The damage here isn’t that a bunch of people need to figure out how to delete a (really quite bad) album that they got for free and are now whining about. It’s that Apple did something inconsiderate, tone-deaf, and kinda creepy for the sake of a relatively unimportant marketing campaign, and they seemingly didn’t think it would be a problem.
There’s one further point I’d like to add as to why this felt so wrong: a music library is a deeply personal collection. It is the whole sum of your life’s soundtrack. It has songs that played while you were laughing with friends, crying alone, making out with your significant other, cooking, cleaning, falling asleep, waking up, working, walking, and so much more. As we are able to take increasing amounts of music everywhere with us, we are increasingly experiencing our lives alongside a soundtrack. Songs of Innocence is an unwelcome wart on my life’s soundtrack. It has inserted itself into my library near albums of far greater importance to me. It feels like a violation of something I cherish.
Here’s a thought exercise: what if it wasn’t a U2 promotion, with their fairly vanilla, insipid tunes? What if it was a band with a bit more bite, like Deftones or a thirtieth-anniversary reissue of Hüsker Dü’s excellent Zen Arcade? What if it was a tie-in with Run the Jewels’ new record? I wouldn’t have a problem with any of these options, but I suspect many would take offence at being pushed an album with profanity or — shock! horror! — a pointed opinion.
Nobody had seen anything like it before. It had a 5GB hard drive packed into a device the size of a pack of cigarettes. I didn’t even know anyone was making hard drives that small. To get through all your songs, it had this wheel that let you click and click and clickckckckckckckckckckck your way through thousands and thousands of songs.
It cost $400. Out of my price range, by a long shot. (I was a junior editor at Macworld trying to pay rent in San Francisco.) But I saved and saved until I could afford one.
Suddenly, they were everywhere. White earbuds on the bus. White earbuds on the plane. White earbuds on every street I walked down, in every city in America. Sometimes you’d go to a party, and the host would leave the iPod hooked up to the speakers, so everyone could take turns DJing. Click the wheel and rock the party.
This day was bound to come eventually, but the quiet death of the Classic is a truly saddening moment. The iPod cemented Apple as the purveyor of cool, and you were immediately mad cooler if you owned one. I felt immediately cooler with my silver Mini, and then my ridiculously oversized (for the time) 60 GB Classic. A friend of mine owned a third-generation iPod — the one with the wheel and the four touch-sensitive buttons across the middle, below the screen. I had friends with Nanos when they were first released, and other friends with Shuffles. Even if you didn’t own an iPod by 2006 or so, you could quickly name ten people you knew with one. And the ads have become totally iconic.
I’ve long harboured a suspicion that the iPod Classic would be discontinued as soon as the iPod Touch got 128 GB of storage, though, and I think this is the year that happens.
Every product line has a lifespan, though. The iPod’s was long — 13 years — and it’s still going. Just not with the one that started it all.
If you followed the rumour blogs prior to Tuesday’s Apple event, very little about the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus came as a surprise to you. The one thing that is surprising is the way in which the 6 Plus handles scaling. It is, as many predicted, a 1,242 × 2,208 pixel interface, but the display itself is 1,080 × 1,920 pixels, so the interface is scaled down to fit. Pixel-perfect scaling of @2x interface elements was already going to be a challenge, but the display itself is not pixel-perfect. It’s “better” in a numbers game against the iPhone 6 and it may look alright at 401 pixels-per-inch density, but that feels like a significant compromise.
Remember ABC’s use of the word “historical” to tease Apple’s keynote? Remember how I got suckered into this, but also reminded you that the last time Apple hyped something to this extent it was the Beatles on iTunes?
Should have seen the U2 thing coming:
“U2 has been an important part of Apple’s history in music and we’re thrilled to make ‘Songs of Innocence’ the largest album release ever,” said Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of Internet Software and Services. “We get to share our love of music today by gifting this great new album to over half a billion iTunes customers around the world.”
That’s why ABC called it “historical”, and likely not without some prodding.
Gotta wonder if this has a similar arrangement to Samsung’s giveaway of Jay-Z’s Magna Carta Holy Grail, too. Samsung, if you recall, bought a million copies of the album, thereby qualifying it for top 40 charts. Did Apple “buy” 500 million copies of Songs of Innocence? While we’re at it, is U2, as Mitch Bartlett so eloquently put it, a band or a business?
Sure, it’s “historical” for 500 million people to own a single album all at the same time. But there’s a huge difference between 500 million people buying an album and 500 million people being given an album. We buy albums we like or might potentially like, from artists that we already know or look interesting. I wasn’t planning on buying this record, yet I now own it. That’s weird, and not in a “pleasant surprise” kinda way.
It’s like when Radiohead released In Rainbows, or Saul Williams released “Niggy Tardust”, or Nine Inch Nails released “The Slip” for as much as you want to pay — even free. They didn’t push it to my phone or your iPad. As a result, they felt less like marketing ploys and more experimental and genuine. And, as a result of that, I have purchased all three albums, and I suspect many others have done the same.
As for the U2 album itself, it’s pretty typical U2. Once you’ve heard anything from All That You Can’t Leave Behind onward, you’ve heard everything they’ve done in that time period. They call this record “very personal“, but they also said that about their previous effort. It’s not bad so much as consistently uninteresting.
Here’s what we can tell you: each “Unexposed” pack features three 5.5-inch x 3.5-inch 48-page memo books in an opaque black sleeve.
We won’t ruin the surprise by giving away any more than that, except to say that each pack contains three of the six memo books that make up this edition. So, there are 20 different possible combinations. Which combination you receive is left up to chance. You don’t know what you’ll get, and neither do we! But we’re confident you’ll enjoy them.
I’m ordering a pack of these because of the accompanying film alone.
Last December, after several corporate leadership changes, and with budget cuts looming on the horizon, I decided I couldn’t go on. My newest set of bosses persuaded me to stay give them a chance. So I continued to work and ponder my next move.
Then another leadership shift occurred, the sixth in 24 months. The new bosses were actually my old bosses, and they knew exactly how I was feeling about my job and the prospect of going through more painful changes. To their great credit, they allowed us to end our relationship amicably. I thank them for their support and their generosity.
Speaking of Apple and the media, Mark Gurman’s extensive explanation of the way the company plays with the press is required reading. Linking to it is, I assume, grounds for not receiving any more of the press invites and sweet scoops that I never got anyway. C’est la vie.
Apple’s really good at pushing buttons behind the scenes and, of course, great at working the press post-launch. But I think the aforementioned “historic” teaser on ABC is unprecedented. I’m sure it’s ABC who used the word “historic”, not Apple, but how often does a teaser that strong come along about Apple, and what prompted the use of that word?
I know the American news media has a tendency to blow things out of proportion, but something about this is different. My Spidey sense tells me that tomorrow’s announcements are going to change the course of the company in a big way.
The photographer Errol Morris once gave an excellent lecture wherein he explained the concept of a hypothetical elephant outside of the frame. The idea of this is whether a photograph — often considered prime proof of an event — can be honest if it doesn’t include all available information. Put another way, is there anything just outside of the framed area that might be relevant or pertinent?
Anyway, I only bring this up because Amazon reduced the price of the Fire Phone from $200 to $0.99 today, and I made Jeff Bezos a graph of Fire Phone sales for his next presentation:
The main way Samsung’s Galaxy Alpha is differentiated from the iPhone 5S is that its faux antenna breaks are on the top and bottom instead of on the sides. Also, it says “SAMSUNG” on the front, just in case you forget what phone you’re using. I wouldn’t blame you, though.
More Twitter-is-now-behaving-like-a-huge-company news. Noah Everett:
We originally filed for our trademark in 2009 and our first use in commerce dates back to February 2008 when we launched. We encountered several hurdles and difficulties in getting our trademark approved even though our first use in commerce predated other applications, but we worked through each challenge and in fact had just recently finished the last one. During the “published for opposition” phase of the trademark is when Twitter reached out to our counsel and implied we could be denied access to their API if we did not give up our mark.
Unfortunately we do not have the resources to fend off a large company like Twitter to maintain our mark which we believe whole heartedly is rightfully ours. Therefore, we have decided to shut down Twitpic.
Guess we have to get used to the formerly-friendly Twitter becoming a bully. Shame.
This is related to Twitter’s larger aim to better organize its content—to separate the interesting and timely tweets from the noise. Twitter has already begun tweaking the timeline where tweets appear—most notably (and controversially), by introducing tweets from accounts users haven’t chosen to follow.
Twitter’s timeline is organized in reverse chronological order, a delivery system that has not changed since the product was created eight years ago and one that some early adopters consider sacred to the core Twitter experience. But this “isn’t the most relevant experience for a user,” Noto said. Timely tweets can get buried at the bottom of the feed if the user doesn’t have the app open, for example. “Putting that content in front of the person at that moment in time is a way to organize that content better.”
Twitter has always had a bit of a shaky business model, especially if you look at the way it was used in about 2008 or 2009. I understand that these changes will allow users to Engage with Brands™ and therefore drive Twitter’s revenue, but this is ultimately a really shitty move for users. A Twitter timeline is a user’s rolling guide to the day, as viewed through the scope of their interests and time. That much is absolutely central to the Twitter experience, and should be sacrosanct for the company. It’s too bad that they don’t see it that way.
What we see in the public with these hacking incidents seems to only be scratching the surface. There are entire communities and trading networks where the data that is stolen remains private and is rarely shared with the public. The networks are broken down horizontally with specific people carrying out specific roles, loosely organized across a large number of sites (both clearnet and darknet) with most organization and communication taking place in private (email, IM).
This is frightening. It’s not just celebrities who are targeted, but the accounts of women — almost exclusively — of any level of fame, or lack thereof.
What I was trying to say earlier and did not entirely elaborate on is that this subculture is a product of a culture that objectifies women and their bodies. It turns intimate images into currency for a particular group of men who see what they’re doing as a challenge, or as a threat vector. It would be irresponsible to equate this to the physical act of rape, but, on some level, it works toward a similar psychological trauma. It’s less typically violent, but it is no less a violation.
(Please avoid reading the comments on the linked article.)
Update: Edited to clarify that rape is not always a violent act.
It’s not clear what the people who leak these photos hope to achieve beyond financial gain and a moment of notoriety. I suppose such impoverished currency is enough. The why of these questions is hardly relevant. These hackers are not revealing anything the general public does not already know. BREAKING: beneath their clothes, celebrities are naked.
What these people are doing is reminding women that, no matter who they are, they are still women. They are forever vulnerable.
If you are a man — especially a white male — and a member of the general public, you’re probably not going to be targeted to have your most intimate photos or text broadcast to the world. If you’re a woman — and especially a public figure — there are assholes who feel entitled to your most intimate photos, and think that it’s fair game for them to be in the public realm. Not only is this criminal, it’s morally bankrupt. There is absolutely no excuse for anyone to view these photos, or for them to be leaked in the first place.
Given enough time, anyone can crack Jennifer Lawrence’s password, but, really, nobody should even be trying to. We should respect everyone’s right to privacy equally.
I’m 32 now. The only things that’ve been more of a constant in my life than AnandTech are my parents. I’ve spent over half of my life learning about, testing, analyzing and covering technology. And I have to say, I’ve enjoyed every minute of it.
But after 17.5 years of digging, testing, analyzing and writing about the most interesting stuff in tech, it’s time for a change. This will be the last thing I write on AnandTech as I am officially retiring from the tech publishing world.
I wish Lal Shimpi the very best, but I’m going to miss his fastidious, detailed, unique take on the tech world.
Today, my friends at Vox.com published a terrific 5,000-word feature about the legacy of the Sopranos, framed around one very exclusive piece of reporting: series creator David Chase told reporter Martha Nochimson whether Tony Soprano dies at the end of the show, a question that fans have debated endlessly in the decade since the series famously ended on a hard cut to black.
It’s terrific, and the Vox.com product team engineered a fantastic presentation where the screen blacks out before the reveal. It’s everything a feature on the internet should be: thoughtful, concise, exclusive, and interactive.
If the article is so dependent on the teaser headline that a single tweet can bust the whole thing up, then Beckman did save people a click. If the article is not dependent on the teaser headline and it can stand on its own, why use that particular headline? It attracts clicks, but at the cost of feeling a little trashy.
Put another way, imagine if the Wall Street Journal redesigned their paper to look like the National Enquirer. Would you find it as trustworthy?
Huge scoop for the Verge. Compare what Uber’s PR team wrote to what is actually revealed in the emails and screenshots in this article and it’s clear that even Uber knows this is super sleazy, and they’re trying to weasel their way around it.
So how do we determine what looks like click-bait?
One way is to look at how long people spend reading an article away from Facebook. If people click on an article and spend time reading it, it suggests they clicked through to something valuable. If they click through to a link and then come straight back to Facebook, it suggests that they didn’t find something that they wanted. With this update we will start taking into account whether people tend to spend time away from Facebook after clicking a link, or whether they tend to come straight back to News Feed when we rank stories with links in them.
Facebook’s tracking code makes this sort of thing possible, which seems both more useful to me than serving me ads, and edging closer to the creepy line. But this serves to reiterate the point Zeynep Tufekci made in her article about the algorithms used by Twitter and Facebook to highlight stuff we might be interested in: what makes this code ideal to decide what is important to us? There’s a lot of responsibility inherent to a deployment of an algorithm update used for user feed selection and sorting, but it increasingly feels as though it’s not being given the respect it deserves by Facebook and Twitter staff.
This is a pretty slick ad: take a very current “viral” thingy and spin it in a short time to point out a great advantage Samsung’s product has over its competitors’. And they apparently gave a very generous donation to charity, so it’s good all around, right?
Gruber notes two things, though: it’s more like a promotion of the Galaxy S5 rather than truly dedicating itself to the charitable cause, and the status bar changes midway through the ad. Regarding the former point, I don’t see how this is much different than the Product Red campaign and its associated products. Regarding the latter, I would hope that this is due to a filming error or something. But knowing how unscrupulous Samsung has been in the past with regards to their ads, I wouldn’t be surprised if this whole thing were faked.
In addition to the basic, essential definition of a Twitter timeline — “all Tweets from those you have chosen to follow on Twitter” — plus retweets and ads, there’s a new section:
Additionally, when we identify a Tweet, an account to follow, or other content that’s popular or relevant, we may add it to your timeline. This means you will sometimes see Tweets from accounts you don’t follow. We select each Tweet using a variety of signals, including how popular it is and how people in your network are interacting with it. Our goal is to make your home timeline even more relevant and interesting.
In most cases, these seem to be tweets favorited, but not retweeted, by people you follow.
Maybe, just maybe, there can be a national conversation on these topics long-ignored outside these communities. That’s not everything: it may be a first step, or it may get drowned out.
But at least, we are here.
But I’m not quite sure that without the neutral side of the Internet—the livestreams whose “packets” were fast as commercial, corporate and moneyed speech that travels on our networks, Twitter feeds which are not determined by an opaque corporate algorithms but my own choices,—we’d be having this conversation.
There are already a lot of conversations surrounding the tragic and complex problems in Ferguson, but plenty more need to happen. The White House has pledged to investigate the militarization of local police, for example. But it’s worth asking how many of these conversations would be happening had the algorithms that inform our conversations selected otherwise.
Peter Christiansen commenting on Hacker News on my little ditty about diversity:
I wish they would have included demographics for the Bay Area, not just the USA. From Wikipedia – 52.5% White, 6.7% non-Hispanic African American, 23.3% Asian, 10.8% from other races, 5.4% from two or more races, 23.5% Hispanic or Latin. (Incidentally, this almost exactly matches Apple’s numbers, except for Hispanic). Comparing tech worker demographics to Bay Area demographics, It’s kind of a chicken vs egg about whether the demographics precede the jobs or vice versa, but given how geographically concentrated the tech industry is, this seems like a bad oversight.
This was by far the most common critique I received about the piece: why did I compare tech company demographics against the US as a whole, and not just California?
While it’s true that the American West Coast has typically had a much higher Asian population than, say, Cleveland or Mobile, it’s hard to say whether it has grown disproportionate to the rest of the United States, as records have been pretty poorly kept. This is what Christiansen alludes to in his comment: is the tech industry responsible for the demographics of the Bay Area, or are Bay Area demographics fairly represented by most of these companies?
Khoi Vinh on Apple’s (and others’) employee diversity figures:
[M]ost retail employees are likely part-time and/or relatively low wage earners; what would these numbers look like if they were segmented so that we can see how well Apple’s diversity initiatives are faring for full-time workers earning over $100,000 a year? Or full-time workers earning more than $200,000 a year? I suspect the numbers would then look less encouraging, maybe even starkly different from what’s being reported here.
Vinh makes a good point — employees in “leadership” positions are universally more white than employees in tech or non-tech; similarly, they’re also typically more male than non-tech (though not more male than tech workers). The stereotype is that Silicon Valley is run by white men; these figures are the proof.
For a company that’s really popular with women, Pinterest has a pretty dismal male/female split. Better than most others, especially on the business side, but not as great as you might expect. Via Ishtaarth Dalmia.
With Apple’s report today (finally), major tech companies have all published information about racial and gender diversity. I thought it might be useful to run the numbers and compare them against the demographics of the United States as a whole, for reference. All data is as-reported from each company.
Almost all available data in this selection of companies solely reports a male/female split. Yahoo is the only company that has an “other/not disclosed” option.
Update: Apple, Google, and Microsoft all have retail operations which are not made distinct from the corporate side. (Thanks to Krishnan Viswanathan for pointing this out.)
The “USA Workforce” row uses data provided by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (PDF). Their demographics information (indicated page 9) is kind of a pain in the ass, though: the unemployed column is a percentage of the labour force, but the employed column is a percentage of the total population. I’ve done the math, though, and the results are what’s shown below. In addition, the BLS does not separate out those of Hispanic descent because “[p]eople whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race.” As such, the row will not add to 100%, but the percentage of Hispanics in the workforce has been noted per the table on page 10.
Similarly, the “USA Overall” row uses data from the CIA World Factbook, and they, too, do not note those of Hispanic descent separately. This row will also not add to 100%.
Apple, Google, and Microsoft all have retail operations which are not made distinct from the corporate side.
Microsoft does not provide a thorough breakdown of their racial diversity data; their data in my table is lumped into the “Other” category. They also do not separate tech and non-tech workers, so their data in this table is the same as their data in the next one.
Microsoft does not provide a thorough breakdown of their racial diversity data; their data in my table is lumped into the “Other” category. They also do not separate tech and non-tech workers, so their data in this table is the same as their data in the previous one.
Let’s get something out of the way: I’m a white twenty-something Canadian who graduated from art college. Analysis of statistics of racial and gender diversity at American tech companies is not exactly my strongest suit. But, hey, you’ve made it this far. I want to be as fair as possible to everyone represented in these stats. If there’s a problem, please let me know.
As noted above, the data available from all companies only reports a male/female split. While it would be imprudent for an employer to ask for more information, it does misrepresent individuals of other genders.
It will come as no surprise that all of these companies are boys’ clubs, particularly tech workers and those in leadership roles. This is one of the biggest issues facing the tech industry right now.
Stereotypes are proving quite strong with the significant over-representation of those of Asian descent at all companies surveyed.
Black employees are, on the other hand, significantly under-represented. Like the under-representation of women in tech companies, this suggests a much larger and more overreaching issue. I’d argue that this is another of the biggest issues facing the tech industry.
Only a single data point was typically made available in a given category. Microsoft was an exception, showing how their diversity has changed over the past few years. I think it would be valuable for the surveyed companies to release similar data from past years. I mention this not because I want a feel-good kind of statistic, but because I’d like to see if progress is, indeed, being made, and at what rate.
Generally, only ethnicity and gender data was provided by the companies surveyed. As several of the reports stated, diversity is so much more than just these two genetic features. It would be inappropriate for employers to ask about sexual orientation, childhood household income, and so forth, but these qualities are part of what shapes internal diversity. Poor families — or even most middle-class families — can’t afford to send their kids to Stanford.
[B]eing opinionated isn’t the goal. Being useful is.
Being opinionated and shipping the truest form of your vision of software doesn’t assure success. I understand the amount of heart, soul, concentration and perseverance it takes to ship a piece of software that really makes you proud and hits all of the marks you’d set for yourself and your team. It can be a really great piece of software.
That doesn’t mean it deserves to be a hit.
I agree with English, but developers who do release “opinionated” software have got to be aware that the more specific they make their software, the smaller the market gets. If you’re a developer and you’re putting out a sweet new app that’s “opinionated” and you don’t recognize that you’re therefore limiting your market, you’re lying to yourself.
But this show also stresses me out. Because I now organize it, I put a lot of pressure on myself to put together the best possible casts. So I am always bothering the improvisers who are on Saturday Night Live, the writers from Colbert Report, and the guys from Conan’s staff to come do it. And they’re busy people, and I hate being the one that bothers them each week with my dumb text messages begging them to come do this show, because not only am I being very annoying, it’s also a weekly reminder that I’m not quite where I want to be. I would like to be the person who gets annoyed, not the person who does the annoying.
And on this night, I’m in the back of the theater, tired and stressed out by all this self-defeating thought, exhausted by it before the show even begins.
There are probably half a dozen things that I’m thinking of posting today, but this rose right to the top of the queue. It isn’t often that the death of a public figure really gets to me, but this is one of those occasions. It’s like losing your best friend; Robin Williams often felt like everyone’s best friend. It’s a tragic way for a brilliant mind to go.
Impulsive Buy editor-in-chief Marvo who, like Madonna, has no apparent surname, is celebrating ten years of reviewing mostly junk food:
Here are other numbers that might interest you: 3,306 posts, 1,671 reviews, and 30 pounds gained over the past 10 years. Man, if only I took pictures of my belly every day for the past 10 years, it would’ve made a great YouTube video. And when I say “great,” I mean “gross.”
Maciej Cegłowski will be using a large pool of Pinboard’s bookmarks to gather data on link rot, and I’m pretty excited for the results. I know of things I’ve bookmarked from just a couple of months ago that have already been moved, and things that I’ve bookmarked from ten or more years ago that are still around at the same link. My own anecdotal evidence suggests that links from 2007-2011 or so are frequently rotted, probably due to rapid changes in site architecture best practices during that timeframe.
This post also illustrates how to research user data without being a dick about it. Cegłowski is upfront, is going to ensure that links are not associated with user names, and is offering a clear, simple way to opt out.
I don’t know how much of this story is true, but what I was saying to reporters over the past two days is that it’s evidence of how secure the Internet actually is. We’re not seeing massive fraud or theft. We’re not seeing massive account hijacking. A gang of Russian hackers has 1.2 billion passwords — they’ve probably had most of them for a year or more — and everything is still working normally. This sort of thing is pretty much universally true.
About a week ago, I spent my first night in my first apartment. It was a big change — moving out of the house I grew up in, with the same view outside my room all my life. It was equal parts exciting and nerve-wracking.
I’ve had a pretty late bedtime for as long as I can remember. So, on my first night in my new place, I decided to head to bed at about 1:00 AM. I put some flannel pants on, washed my face, grabbed a glass of water, and then went to brush my teeth.
And I had no toothpaste.
Where does one find toothpaste at 1:00 on the Sunday of a long weekend in downtown Calgary? There’s a 24/7 convenience store chain here called Mac’s, and I’m pretty close to one of the more famous locations in Calgary: the lovingly-dubbed “Crack Mac’s”, for its rather specific clientele. It’s not dangerous, really, but you’ll often find people nodding off or completely fucked-up just outside its front door.
I changed into proper clothing, popped into Crack Mac’s, and looked around for toothpaste. Couldn’t find any. I asked the clerk who — and I shit you not — was fully Jamaican, “could you please show me where the toothpaste is?”
He takes me to the place I had already been looking. “Looks like we’re out, mon,” he said, “but there’s another location nearby. You know it, mon?”
So I began walking the eight-or-so blocks to the other Mac’s location downtown. About halfway there, a police car drove by, and I couldn’t help but think of how they would not believe a single word of this story so far, should they have stopped me to ask: I’m looking for toothpaste at 1:00 on a Sunday and a Jamaican guy just told me to head in this direction. What’s the matter, officer?
I got to the other store, found what I was looking for, put all $2.51 of it on my Visa — because cash is for chumps — and walked home, the new proud owner of a tube of toothpaste.
Really good post from Schiit Audio’s Jason Stoddard over on the Head-Fi forums (via Marco Arment). It’s ostensibly about the sales effect of a review in an “old media” publication, but this part struck me more:
Or, if someone says, “We can’t convert new audiophiles,” laugh louder. We absolutely can. We just need to get more attention in the mass media. And continue our inroads on sites where younger people discover stuff, like Reddit.
And that can be done.
But it won’t be done with $40,000 preamps, $3,000 USB cables, and $500 magic pucks. It won’t be done with aspie-level obsessive in-fighting about formats and provenance. It won’t be done with religious fervor to spread the word about the One True Sound or the One Perfect Measurement.
It’s too bad the term “audiophile” has been hijacked by technological homeopaths. It’s time to take it back.
People who value disruption and unconventionality are more likely to interpret these signals positively. They work where deviations from the norm are lauded, and the interpretation says as much about the viewer as the wearer. But as waves of hoodie-wearing 20-somethings flood companies, sartorial deviation is poised to become the new norm. When everyone wears a T-shirt to lectures and board meetings, how do you tell who is truly innovative and who is just posing?
I’m not sure how many of you had a group of punk rock fans in your junior high school, but I did. They were my favourite group to hang out with because they listened to the best music, but you wouldn’t know it based on the way I dressed. Or, for that matter, the way I dress now. But there were also those in the school who did the opposite: they had a bunch of chains and patches, but they couldn’t tell the Dead Kennedys from Fear.
Does it really matter? Can someone dressed in a suit not pitch venture capitalists nearly as effectively as someone who looks like they rolled into the meeting directly from their futon? Does someone who’s wearing Chucks automatically get a 10% bonus because they’re “unconventional”? The big question: should anyone make their investment decisions based on the cut of the investee’s jeans?
A Russian crime ring has amassed the largest known collection of stolen Internet credentials, including 1.2 billion username and password combinations and more than 500 million email addresses, security researchers say.
The records, discovered by Hold Security, a firm in Milwaukee, include confidential material gathered from 420,000 websites, ranging from household names to small Internet sites. Hold Security has a history of uncovering significant hacks, including the theft last year of tens of millions of records from Adobe Systems.
I’m hoping that this is just the setup to yet another Die Hard film.
We all buy in to Facebook (and Twitter, and OKCupid, and every other social media network), giving them a huge amount of personal data, free content, and discretion on how they show it to us, with the understanding that all of this will largely be driven by choices that we make. We build our own profiles, we select our favorite pictures, we make our own friends, we friend whatever brands we like, we pick the users we want to block or mute or select for special attention, and we write our own stories.
This is why it really stings whenever somebody turns around and says, “well actually, the terms you’ve signed give us permission to do whatever we want. Not just the thing you were afraid of, but a huge range of things you never thought of.”
It’s an inherent problem in the way that the social web works today. Experiments with exchanging less personal information and therefore being less susceptible to these kinds of activities, like App.net, have proved largely unsuccessful. So far, we have elected to sacrifice more of our control in exchange for no-monetary-cost services. What’s the point at which we — the user base — will collectively decide to back away?
Liz Gannes of Recode is writing a multipart series about instant gratification services for physical products and services. The first article, posted today, is full of examples of all kinds of services that will deliver goods to you on demand:
[J]ust last Monday, a mobile medical-marijuana delivery startup called Eaze launched in San Francisco. Not only was Eaze open for business, it was open for business 24 hours a day.
Bootstrapped by an early Yammer employee, Eaze’s site promises delivery to our office in seven minutes. I don’t have a medical marijuana card myself, but my friend Joey at our co-working space does, so I get permission from the bosses to subsidize a minimum order of “Berry White,” described as a “mix of legendary White Widow and Blueberry strains.”
We submit Joey’s doctor’s letter at noon, and are verified by 1:20 pm. We place our order via mobile Web on Joey’s iPhone.
A black Lexus pulls up outside the office 42 minutes later. We have been told to have cash on hand, because Eaze’s online payments system isn’t fully in order yet.
Our “caregiver” — a guy named Loreno who says he found the Eaze gig on Craigslist — opens the trunk and sorts through piles of Tupperware to find the baggie of Berry White. Joey gives him our $40, and instant gratification is delivered.
It’s both odd and perfect that this example of instant gratification — this particular version of which has been around pretty much since all kinds of instant communication methods were invented — is now legitimized.
Online message board 4chan, notorious for its irreverent sense of humor, has spawned what is either a bizarre art project or a massive flipping of the bird to the art world: a photo of a 4chan post, being auctioned as art on eBay. The auction item, Artwork by Anonymous, reads “Art used to be something to cherish. Now literally anything could be art. This post is art.” The existentialist musing could prove to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, with bidding rapidly approaching six figures and just under seven hours left to bid.
I’m not sure whether this piece deserves a proper critique, or even if it can be taken seriously enough to warrant one. As an artwork, it reads like a second-year student’s work, produced just after they learned about dadaism. As a statement, it’s played.
But its presentation — a photograph of an anonymous message board posting that automatically deletes itself after inactivity — speaks volumes: it’s a captured version of something designed to be temporary. It’s a moment captured in time that would otherwise likely be overlooked. It’s a bold statement that’s completely unoriginal, presented within a fairly original contextual framework.
It’s not a very strong piece on its own. But with a potential price tag of $90,000 attached, it becomes an extremely strong statement. It’s, at the very least, intriguing.
Interesting speculative “Monday note” from Jean-Louis Gassée:
Furthermore, it looks like I misspoke when I said an An chip couldn’t power a high-end Mac. True, the A7 is optimized for mobile devices: Battery-optimization, small memory footprint, smaller screen graphics than an iMac or a MacBook Pro with a Retina display. But having shown its muscle in designing a processor for the tight constraints of mobile devices, why would we think that the team that created the most advanced smartphone/tablet processor couldn’t now design a 3GHz A10 machine optimized for “desktop-class” (a term used by Apple’s Phil Schiller when introducing the A7) applications?
Today’s ARM chips are decidedly optimized for mobile usage because — spoiler alert — that’s where they’re used. But, while the architecture of the chip was decidedly built in favour of mobile and low-power usage in the beginning, today’s ARM chips are a completely different species. Imagine what kind of power an A-series chip could turn out if it were not encumbered by the power constraints of a smartphone (or a tablet, at the highest end of the available mobile power envelope).
The remarkable thing about the internet is that you don’t have to wait, you don’t need anyone’s permission to put your creative work out in the world, you can just do it.
I’m just getting around to reading Clive Thompson’s “Smarter Than You Think” — I’m about halfway through — and Thompson has devoted a large chunk of the first half of the book to almost exactly this. Myers and Thompson are, of course, not the first to notice the magic of having a largely-democratic widely-accessible platform.1 But it’s something that cannot be overstated: no matter how much crap gets produced and released as a byproduct of so many people having access to the tools, there’s so much more amazing stuff being written, filmed, photographed, recorded, and made every day.
Thomas Phinney busts up a Wired puff piece on Roboto, but makes a much greater, more valuable point near the end:
Now, if Google/Android and Apple want to claim that they are making their UI font choices for design reasons, that’s fine. But when they (or Wired) start touting the awesome legibility of their choices, I have to call them out on it. Nonsense.
Yosemite’s switch from Lucida Grande to Helvetica Neue1 is obviously controversial. It may create some consistency on Apple’s platforms, but at the cost of being less legible at UI sizes, even on a high-resolution display. No matter how much I like the way it looks, I can’t deny the decrease in legibility.
In addition, it’s strange how Phinney himself confuses “design” and “aesthetics”. If Apple were to choose a UI typeface for design reasons, it wouldn’t be Helvetica. Where’s Apple Sans when you need it?
I took the liberty of rewriting Wired’s headline for this article — “Square Bets Big on Next-Gen Credit Card Tech” — because the rest of the world has used EMV cards for at least several years.
Square’s implementation is as you would expect from a team fronted by former Apple hardware designers: elegant in its simplicity. It’s not as nice as the current reader, mostly because of all of the additional hardware required to read chip cards, but it’s certainly more refined than a chip-equipped PIN pad.
This looks really promising to me as Square tries to up their international game. Not only is this going to mean greater security for Americans, it’s going to allow more international users to feel more comfortable using Square to pay for stuff.
Fortune’s Philip Elmer-DeWitt, quoting an anonymous former IDC researcher:
Even the growth rates are fiction. The fudge is in the “others” category, which is used as a plug to make the numbers work out. In fairness, we did do survey work, calling around, and attending white box conferences and venues to try to get a feel for that market, but in the end, the process was political. I used to tell customers which parts of the data they could trust, essentially the major vendors by form factor and region. The rest was garbage.
Paul Carr of Pando Daily, quoting from Chen Ma’s suit:
…Plaintiff alleges that while using her iPhones, including her current iPone [sic] 5S, she was not given notice that her daily whereabouts would be tracked, recorded, and transmitted to Apple database to be stored for future reference. She was not asked for and thus has not given her consent, approval and permission nor was she even made aware that her detailed daily whereabouts would be tracked, recorded and transmitted to Apple database.
Apple, in the Terms and Conditions that Ma agreed to when setting up her iPhone:
By enabling Location Services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to the transmission, collection, maintenance, processing, and use of your location data and location search queries by Apple and its partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based and road traffic-based products and services.
It’s not going to be this cut and dry — these things never are — but this seems so frivolous to me. This is the most interesting part of this suit:
According to belief and information, Plaintiff further alleges that Apple has released and disclosed the above described private information of iPhone users to third parties, including but not limited to US government who, according to information, has made more than 1,000 information requests to Apple.
Isn’t this legal effort better directed towards the NSA who issued those information demands? National Security Letters are essentially orders, not mere requests.
But you know what? Perhaps there’s some substance to this. Let’s take a look at the seven things the iWatch “needs to do” if Apple would like to “win”. Whatever the hell that means.
It has to be a watch. First, tell the time. That’s the ballgame. It’s why the Pebble Steel, despite its remarkable lack of functionality, is the best smartwatch currently on the market.
Even the Nike FuelBand — Pierce quotes Tim Cook’s praise of it at the top of the article — tells the time. But the iPod Shuffle has been super successful without a screen. I think it’s more likely than not that the hypothetical Apple wearable will sport a display and will tell the time, but who knows?
My iWatch should be MY iWatch. As time goes on, Android Wear’s inability to let developers build custom watch faces frustrates me more and more. Apple should take note: any watch made mostly from a screen ought to be infinitely customizable. If I can’t choose my own watch face or download one from the App Store, Apple blew it.
Actually, I’m a little stumped on this one. After all, it was acceptable to launch the iPhone without a native SDK because it was an entirely new platform.1 A wearable product would be something new, but it might not be an entirely new platform (that is, it could conceivably run an iOS variant).
But if you were only able to use, say, a selection of ten watch faces that came with the device and there were no additional faces available for download, would that be blowing it? How many sales would Apple forego if that were the case?
Personalization is about more than just software, too. Apple needs to conform to standards: include swappable watch bands or get out.
It has to be part of a bigger connected picture. Apple’s always been uniquely good at building devices that work well on their own and better together, and the iWatch needs to be the best example yet.
No, Apple’s not going to make an iWatch that plays nicely with your Android phone or your Windows PC. That’s fine. What it needs to do is build a device that is powerful and useful in its own right, and becomes even more so when it’s paired with other Apple devices.
This, I agree with. It makes complete sense. Remember Apple’s early-2000s “digital hub” strategy? As much as the proverbial cloud is the replacement for that, the iPhone is the new local hardware hub. It’s your instant messenger, your news reader, your iPod, your casual gaming machine, your satellite navigation unit, your camera, and your phone. And it’s always on you.
At the same time, I’d think that an Apple wearable could stand on its own. Joggers would appreciate not needing to take both their iPhone and wearable with them.
I should be able to use Evernote for taking notes, Lyft for calling cars, Spotify for music, Google for maps, and anything else I choose. A watch is personal; it’s not good enough if it doesn’t work the way I do.
Good luck with that, Pierce.
It needs a killer app — and a lot of other ones.
But at first, the iWatch also needs a single primary raison d’être, a reason for being in the first place. […] The iWatch needs a single revolutionary story Apple can tell about what it is, why the world needs smartwatches — and why they need this one.
Agreed. That’s what Apple’s really good at, which is what Pierce appears to be hinting at:
No other manufacturer has figured out how to sell their smartwatches, how to convince users they need one. Apple needs to get it right.
But this is entirely backwards. The meeting for any product like this wouldn’t start with Schiller standing up and saying “Hey, guys, let’s build a watch!” but rather a problem. For example, that could be a question of whether fitness tracking devices are as good as they should or could be. Only after the product goals are established does it take shape.
Take the development of the iPad, too. Steve Jobs:
It began with the tablet. I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our people about it. And six months later, they came back with this amazing display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys. He got scrolling working and some other things, and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet aside, and we went to work on the iPhone.
Apple’s strategy is really simple. What we want to do is we want to put an incredibly great computer in a book that you can carry around with you and learn how to use in 20 minutes. That’s what we want to do and we want to do it this decade. And we really want to do it with a radio link in it so you don’t have to hook up to anything and you’re in communication with all of these larger databases and other computers.
The iPad was born from this idea; the idea was not grafted to fit a 10-inch piece of glass. It’s a subtle but critical difference.
It should do things for me, and make it easy for me to do things too.
I like things. And stuff.
Whether I’m opening apps, making phone calls, or just turning on Airplane Mode, I’ve come to rely mostly on Siri.
Siri’s cool, but you rely upon it to open apps? Really? Okay.
Apple can’t win without good battery life. There’s only one spec that can singlehandedly prevent the iWatch (or any smartwatch) from ever being mainstream: battery life. A device that lasts a day or less is going to be forgotten on the bedside table one morning, the habit lost, the device returned.
I agree that it should have great battery life, but I disagree that it needs more than a day of typical battery life. Most people I know who wear a wristwatch take them off before bed, including myself. Remember that cellphones used to last a week or more on a single charge; now, we’re accustomed to plugging them in every night or so.
Most of the time, the iWatch should do nothing. It should sit forgotten on your wrist, alerting you only when there’s something worth paying attention to. And that won’t be every notification, every alert, every message. The iWatch needs tools to be finely tuned, and needs to be smart enough to tune itself to show me only what I need to see right now.
It wasn’t, however, acceptable to launch the “sweet solution” Apple promised at WWDC 2007. By the way, if you haven’t seen that keynote recently, check it out. It’s, uh, not great, to say the least. ↩
The industry is currently in the midst of a massive cultural shift. There’s a growing disconnect between the nearly half of gamers that are female, and overwhelmingly male population of games journalists and game developers.
When you wonder why women aren’t rushing to fix that balance, remember this is the fucking emotional and even physical minefield they’re signing themselves up for. Growing a thicker skin isn’t the answer, nor is it a proper response. Listening, and making the industry safer for the existence of visible women is the best, and only, way forward.
This is a tough read. I can’t begin to imagine what women are subjected to on a daily basis in any context. This is just a small look at an obviously more enormous problem.
When Apple explained the diagnostics toolset and published a detailed support document, Zdziarski said that Apple’s acknowledgement of its not-secret developer tools only proved him right, and that this meant Apple was admitting to his claims of making iOS vulnerable to authorities’ snooping by design.
Zdziarski says he “doesn’t believe for a minute that these services are intended solely for diagnostics.”
And with one word — “believe” — we have the nut of what’s becoming a big problem in the state of security and journalism for everyone.
Pedro de Noronha, managing partner at hedge fund Noster Capital, said he was unsure about the Silicon Valley-based company’s long-term potential.
“I need to know where a company is going to be in 5-to-10 years. I mean look at Apple, a company we all admire…I don’t know where they are going to be in three years,” Noronha told CNBC in a TV interview.
“It’s a very competitive landscape. They might become obsolete in two-to-three years, as we’ve seen with dozens of technology companies.”
Or space aliens that look like poodles but are the size of elephants may pop up in three years. You just don’t know.
That’s why I’m bullish on poodles the size of elephants.
Fresh scuttlebutt. Apparently, Nilay Patel will be returning to take over as Editor in Chief, after his recent brief stint at Vox. Topolsky, meanwhile, will be going to Bloomberg. I doubt the direction of the Verge will change substantially because of this change of editorial staff — Patel has been at Topolsky’s side since the Engadget days, so his editorial direction will likely be similar to Topolsky’s. If there are substantial changes, I think they will be more due to external factors or for traffic reasons, not because of this change of staff. Unfortunately.
Apple’s going to be posting a public beta of Yosemite tomorrow for members of their AppleSeed OS X Beta program (which has, confusingly, not replaced the standard invitation-only AppleSeed program). As best as I can recall, this is the first time Apple has released a public beta of OS X since Mac OS X, well, Public Beta. It’s probably going to be the same build as the current developer build, which is still somewhat buggy, but nowhere near as bad as it was before. I wouldn’t yet use it in a high-risk production environment, but it’s stable enough that you can put it on a machine that gets used mostly for web and email stuff.
What caught my eye, aside from the glimpse of the old six-color Apple logo at the end, was the fact that each sticker is clearly on a different, real machine. It would have been easy for Apple to position one blank MacBook Air in front of the camera and then digitally add the stickers. But no: each sticker is affixed to a different MacBook Air. You can tell by watching the bottom edge, which shifts slightly, and also by the scratches and dings that appear on some models.
Apple is getting better at showing their products in non-showroom condition. Consider the iPhone cases in the “… Every Day” ads, or the iPads in cases in the “Your Verse” spots. But these are super used MacBooks. They’re in worse exterior condition than my (admittedly babied) seven year-old MacBook Pro. But this is clearly how they’re intended to be used. I’ve heard a fair number of people complain about the use of aluminum, and how it doesn’t stay “perfect”. That’s the point.
Also interesting to note is the third-party customizability Apple is showing in a lot of their ads as of late. Whether it’s apps, or cases, or stickers, it seems like they’re getting more comfortable with the idea that people will use these products every day, and not necessarily with the default setup. (Though, I don’t think I’ve seen any ad that features apps that replace the defaults.)
First documented in a forthcoming paper by researchers at Princeton University and KU Leuven University in Belgium, this type of tracking, called canvas fingerprinting, works by instructing the visitor’s Web browser to draw a hidden image. Because each computer draws the image slightly differently, the images can be used to assign each user’s device a number that uniquely identifies it.
Rich Harris, chief executive of AddThis, said that the company began testing canvas fingerprinting earlier this year as a possible way to replace “cookies,” the traditional way that users are tracked, via text files installed on their computers.
“We’re looking for a cookie alternative,” Harris said in an interview.
And wrong. Consider the two main ways you may attempt to avoid being tracked by advertisers on the internet:
using the Do Not Track setting in your browser; and,
changing your browser’s cookie settings to block third party cookies.
The first setting is completely optional for advertisers to follow, rendering it effectively meaningless. The second setting does not impact this fingerprinting scheme in any way, which means that this is similar to Google’s workaround for Safari’s default setting to block third party cookies, for which they were fined $17 million.
So how do you opt out of this? Well, cookies are back in style:
He added that the company has only used the data collected from canvas fingerprints for internal research and development. The company won’t use the data for ad targeting or personalization if users install the AddThis opt-out cookie on their computers, he said.
In essence, you’re not opting out of the collection of your data, but instead hoping that AddThis won’t use the data it collects for anything other than internal research. Which is soothing, isn’t it?
[T]he incentive structure [for retention specialists] is really about punishment. Reps start out the month with a full commission, but every canceled product deducts from that amount. Once reps fall below a certain threshold, they get no commission at all. That means a rep could get all the way to the second-to-last day of the pay period only to have a customer cancel four products. Suddenly the rep is below her goal, losing $800 to $1,000 off her paycheck.
Deplorable. And, in many markets, Comcast has no competition — not “virtually no”, but none. Why would they even try to make their customers happy?
John Napier Tye, in a guest column for the Washington Post:
Issued by President Ronald Reagan in 1981 to authorize foreign intelligence investigations, 12333 is not a statute and has never been subject to meaningful oversight from Congress or any court. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has said that the committee has not been able to “sufficiently” oversee activities conducted under 12333.
Unlike Section 215, the executive order authorizes collection of the content of communications, not just metadata, even for U.S. persons. Such persons cannot be individually targeted under 12333 without a court order. However, if the contents of a U.S. person’s communications are “incidentally” collected (an NSA term of art) in the course of a lawful overseas foreign intelligence investigation, then Section 2.3(c) of the executive order explicitly authorizes their retention. It does not require that the affected U.S. persons be suspected of wrongdoing and places no limits on the volume of communications by U.S. persons that may be collected and retained.
The means of intelligence gathering have changed substantially since 1981, but this loophole remains open.
Microsoft’s strategy is focused on productivity and our desire to help people “do more.” As the Microsoft Devices Group, our role is to light up this strategy for people.
I haven’t talked face-to-face with anyone in a non-managerial position since the mid-2000s which explains my jilted language here.
To align with Microsoft’s strategy, we plan to focus our efforts.
Good luck with the job hunt.
The roots of this company and our future are in productivity and helping people get things done.
The Office productivity suite includes Word, which is great for putting together your résumé.
Our fundamental focus – for phones, Surface, for meetings with devices like PPI, Xbox hardware and new areas of innovation — is to build on that strength.
The wide variety of game titles available on the Xbox will help out when you’re waiting around to hear a callback from a potential employer.
While our direction in the majority of our teams is largely unchanging, we have had an opportunity to plan carefully about the alignment of phones within Microsoft as the transferring Nokia team continues with its integration process.
I am burying the lede.
It is particularly important to recognize that the role of phones within Microsoft is different than it was within Nokia. Whereas the hardware business of phones within Nokia was an end unto itself, within Microsoft all our devices are intended to embody the finest of Microsoft’s digital work and digital life experiences, while accruing value to Microsoft’s overall strategy.
I am stalling.
Our device strategy must reflect Microsoft’s strategy and must be accomplished within an appropriate financial envelope. Therefore, we plan to make some changes.
So many of you are fucked.
We will be particularly focused on making the market for Windows Phone.
My announcement of these layoffs will be drawn out like an X-Factor season finale. Here’s the first commercial break.
In the near term, we plan to drive Windows Phone volume by targeting the more affordable smartphone segments, which are the fastest growing segments of the market, with Lumia. In addition to the portfolio already planned, we plan to deliver additional lower-cost Lumia devices by shifting select future Nokia X designs and products to Windows Phone devices. We expect to make this shift immediately while continuing to sell and support existing Nokia X products.
I’m using the word “we”, but there’s a really good chance you’re not part of this “we”.
We expect these changes to have an impact to our team structure.
Pack up your desk.
As part of the effort, we plan to select the appropriate business model approach for our sales markets while continuing to offer our products in all markets with a strong focus on maintaining business continuity. We will determine each market approach based on local market dynamics, our ability to profitably deliver local variants, current Lumia momentum and the strategic importance of the market to Microsoft. This will all be balanced with our overall capability to invest.
I was allowed approximately one thousand words for this memo and I intend to use that entire length.
We plan to right-size our manufacturing operations to align to the new strategy and take advantage of integration opportunities.
We are voting “manufacuring” off the island.
We plan that this would result in an estimated reduction of 12,500 factory direct and professional employees over the next year.
Eleven paragraphs in, here’s the news. I am currently updating my LinkedIn profile to add “buring the lede” to my list of skills. Speaking of LinkedIn, hope yours is up to date.
We recognize these planned changes are broad and have very difficult implications for many of our team members. We will work to provide as much clarity and information as possible.
As I’m sure you’ve noticed, the past several weeks have seen a reduction in the number of posts published daily, and a difference in the typical timing of those posts. I respect your time, reader, so I feel like I owe you an explanation.
I recently completed my post-secondary studies and have begun full-time employment. This has been the single largest factor, among several, that has contributed to the odd and infrequent post schedule.
I intend to keep writing Pixel Envy on a regular (week-daily) basis, and I’m excited to share some longer-form articles that I’ve been drafting. Becoming a moderately-functional adult has slightly got in the way, though. I’m sure you understand.
Marco Arment has released his much-anticipated new podcast app, Overcast, and Macworld’s Jason Snell is mighty impressed:
I’ve used just about every iPhone podcast app out there, most of them for fairly large amounts of time. Overcast is the one I’m going to stick with—for now, anyway. The podcast-app space keeps changing and is quite competitive, but Overcast best fits the way I listen to podcasts today.
Podcast adoption has always been driven primarily by ease of listening, which has improved dramatically with the rise of smartphones, podcast apps, and Bluetooth audio in cars. When it’s easier to listen, not only do more people listen, but listeners find more opportunities to listen. There’s still plenty of potential to help people who already like podcasts listen to more of them.
I’ve been noodling around with Overcast since it was released today, and I am absolutely smitten. I’ve made known my disdain for the rambling style of so many podcasts, so I only really listen to a handful, and not on a regular basis.
For a start, Overcast is an exquisitely designed app. There aren’t many apps this well designed in any category. There are the big things, like the excellent typography and the gorgeous directory view. But there are littler things, like the ability to “scroll” the album artwork on the playback screen and see more information about the episode, as culled from the RSS feed.
There’s one notable design oddity: the toolbar at the top is a little reminiscent of a Mac app’s toolbar rather than an iOS app. I understand the limitations of integrating the playback bar into the lower portion of the app, but that doesn’t make it not entirely odd. Not bad, just different.
Your standard podcast app stuff is all here: subscriptions, time skipping, sleep timer, and so forth. But there are much smarter features, too. Most podcast apps have a playback speed control, but it’s kind of “dumb” — it just makes things go faster. Which is what you kind of expect, but perhaps it doesn’t work quite right. Say you’re listening to an episode of the best podcast of all time, and you notice that Merlin Mann talks hella fast, and Adam Lisagor talks hella slow. Mann squishes words together, while Lisagor tends to leave long gaps. Wouldn’t it be awesome if your podcast app could compensate for both? Overcast has a really great feature called Smart Speed which does exactly that. It works by reducing the amount of dead air, and it’s constantly changing its playback speed to compensate. It’s really, really nice.
The real test for me is going to be over the coming weeks: will I listen to podcasts more? Of course, there are a lot of reasons I haven’t been listening to podcasts; a lack of a favourite podcasting app is just one. But I’ve put Overcast on the first page of my home screen (sorry Strava) and I’m going to give it a try.
Apple’s on-again-off-again relationship with IBM is on again, for the first time since the switch to Intel. This time, it’s a huge partnership between the two companies for big enterprise support. Apple PR:
Apple and IBM’s shared vision for this partnership is to put in the hands of business professionals everywhere the unique capabilities of iPads and iPhones with a company’s knowledge, data, analytics and workflows. Specifically, the two companies are working together to deliver the essential elements of enterprise mobile solutions.
Yeah, I know — *snore*. This is a huge opportunity for Apple to increase their enterprise footprint, which has traditionally been one of Apple’s weakest sectors. As the press release notes, Apple has an okay hold on that market:
[O]ver 98 percent of the Fortune 500 and over 92 percent of the Global 500 [use] iOS devices in their business today.
But this doesn’t say how popular iOS is these environments, just that iOS devices exist in enterprise. This IBM partnership sounds like it’s going to make things better for existing users while significantly increasing adoption among holdouts.
Comcast says it’s very, very sorry. “We are very embarrassed by the way our employee spoke with Mr. Block and are contacting him to personally apologize,” the company said in a statement.
“The way in which our representative communicated with him is unacceptable and not consistent with how we train our customer service representatives. We are investigating this situation and will take quick action. […] “
It’s vague, but this sort of statement usually means that they’ll reprimand or terminate the employee. While it’s unlikely that this particularly aggressive rep is the standard for contract cancellation calls, it’s also unlikely that this is an isolated case. This is endemic of much greater institutional problems at the worst company in America.
Also, why is Comcast using the word “embarrassed” for this call? That’s the same word I use when I tell the story of the time I was caught eavesdropping on someone in the eighth grade. This is so much greater than petty embarrassment.
Here’s how I think about this to myself: the Romantic era, which started with the Delicious Generation and became dominant with the early iPhone apps, has given way to the Modernist era. Grandiosity gives way to sleekness and honesty.
Remember Disco and its stupid smoke effects?1 There was something fun about seeing particle smoke come off a disc burning app, but it’s the kind of thing that feels more like a trend than a lasting piece of good design. Put another way, does the leopard print iMac feel as lastingly beautiful as the iMac G5? Thought not.
Despite all the buzz surrounding wearables, it isn’t clear who’s supposed to be buying them. Fewer than half of the respondents to a recent Accenture survey said they would consider buying a smartwatch, and even the most optimistic experts predict only 20 million smartwatch sales this year, a pittance compared with phone and tablet sales. The market’s skepticism might be a function of how early smartwatches fared (few lasted more than a year or two before being pulled from shelves). But more likely is that today’s smartwatches remain mysterious, somewhat redundant gadgets. Even the most sophisticated models don’t do anything a phone can’t do, except sit comfortably on your arm. And the Dick Tracy novelty factor is still high. Silicon Valley code jockeys might appreciate being able to order pizza from their wrists—which is, by the way, a real Android Wear app—but the rest of us don’t have much need for another device to lug around, keep charged, and worry about breaking.
Shorter version of the longer answer: not yet, no.
I, as much as anyone, have dismissed the current generation of wearables. They’re basically second notification screens which, for some, makes sense. But I still don’t get their utility for my own use.
But perhaps it’s still too early. Take, for example, this article by Matthew Miller in ZDNet, in August 2009:
I have tried different tablet devices in the past and I see very little benefit from them for the majority of people. The iPhone/iPod touch seem to be just about as big as you need for a productive web surfing and media consumption device and a tablet Apple really does not make much sense to me.
But the iPod looks like it may turn out to be a non-repeatable experience. Look at the historical record. When the iPod emerged in late 2001, it solved some major problems with MP3 players.
Unfortunately for Apple, problems like that don’t exist in the handset business. Cell phones aren’t clunky, inadequate devices. Instead, they are pretty good. Really good. Why do you think they call it a Crackberry? Because the lumpy design and confusing interface of the device is causing people to break into cars? No, it’s because people are addicted to it.
“The Typist” shares their story of why they use a case on their iPhone, and it’s really good. It’s the main link for this post, but I can’t quote anything from it because it’ll spoil everything.
Allow me to share one of my stories, though. In summer 2012, I was walking through Century Gardens when I received an email that I just had to check. I started skimming the email on my iPhone 4S when my foot got caught on a bit of uneven brickwork and my phone was launched into space. I fumbled to catch it and didn’t get a good grip on it, so it flew out of my hand, bounced on a rock, and fell straight into the water feature in the park with the requisite cartoonish bloop. I looked in and it had fallen in screen upwards, and I could read my email through the water. I stepped in, grabbed my phone, and immediately tried to turn it off.1 For some reason, it powered itself back on — a worrying sign.
As soon as I got home, I dropped it into a bag of rice and left it overnight. The following morning, I pulled it out and checked it out. Aside from a few nicks and bumps on the antenna, there was almost no damage. The only major issue was that some sounds weren’t playing through the internal speaker. Here’s a fun test for you, reader: under what conditions would an iPhone play all system noises out of its speaker after being locked for a couple of minutes, but would only do so for a few seconds? Under what condition would the Siri noise always play through the internal speaker, but almost no other system sounds would be audible, despite the phone not being in silent mode?
Answer: when the phone thinks it’s playing audio through the dock connector. It turns out that the dock connector’s audio out pin sits beside one of the ground pins, and these were shorting out. A quick brush with a little bit of rubbing alcohol and my phone worked as good as new for two more years, before I replaced it with a 5S. I still don’t use a case.
I’m usually fairly careful, but when I screw up, I really screw up. I have also rolled my DSLR down a very, very steep hill. Yet, like my iPhone, it emerged pretty much unscathed. I am far too lucky.
In a sobering and slightly embarrassing reminder of financial access, I retrieved my expensive pocket computer in full view of a couple of panhandlers. Unfortunately, I didn’t have any cash on me at all. ↩
Poor or broken accessibility is exactly the sort of problem that Apple’s App Review team should check for: many developers forget to test it, it’s easy for Apple to quickly test when reviewing each app, and it’s easy to fix.
Instead of arbitrarily enforcing silly rules, the Review team should absolutely be testing every app for full accessibility. iOS and OS X may lead their competition in accessibility support, but a similar level of commitment is necessary from third-party developers for the platforms to be truly accessible for all.
On screen, the major studios now open almost every film with a proud, graphic statement of identity. At 20th Century Fox, the motif involves searchlights and a bold fanfare. Universal circles the planet. Disney, in a logo that was clocked by Variety at a full 30 seconds, among the longest, pans a Magic Kingdom, with its fairy tale castle, misty hills, meandering river, fireworks, shooting star and puffing locomotive.
Not to be outdone, Hollywood’s more powerful production companies and financiers have increasingly followed suit with elaborate cinematic logos of their own.
For an independent film with multiple production companies, the identifiers may come in a parade, three, four, five at a time. With studio movies, by contrast, only the very biggest players are typically allowed a logo (and not always, since a filmmaker’s plans for a picture’s opening moments may actually trump branding and vanity).
There’s something about seeing a really great studio logo — the cited 20th Century Fox one, or the early-2000s United Artists logo come to mind — that sets the tone for the film. The classic THX logo and sound is the kind of thing that makes you reach for something with which to strap yourself into your chair.
Some of us have more to fear than others. According to a Business Insider survey, nearly 14% of people choose to go case-less, risking the destruction of their $400 pocket computers at any moment.
Disregarding the fact that the survey’s methodology is, par for the Business Insider course, suspect, I was interested in this because I am one of those 14%. I haven’t used a case on my phone in four years. Why? Well, let’s let Kane explain:
Of the 14% of survey respondents who don’t use a case, most cited aesthetic reasons — 43% because “I like the look of my iPhone without a case,” 50% because “cases are too bulky.”
Avoiding bulkiness isn’t an aesthetic decision, it’s a practical one. I don’t wear super skinny jeans by any means,1 but adding thickness and weight is unwelcome.
Even if you can afford to have your phone fixed or replaced every time it hits the cement, it’s still going to cost you hours of your life securing the fix. And if you’re well enough off that the cost of a few iPhones a year doesn’t phase you, is loitering in the Apple store really worth your time?
I can’t afford to have my phone fixed multiple times per year, yet I have always gone case-less. It’s just nicer.
Nudie’s Grim Tim fit is my favourite, if you must know. ↩
An anonymous writer at the notoriously unreliable Seeking Alpha, “Options Calling”, is unimpressed with iPod sales. And who can blame them? Apple’s certainly selling fewer iPods than they were just a few years ago. But this article is so weak. Let’s start with the title:
Time to Scrap the iPod
Why’s that weak? Well…
The reason behind the fall of the Nano and Shuffle could be the release of the iWatch, which is expected to release in October this year.
Because of the iWatch, it’s time to scrap the iPod. Geddit?
Anyway, let’s get to some bar graphs:
In a recent report, Apple Inc. presented its second quarter earnings’ “unaudited summary data”, and the picture it presented wasn’t much like what people might have expected.
The iPod, for one, posted an extremely dismal 53% drop in sequential change in revenue, and a 54% drop in units sold. Apple enthusiasts would argue that the drop in sales from the first quarter onwards is characteristic of the company…
A 54% drop in unit sales is, indeed, surprising, if this were year-over-year. But this is sequential, and Apple’s first quarter is their holiday quarter. It’s not only “Apple enthusiasts” who would argue that a sequential drop in sales between Q1 and Q2 is characteristic — anyone who looks at the numbers would also make that argument.
The author then makes the argument that the iWatch could cannibalize iPod sales, which is actually not a bad line of thought if the rumours are correct. But they’re just that: rumours. So, to then demand that Tim Cook drop the iPod lineup is absurd. And, yet:
So why not scratch a device out altogether that has been reporting declining sales for five straight years? Why not invest in better projects that would ensure better returns to the company – and its shareholders – than the iPod? Apple Inc. CEO, Tim Cook definitely needs to do some brainstorming, and soon.
Why not? Because in fiscal year 2013, Apple still sold over 26 million of the things. It’s not nearly as big of a business as the iPhone or the iPad, but it’s still really big. They’re still building the iPod Classic, too, which is hilarious to me.
Nick Keppol of MartianCraft took an in-depth look at Yosemite’s new application icons. Most intriguing? This:
Grey scale is out — warm and cool tones are in. It’s been a popular look in Hollywood blockbusters: yellow/orange highlights, blue/teal shadows. The new Yosemite icons use similar tonal shifts with their metal materials. If we consider these icons as materials, this tone represents an environment reflection — not merely a color effect.
Don’t necessarily think of Yosemite’s new iconography as a simplification or reduction of the previous OS X pseudo-photorealistic aesthetic. Think of this design language as pushing the definition of “idealized reality”.
Another expert said that s/he believed that this leak may come from a second source, not Edward Snowden, as s/he had not seen this in the original Snowden docs; and had seen other revelations that also appeared independent of the Snowden materials. If that’s true, it’s big news, as Snowden was the first person to ever leak docs from the NSA. The existence of a potential second source means that Snowden may have inspired some of his former colleagues to take a long, hard look at the agency’s cavalier attitude to the law and decency.
And, since Cory said it, I do not believe that this came from the Snowden documents. I also don’t believe the [TAO catalog][2a] came from the Snowden documents. I think there’s a second leaker out there.
Digression: I know Schneier is a security professional, and that security professionals must be cynical — it’s kind of their job description. But this kind of stuff really gets to me:
I don’t expect this to get much coverage in the US mainstream media.
At best, the “mainstream media”1 just isn’t that interested in covering surveillance of pieces of software that fit into a pretty tight niche. At worst, Schneier is accusing broadcasters of being in league with the NSA to actively suppress this story.
The advantage of Schneier’s vague cynical sentiment is that it leaves a very wide margin. The links above point to mainstream coverage, but it won’t be sufficient. It never is when the goalposts are so mobile.
And just what is “mainstream” today? What is not? If you listen to the broadcasted persecution complex that is Fox, they claim to be outside of the mainstream media, yet they consistently brag about their high ratings. This phrase is meaningless. ↩
Goldman Sachs Group Inc on Wednesday said Google Inc has blocked access to an email containing confidential client data that a contractor sent to a stranger’s Gmail account by mistake, an error that the bank said threatened a “needless and massive” breach of privacy.
This is a fascinating story. I wonder what kind of precedent this will set. Stempel, continued:
Goldman did not say how many clients were affected. It has been seeking a court order compelling Google to delete the email, which it said on Wednesday had yet to occur.
“Google complied with our request that it block access to the email,” Goldman spokeswoman Andrea Raphael said. “It has also notified us that the email account had not been accessed from the time the email was sent to the time Google blocked access. No client information has been breached.” A Google spokeswoman declined to comment.
The bank said a member of Google’s “incident response team” reported on June 26 that the email could not be deleted without a court order.
If Google initially declined to block access to the email without a court order, what made them change their minds? To the best of my knowledge, this is unprecedented. What’s the threshold for Google to block access to a mistakenly-sent email? Is exposing confidential client data from one of the world’s largest banks the bare minimum?
Let’s imagine a new feature in iOS called “Homebase”. A user would be presented with a simple UI that lets them select a location that’s a “safe” environment. After the setup is complete, your Homebase would be recognized by GPS coordinates and/or available Wi-Fi networks. The important thing here is that the user gets to define where they feel safe with their device.
The lock screen doesn’t need to display a Passcode lock at Homebase. People who use the Remote app with their Apple TV will no longer be annoyed by an unnecessary security precaution, nor will folks forget to turn their Passcode lock back on when they leave for the local bar (where they’re certain to get a Poopin’ tweet.)
No matter how convenient and simple Touch ID is, nothing feels more immediate than having no barriers to unlock your iPhone. Unfortunately, that’s also the most insecure state.
I’ve wanted this feature for a long time, but it’s languished on Hockenberry’s site as a mere idea. Now, it may become a reality, if you’re the special kind of optimist who places any faith at all in the reality of Apple’s patents.
[T]he invention delivers a mechanism to adjust iPhone access levels based on its location, meaning different tolerances can be applied based on the relative security of a location. For example, a user may only need a simple four-digit passcode to unlock a device while at home, but authentication via Apple’s Touch ID when in public areas like a shopping mall.
I guess I’m starting my iOS 9 wish list right now.
Windows “Threshold,” the next major version of Microsoft’s Windows operating system due to hit around the spring of 2015, is coming into focus.
And not too surprisingly, one of the Microsoft Operating Systems Group’s main goals in designing and developing the coming operating system (OS) release — which may or may not ultimately be branded as “Windows 9″ — is to try to make it more palatable to hold-out Windows 7 users.
I know we’ve been over this again and again, but in addition to the conceptual flaw of trying to make one operating system for desktop and mobile, there’s a marketing problem as well. Apple was able to make iOS palatable to its existing customers (as well as others) by detaching it from OS X.
In some ways, the most interesting thing about Threshold is how it recasts Windows 8 as the next Vista. It’s an acknowledgment that what came before didn’t work, and didn’t resonate with customers. And though Microsoft will always be able to claim that Windows 9 wouldn’t have been possible without the important foundational work they had done first with Windows 8—just as was the case with Windows 7 and Windows Vista—there’s no way to sugarcoat this. Windows 8 has set back Microsoft, and Windows, by years, and possibly for good.
Google’s transition from a company that used to think about design the same way as it thought about human resources—as a cost of doing business—to a company that prioritizes design is remarkable, at least insofar as its products look and feel and work so much better today than they used to. The company is writing a fascinating case study for how to reverse engineer design into a tech giant’s DNA.
This is great news. Siri has certainly gained capabilities since it was launched in 2011, but the accuracy of its speech recognition is still often disappointing. I use Siri fairly infrequently. I understand that its accuracy improves with more use, but how many people want to slog through weeks or months of editing poorly-dictated text messages and emails just to improve Siri’s accuracy on their phone? Siri needs to be super accurate out of the box, otherwise it becomes an exercise in frustration.
Potentially good news related to Apple’s shitcanning of Aperture. Sam Machkovech, Ars Technica:
When asked about what Aperture-like features users can expect from the new Photos app, an Apple representative mentioned plans for professional-grade features such as image search, editing, effects, and most notably, third-party extensibility.
With any luck, Photos will allow me to carry over my Aperture library effectively unchanged, with lossless editing capabilities preserved. That’d be nice.
The Mac Pro has done exactly what a good computer should: it has made itself unobtrusive. I don’t hear it, and it doesn’t slow me down. It’s a shame one has to spend the kind of money this computer costs to get those features, and I hope that, one day, all computers will be like this.
This is what I feel when I’m using my MacBook Air. It may be a couple of years old now, and not nearly as zippy as the Mac Pro, but it doesn’t slow me down. I often forget I’m using it because it’s so unobtrusive and quiet. It’s sublime.
When I signed up for 23andMe — a genetic testing service — it asked if I was willing to be part of “23andWe,” which would allow my genetic material to be part of research studies. I had to affirmatively check a box to say I was okay with that. As I suggested when I wrote about this yesterday, I think Facebook should have something similar. While many users may already expect and be willing to have their behavior studied — and while that may be warranted with “research” being one of the 9,045 words in the data use policy — they don’t expect that Facebook will actively manipulate their environment in order to see how they react. That’s a new level of experimentation, turning Facebook from a fishbowl into a petri dish, and it’s why people are flipping out about this.
Years and years of storage based segmentation has shown Apple that $100 increments based on storage capacity is a model the market can and will bear. Scratch that — the market will reward with astronomical amounts of money. That doesn’t make it right or wrong, sane or insane, comforting or maddening. It just makes it what it is. And Apple likely won’t change it unless and until we all agree on something better.
I was among many when I wondered if the $50 price increments for increased storage in the tweaked iPod Touch lineup foreshadows a similar change to the iPhone and iPad lines. Ritchie makes a solid case as to why it likely won’t unless there’s another way to compel people to choose between the models.
The only thing I can think of is a change to the physical sizes of the device. The rumour mill says that Apple’s working on iPhones of 4.7-inch and 5.5-inch display sizes, or something like that. Perhaps Apple keeps the 4-inch model around as the “base” model, and those two become the mid- and top-tier models, respectively?
This story was first broken by Sophie Weiner of Animal:
Using an algorithm that can recognize negative or positive words, the researchers were able to comb through NewsFeeds without actually viewing any text that may have been protected under users’ privacy settings. “As such, it was consistent with Facebook’s Data Use Policy, to which all users agree prior to creating an account on Facebook, constituting informed consent for this research,” the study’s authors wrote. That’s right: You consented to be randomly selected for this kind of research when you signed up for Facebook. Might want to check out that User Policy again.
A stronger reason is that even when Facebook manipulates our News Feeds to sell us things, it is supposed—legally and ethically—to meet certain minimal standards. Anything on Facebook that is actually an ad is labelled as such (even if not always clearly.) This study failed even that test, and for a particularly unappealing research goal: We wanted to see if we could make you feel bad without you noticing. We succeeded.
So, this study is legally dubious, ethically bankrupt, and made a bunch of people miserable without telling them. But what else would you expect from Facebook, you “dumb fuck”? (And, yet, here I am with Facebook open in another tab.)
Apple introduced a new Photos app during its Worldwide Developers Conference that will become the new platform for the company. As part of the transition, Apple told me today that they will no longer be developing its professional photography application, Aperture.
The new Photos app will also replace iPhoto, giving users a more seamless experience on Apple devices.
I mean, the new Photos app is really impressive, but it’s not Aperture. It absolutely looks like a valid replacement for iPhoto, but not Aperture. I could switch to Lightroom, but I hate its editing workflow.
Let’s talk about Robin Thicke. Actually, I’m sure you want to talk about wearable tech devices; conveniently, we can talk about both at the same time because Samsung made Thicke their spokesdouche for the Galaxy Note 3 and the Galaxy Gear combo. First order of business: does Thicke actually use a Galaxy Note? Uh, nope.
With that out of the way, let’s forget about the horrible scrolling on the promo site and chat about this one ad. Three women in a convertible are stopped at a light and singing along to “Blurred Lines”, when Thicke pulls up beside them. They take a couple of photos, then he asks for their phone and writes down a number for a “music video casting call”. Given that “Blurred Lines” is a song about how confused Thicke is by the concept of consent and that the video features full nudity (NSFW, obviously), do you get the feeling that this, as an ad concept, is somewhat tone deaf?
The Verge’s Adrianne Jeffries reviewed the newest monologue from Mike Daisey — infamous for being a root cause of This American Life’s sole retraction:
There seems to be the germ of an interesting idea there, but like the rest of the parts about women, Daisey had the right vocabulary and no thesis. Throughout the show, he tosses out perfunctory lines like “50 percent of you are treated like shit,” and “I am sexist. I see it too often,” and “I can’t even imagine what it is like to be Hillary Clinton,” and “That’s patriarchy!” In the end, “Yes This Man” turned out to be a perfect title for an hour of introspective riffing. Just don’t expect much else.
For a while now, many of you have been asking for a better way to access data to build apps that integrate with Gmail. While IMAP is great at what it was designed for (connecting email clients to email servers in a standard way), it wasn’t really designed to do all of the cool things that you have been working on, which is why this week at Google I/O, we’re launching the beta of the new Gmail API.
Google’s Gmail API documentation says that it “should not be used to replace IMAP for full-fledged email client access”, but my question is “for how long?”. If a greater number of people use IMAP clients to access Gmail, fewer ads are seen. If fewer people use IMAP, Google has a shrinking reason to keep supporting it.
I joked a little about this on Twitter but, really, I’m not surprised to see both platforms converging. iOS comes from a philosophy of adding features slowly and trying to do it well from the start — the copy and paste UI hasn’t changed since it was introduced, for example, but it took three full versions to get such “basic” functionality. Android comes from the school of adding as much as possible, and then refining as many of them as possible over time.
In iOS 8, Apple is adding interactive notifications and a much more extensible experience. Meanwhile, Android “L” (Lollipop?) has a completely reconsidered design language and lock screen notifications similar to iOS. It’s therefore no surprise, in my mind, that there’s some convergence happening.
There’s even a common theme this year at Apple’s and Google’s developer conferences: continuity. With iOS 8 and Yosemite, Apple has a vision of customers completing tasks on the right device for the right occasion, with smooth transitions; so, too, does Google, with Android everywhere. But there’s a noticeable difference in execution between their two strategies: Google is using the same OS everywhere with the same user interface design principles. You’ll even be able to run Android apps on a Chromebook, for example, but why would you want to run software designed for touch on a largely keyboard-and-mouse system?1
But, contrary to what you may think, I’m not necessarily knocking Google’s strategy. I’m interested in seeing how it pans out. It’s obviously far too early to tell, as these are developer betas and previews, but quite a lot of what was announced today feels a little underbaked. It may simply need more time for this strategy to be fully fleshed out.
As for the presentation itself, it was long — over two and a half hours — and felt even longer. Presenters were interrupted by protesters on two separate occasions, and someone at Google decided to run the code debug demo over two hours into the presentation. Really tiring.
Now, Apple and Google have both laid out their product strategies for the next year or so. It’s showtime.
Yes, the Chromebook Pixel has a touchscreen, but how many people do you think bought one? ↩
As expected, Google just announced Google TV at I/O. There’s four billion TV viewers worldwide, making it the biggest market in the world, and Google’s after it in a big way — it’s a $70 billion ad market in the US alone, after all. According to Google, “video should be consumed on the biggest, best, and brightest screen in your house, and that’s the TV.” The idea is to merge the web and TV without compromising on either the web experience or the video experience, with a focus on discovery and personalization.
About time they launched this thing; it’s been rumoured for so long and I wa— hang on a minute. Keep talking, Patel:
Since it’s Android, there’s a version of Android Market — any app that doesn’t require phone hardware can run on Google TV. There will also be a Google TV-specific Android SDK launching in “early” 2011, along with the Android Market for Google TV.
Contrary to reports, Android TV isn’t a set-top box like Apple TV or Amazon Fire TV, but a software system that will be embedded into the smart TVs and other devices from third-party OEMs.
Android TV will play movies and TV shows, and users will be able to control it via mobiles phones and tablets. Google Engineering Director Dave Burke showed off how the system works to enable search and navigation either via text or voice.
This is, like, the same thing.
Written daily by Nick Heer in Calgary, and around the world.