricacies and small features spread out around the site, so be sure to dig around. It’s definitely a dynamic new site with lots of extras that aren’t necessarily immediately obvious.

So have a look around and let us know what you think!

Переслать
Apple Dominates Mobile Internet Devices: Report
The latest report (PDF) from mobile advertising network AdMob has good news for the company’s parent firm, Google, but greats news for Google’s mobile rival Apple.

For February, smartphone traffic share increased an astonishing 193 percent over the same period last year with a corresponding drop in feature phones. Half of that traffic belonged to Apple.

However, it should be noted those numbers aren’t market share, or web share, but ad share as measured by AdMob from data “pulled across ads served on more than 15,000 sites and applications,” half of which are from devices in North America.

Having disclosed all that, Apple is set to rule the mobile web. Just look at the graph and follow the thin blue line.

According to AdMob, the Mobile Internet Device (MID) represented 17 percent of traffic in February of 2010, up 403 percent year over year. Mobile Internet Devices include handheld gaming consoles from Nintendo and Sony and general purpose handhelds like the Zune HD. Apple’s iPod touch, according to AdMob, currently accounts for 93 percent of that traffic.

That’s not a typo, and while some might suggest that dominating percentage is hopelessly prejudiced by the data source, there is corroboration of a sort from Net Applications, which does track market share.

Leaving Java Mobile Edition out of the mobile OS pie because it fits better with feature phones, the remaining operating systems again demonstrate Apple’s dominance. The iPhone OS accounts for 60 percent of the market, while the iPod touch competing against smartphones is bested only by Symbian. Nintendo and Sony don’t even show up.

The downside is that not too long ago the wedge for Android didn’t exist, and more threateningly for Apple, Android share tripled from last month. AdMob backs up those gains, with Android now accounting for 25 percent of smartphone operating systems, up from just two percent last year, but that’s okay.

The hottest potential market isn’t smartphones, but Mobile Internet Devices. Apple effectively controls the market for handheld MIDs with the iPod touch, and 10 days from now that could happen all over again with tablets and the iPad. When Steve declared Apple a “mobility” company, it wasn’t the usual Jobsian hyperbole, but a declaration of the company’s business model going forward.

The future begins April 3.

Переслать
Wall Street Journal to Charge $17.99 a Month for iPad Subscriptions
Just when you thought the iPad might be able to breathe some life back into the failing print industry, the industry itself seems dead set on making sure that doesn’t happen. Well, certain parties within the industry at least, like maybe News Corp. for instance, if a recent report appearing in the Wall Street Journal about planned iPad subscription pricing is any indication.

The report, which, you’ll remember, appeared in the WSJ itself, cited “a person familiar with the matter” as the source of the information that the Journal would be charging $17.99 per month for iPad subscribers when the device launches next month. No, that’s not a typo where I accidentally switched “per month” for “per year.”

I realize that the Wall Street Journal is among those choice few who’ve been given a pre-production piece of iPad hardware upon which to develop its app, but I doubt very much that anything it can put together, no matter how spectacular, will make me want to pay $18 a month for the privilege of using it. People switched to online news sources because they were cheaper, not significantly more expensive than traditional paper outlets.

While the WSJ seems to have gone well off its rocker regarding iPad pricing, other companies are offering more sane and reasonable deals. Esquire, for instance, which is the magazine the furthest along in the Hearst family with regards to iPad development, plans to offer its iPad issues for only $2.99 an issue. That’s $2 off the standard newsstand price, which is cheaper, as one might expect.

Men’s Health, on the other hand, is going the route of equally priced digital and print editions, and will be charging $4.99 per issue, and other offerings like Time and People are said to be priced close to the newsstand editions. Advertisers are reportedly flocking to the magazine publishers in droves in order to be part of the first wave of iPad editions, owing partly to the marquee value of the highly anticipated launch, and partly to the innovation in interactive ads possible thanks to the new medium.

So the question is, what’s the pricing sweet spot for iPad users when it comes to magazine content? Personally, I wouldn’t pay any of the prices I’ve mentioned, but that’s only because I’m not interested in the content. If National Geographic or Popular Science offered iPad apps priced the same as their print editions, I’d go for it, even though I don’t buy those in print now. I wouldn’t pay $17.99 a month for anything, even a magazine for which I was the sole target audience called “Darrell Monthly.”

Related GigaOM Pro Research: Forecast: Tablet App Sales To Hit $8B by 2015

Переслать
Final Word on AT&T 3G MicroCell: Meh
For many iPhone users held hostage by AT&T’s second-rate 3G network, the announcement that a nationwide rollout of the AT&T 3G MicroCell will begin in April sounds like a long-awaited promise of coverage rescue finally coming true.

Certainly that’s what I thought when I started using the MicroCell last year, but six months later I haven’t found cellular freedom at home so much as a better jail cell for me and my iPhone.

Regarding the announcement, AT&T says only that the nationwide launch will begin in mid-April, with “new markets activating in cities across the continental U.S. for the next several months.” To date, that’s mostly been regions of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, with San Diego and Las Vegas being recently added.

However, browsing the MicroCell support forum, posts are appearing declaring MicroCell availability in Arizona, New Mexico and New York—not New York City. Expect the MicroCell to be available in most U.S. cities by the end of 2010. Now that the “when” has been answered, the question is whether there is any value for the iPhone user with poor coverage at home.

How’s that image for an answer. Instafail. Despite the “five bar” coverage in my house, I will intermittently and without any discernible pattern have calls fail immediately after initiating them. A second attempt always succeeds, but it’s frustrating, and it happens on both my iPhone and my wife’s iPhone. After six months of being a beta tester, replacing one problematic MicroCell, troubleshooting various problems with tech support and discovering solutions on my own, I still have problems.

Other problems include what I would describe as passive-aggressive xenophobia on the part of my MicroCell towards people in call centers, presumably on other continents. Calls to call centers represent the most frequent of infrequent in-call drops. However, I also drop calls if I let the kitchen get between me and the MicroCell, even if the distance is less than 20 feet. Even keeping the kitchen out of the way, the range of the MicroCell could be better. In two different houses, I find 50 feet and a wall or two is the upward range limit.

Should your MicroCell itself drop out—and it will—it’s pretty easy to get running again. Disconnecting power and reconnecting will almost always have it back online within 15 minutes. Should that not work, it will be necessary to re-register the MicroCell on AT&T’s website, then reconnect it with your network. It’s a tedious and time-consuming process, but I haven’t had to do that since November, so perhaps that’s one problem fixed.

What will these problems cost you? The MicroCell sells for $149.99, though qualified purchasers can get rebates of up to $100, making the cost of network coverage that AT&T should already be providing only $50. To get the rebate, you have to sign up for a MicroCell calling plan at $19.99 per month. If you don’t get a MicroCell calling plan, calls will be deducted from you cell plan minutes. Seriously, is this a great deal for AT&T or what? Unburdening their network woes on the backs of broadband providers and getting AT&T cell phone users to pay for it—brilliant!

So, should you get a MicroCell? That’s not really the question. Rather, the question is can you replace your POTS or VoIP landline with a MicroCell and iPhone? My experience is that you cannot. While you can count on the AT&T 3G MicroCell to extend “five bar” coverage to your home, the bars are still a prison, and AT&T remains the iPhone’s jailer. Those of us desiring to cut our landlines don’t need an AT&T 3G MicroCell, we need a Verizon iPhone.

Related GigaOM Pro Research: Metered Mobile Data Is Coming and Here's How

Переслать