This Week's Sponsor:

Copilot Money

The Apple Editor’s Choice Award App for Tracking Your Money. Start Your Free Trial Today

Posts in stories

My Dropbox Writing Workflow

Ever since I wrote about my new year’s resolutions to work smarter using better tools, compared my favorite iOS text editors, and shared some of my workflow techniques on Macdrifter, I thought it would be appropriate to share a bit more about the activity that takes up 80% of my work time: writing.

As I wrote in my comparison of iOS text editors:

Two months ago, I noted how there seemed to be a distinction between text editors focused on long-form writing, and the ones stemming from a note-taking approach. I think this difference is blurring with time, but there are still several apps that are clearly focused on distraction-free, long-form writing, like iA Writer and Byword, whereas the ones I tried for this article belong to the note-taking/Markdown/Dropbox generation of text editors. I like iA Writer and Byword, but I’m saving that kind of apps for another article.

In my workflow, there is a distinction between apps “for writing” and tools for quick “note-taking”, but in order to minimize the effort required to keep everything in sync and tied together, I set out to make sure the differences of such tasks could coexist within a single ecosystem.

My writing ecosystem is powered by Dropbox. Read more

Promoting Software

In the pre-PC era, we built dedicated tools to fit different purposes. In the PC era, we learnt how to shift some tasks over to a single, centralized tool called the “personal computer”; we started exploring the concept of “ecosystem” through “digital hubs”, although we didn’t see the PC – whether “desktop” or “portable” – as a meaningful replacement for objects we depended upon in our daily lives. With mobile devices from the Post-PC era, we’re seeing tremedous growth in one particular aspect: that software can do (almost) anything. We’re in the process of learning how to use a single tool to fit multiple purposes at once.

This is especially true with the iPad. Following yesterday’s news of Cargo-Bot, an iPad game made on the iPad using Codea, I had yet another example of how software is changing the way we think of the distinction between tools for “work” and “entertainment” – and how it’s blurring the difference between computers for “production” and devices for “consumption”. John Gruber calls it “a glimpse of the future”. He’s right: here we have a device that is now capable of programming a game for its own platform, and it seems totally obvious in retrospect.

I never quite got the argument that devices like the iPhone and iPad were made for “consumption”. In the past five years, we have seen people making music on tablets, writing novels on them, and film-makers using iPhones as solid alternatives to their mobile capturing needs. The portability of the camera reinvented citizen journalism and revolutionized mobile photo sharing. I have seen doctors pulling out iPhones to do quick calculations and compare MRI images. I have been increasingly using my iPad as an “anything device”; on the other hand, I may have played no more than 4 games on my iMac since 2008.

It’s not just about “niches” or “bloggers” who want to find a way to do more on tablets than “normal people” would think is feasible. While the App Store has certainly seen a surge in popularity of text editors, Twitter clients, note-taking apps, and other kinds of apps writers and bloggers use on a daily basis, we shouldn’t forget about Final Draft, Procreate, Paper, the Business category, Apple’s Cards app, travel guides, books…just to name a few.

Software can do anything, but sometimes it is the combination of hardware and software that yields new, unexpected results that take advantage of the interplay of bits and guts. Apple based its mobile business on this. And third-party developers, too, understand that, in some areas, Post-PC hardware needs to be “extended” to address more specific needs. The Jawbone JAMBOX is a fantastic portable speaker that can augment your music listening or gaming sessions. The Nest thermostat is proving to be a hit among early adopters. Ten One Design is working on a Bluetooth-enabled pressure-sensitive stylus with an SDK for developers. Note how, even when extra hardware is needed, Post-PC devices leverage one thing to make these additions more natural, powerful, and connected: software.

It’s not just Apple. Other companies are making smartphones and tablets (and glasses), and some of them also recognize the importance of an ecosystem that fosters innovation and a stable business model for all the parties involved. It appears to me – and the numbers speak clearly for themselves – that only Apple, though, has so far acknowledged that a third-party software ecosystem needs to be nurtured, carefully encouraged, and educated about the latest technologies available to consumers and developers. And then again, Apple can do better.

The Times They Are a-Changin’. The multi-purpose, constantly evolving nature of software has changed us: most people don’t want to upgrade their devices every six months anymore, but they are always looking for new ways to unify the “things they have to do or want to do” into a single, intuitive, affordable experience capable of changing context and functionality with just a few taps.

In the Post-PC era, we are promoting software.

Interview: Nate Weiner Talks Pocket Launch, Read It Later Evolution

I recently had the chance to talk with Nate Weiner, the creator of Read It Later, to discuss today’s launch of Pocket (here’s my review), the state of “read later” apps and reading on the web, and the direction Pocket is taking in enabling users to save their favorite content. Nate Weiner had the idea for Read It Later in 2007, when he found out he was constantly emailing links to himself for articles he wanted to read later. After five years, Read It Later is reborn today as Pocket.

MacStories: Looking back at my Purchased history on the App Store, I see the original Read It Later is the third app I installed on my iPhone. How has Read It Later changed in the past three years, leading to Pocket, launching today?

Nate Weiner: Was it really? That is awesome.

A lot has changed since then. When I launched the first iPhone app for Read It Later, I was just a solo developer working out of my bedroom in Minnesota. Today, I’m sitting in Read It Later’s office in downtown San Francisco alongside 7 other incredibly talented people.

What hasn’t changed is our focus. Read It Later was a simple tool that focused on doing just one thing: saving things for later. Pocket is about taking all of the core parts of what people did with Read It Later and making them better, easier, and quite honestly, just a lot more fun to use. Read more

MacStories Reading List: April 8 - April 15

The MacStories Reading List is back, and it features the best articles about the most important news of the past weeks. From the Instagram acquisition to renewed interest in bigger iPhones with different screens, the Apple blogging machine picked up steam after the release of the new iPad and is now looking forward to WWDC ‘12, which Apple is rumored to be announcing soon.

Until then, put on your favorite reading glasses, and follow us after the break for this week’s best Apple-related writing. Read more

iCloud’s First Six Months: The Developers Weigh In

On October 12th, 2011, iCloud launched to millions of iOS users impatiently waiting to start getting their devices to sync with Apple’s new platform, which CEO Tim Cook went on to call the company’s next big insight for the next decade. Six months and 85 million customers later, iCloud has proven to be a substantial improvement to sync a user’s email, contacts, address book, and other data accessed by Apple apps. With third-party developers, however, adoption of iCloud sync and storage features has turned out to be a bit tricker, and possibly less intuitive than Apple’s own implementation due to the early nature of the platform. Read more

The (Big) Numbers Of The App Store Platform

Today’s news that Paper, a sketching app for iPad, has been downloaded over 1.5 million times in two weeks made me think about the size of the App Store platform and ecosystem of devices. Launched in 2008, the App Store now extends across the iPhone, iPad, and Mac, and distributes over half a million apps to customers (588964 apps per AppShopper). Last month, Apple reached the impressive milestone of 25 billion apps downloaded from the App Store – an important number that tops a history of exponential growth and adoption.

Below, I have compiled a list of noteworthy milestones reached by App Store developers in order to put Paper’s numbers in better perspective. For more App Store-related numbers, check out Wikipedia’s milestones table and our Mac App Store: Year One overview.

On January 24th, 2012, Apple announced the company paid over $4 billion to developers since the App Store’s launch in 2008. Over 315 million iOS devices have been sold to date; with these numbers, an average of 79 apps has been downloaded for every iOS device.

App Downloads: A History of Numbers

2009

July: Dictionary.com reaches 2.3 million iPhone app downloads.

2010

March: Doodle Jump for iPhone sells 3 million copies since launch.

June: Skype announces 5 million iPhone app downloads in four days.

June: Angry Birds for iPhone has been downloaded over 5 million times since its launch on December 2009.

September: Gameloft announces 20 million paid app downloads of its iOS games since the App Store’s launch.

2011

January: Pixelmator grosses $1 million in under 20 days.

January: Autodesk announces Sketchbook Pro for the Mac App Store has sold twice as many copies as the regular app in a year.

February: Fruit Ninja for iPhone hits 6 million paid downloads in 10 months.

May: Talking Tom 2 hits 1 million downloads in a single day.

June: Game publisher Chillingo announces 140 million downloads for its iOS apps since the App Store’s launch in 2008.

June: Gameloft announces 200 million iOS app downloads in 3 years.

October: Autodesk announces 3 million downloads of AutoCAD WS for iOS and Android.

October: Discovr announces 1 million downloads.

December: Flipboard for iPhone gets 1 million downloads in its first week.

2012

January: World of Goo downloaded over 1 million times by App Store and Mac App Store customers in 13 months.

February: Scribblenaut Remix sells 1 million copies since its launch in October 2011.

March: Camera+ sells 7 million copies in 1.5 years on the App Store (previously: 6 million copies in January 2012; 3 million copies in June 2011)

March: Angry Birds Space reports 10 million downloads in 10 days (the app is available on multiple platforms and devices, including iPhone, iPad, and Mac).

March: iPhoto for iOS downloaded by over 1 million unique users in under 10 days.

April: Draw Something hits 50 million downloads in under 2 months.

April: Paper for iPad is downloaded 1.5 million times in two weeks.

April: MLB.com At Bat 12 reports 3 million downloads. The app was released at the end of February 2012 on multiple platforms (including Android) and its developers also reported over 800,000 live streams per day.

Understanding The Agency Model And The DOJ’s Allegations Against Apple And Those Publishers

Yesterday, the US Department of Justice sued Apple and six publishers, alleging that they had conspired to fix prices. It all centres around the switch from a wholesale model of selling e-books from the publishers to retailers (such as Amazon) to using the agency model of selling books that Apple and the publishers agreed to adopt in early 2010. Some of the publishers have already settled with the DOJ, but other publishers and Apple have vowed to fight the allegations.

But what is the agency model and how does it work? I’ve done my best to explain the two systems and some of the details surrounding the model that was adopted by Apple and the publishers that are in hot contention. I’ve also summarised the DOJ’s allegations as well as their timeline of events that the DOJ goes into great detail in their court filing. Finally, if you find yourself fascinated by the topic, at the end of the post is a further reading section to get more details and some opinions on the issue.

Jump the break to view the full article and video explaining the wholesale and agency models.

Read more

It’s Time To Change iTunes

Jason Snell makes the case for a new, better iTunes over at Macworld:

If Apple’s going to embrace the cloud wherever possible, it needs to change iTunes too. The program should be simpler. It might be better off being split into separate apps, one devoted to device syncing, one devoted to media playback. (And perhaps the iTunes Store could be broken out separately too? When Apple introduced the Mac App Store, it didn’t roll it into iTunes, but gave it its own app.)

In March 2010, a few days ahead of the original iPad’s release, I wrote:

iTunes is obsolete,and so is the concept to use iTunes as a centralized hub for music, videos, photos, settings, backups, calendars – basically, everything. Think about it: all the stuff you have on your iPhone was either created on the iPhone itself or synced via iTunes. You can’t transfer information from your computer to the iPhone without iTunes. And thus I think Apple has been very lazy in these past years, not willing to update iTunes or finding another solution for our needs.

To which I followed-up in September 2010 after the introduction of Ping:

iTunes is a bloat. Slow. Unresponsive. Clunky. A huge piece of software with thousands of features in it, a couple of online Stores and now a social network, too. A few times in the past I wrote that Apple needed to move this stuff out of iTunes, or at least re-imagine the whole purpose of the app. Many said that would happen with the 10 version. Not so fast. Apple doesn’t want to change iTunes. Thus, the feature creep. Not only they left the Stores, apps, books and sync options in iTunes – they thought that adding a completely new layer of social networking would be a good idea. Again, I’m not criticizing Ping: I’m talking about iTunes as an outdated container of features.

I’ll tell you what’s wrong with iTunes: in the age of iCloud, iTunes is a weirdly old-fashioned desktop software to organize media and manage devices in the same way we did 10 years ago. Only with more features and content types. iTunes is the epitome of old interfaces and interactions trying to hold onto the present.

iTunes works, but it doesn’t work simply. It’s not just complex, it’s complicated and not intuitive: I can’t tell you how many times I was asked by less tech savvy friends about backups, syncing apps, music playlists, video conversions, iOS folders, Address Book contacts, and even software updates. Jason makes some great points in his article – it’s time to simplify. People don’t “get” iTunes anymore. Is it a music app or a media manager? Or is it a device management tool? A Store? A social network? A horse? A radio?

iTunes tries to do so much while doing so little to help users understand its features and differentiate between computer content, cloud content, and device content. Worse, because iTunes is so full of preferences and dialogs, sometimes it’s not clear what it is trying to do, and this often leads to deleted apps, corrupted music libraries, and ever-downloading podcasts. It’s not that Apple hasn’t educated users over the years; but there’s just so much help documents and subtle UI refreshes can do once hundreds of features have users confused and frustrated.

More importantly, iCloud has shown that a better way to manage media and apps for Apple’s devices is possible. And that is, no management: songs and movies downloaded from the iTunes Store are stored in the cloud and they don’t have to be converted; apps are stored in your Purchases and they are downloaded instantly on all your configured devices. Third-party podcast apps that have implemented iCloud sync are infinitely better than podcast support in Apple’s apps. iCloud keeps your bookmarks, notes, contacts, and emails in sync. iTunes Match even keeps your entire music library in the cloud, available at any time. iCloud is the future of Apple’s ecosystem.

So why are we still using iTunes? This is the question we should be asking. And admittedly, the majority of us are doing so for the extra convenience of media on our desktop computers. iOS devices aren’t always connected to a WiFi network, and they are limited in storage. It’s more convenient to keep large libraries of songs, movies, TV Shows, apps, and books on a computer. At least for now.

Is a world without iTunes possible? Maybe, but not today. People still need to be able to keep all their apps locally, alongside their music and movie files. In an ideal world, everyone is buying music and movies from iTunes, but in the real world people use web browsers to download media, and they want iTunes for that. Not to mention the features that iTunes sports on the desktop, which still haven’t been brought back to iOS. The way forward, however, clearly brings us to iCloud: with time, people will get used to iCloud even more, and Apple will improve its infrastructure in terms of reliability and functionalities. The fact that Apple is drifting away from a centralized desktop hub to a persistent hub in the cloud is also confirmed by the direction Apple is taking with Mountain Lion: aside from general iOS resemblances, the Notes app will be coming to the desktop, syncing its content with iCloud, no need for iTunes. And if the “iTunes in the cloud” initiative is of any indication, perhaps iCloud will really become the fundamental backbone of media management and syncing in the future – because, in theory, it needs no management.

But until that day, the stopgap solution to manage and sync content locally needs to be better than iTunes. Maybe it’s about splitting iTunes into multiple apps that execute their functions clearly, naturally, and reliably. Maybe it’s about offering a dedicated App Store app outside of iTunes that lets you easily switch between iPhone, iPad, and Mac apps. iBooks for Mac might help in getting the books out of iTunes. Perhaps separating media playback from device management, while making everything easier to use would come in handy, too.

I hope that iCloud, as the company’s next big insight for the next decade, will help Apple provide a better solution for its users, so that in 10 years today’s iTunes will be a distant memory.

The Obvious Ending Of Instagram’s Tale

Earlier today, Facebook announced it has “agreed” to acquire Instagram, the popular photo sharing service that recently launched an Android app, adding 1 million users in 12 hours to its existing 30 million iPhone users. Here’s Instagram’s announcement, Zuckerberg’s post on Facebook, and some nice numbers for context. Both companies say Instagram “isn’t going away”, though they will be working on expanding the network while keeping the Instagram “we know and love”. If it sounds confusing on a practical level, here’s how we can put this announcement in perspective.

Unlike Flickr, Facebook didn’t miss out on mobile (its iPhone app is the most popular free app on the App Store, ever), but unlike Flickr, Facebook is also many experiences in one. Facebook is the social network, not just the photo network or the bookmark network. Facebook is none of them and all of them at the same time. And as such, Facebook understands that the mobile photo sharing aspect of the social network could be done better.

How better? Instagram better. Even without a business model – something the company has been criticized for not figuring out on day one – Instagram amassed more than 30 million users in roughly 2 years, and it has somehow redefined the way we think of photos shot quickly, modified, and shared on the go on multiple social networks. Photos that don’t require a sign up to be seen, but that do require registered users to “like” and comment. Photos that, even if not of the highest quality, still appeal to the mobile user who wants to touch up his picture of food or a concert with some nice, vintage-like filters. Instagram is fast, intuitive, and free to use for anyone.

Some are already comparing Instagram’s acquisition to Google buying YouTube years ago. I can see the similarities, but there are some differences to keep in mind. Whilst Google’s publicized core product, search, hasn’t directly benefitted from YouTube, Google’s real business, advertising, certainly has in some way. With the Instagram acquisition, I do believe Facebook knows the app is fascinating because it is an app, separate and fun to use, rather than a complicated interface for the big, large network with thousands of features. And I think Facebook could figure out a way to keep the essence of Instagram alive, at least from an interaction perspective, while altering the network in ways to bring tighter integration with Facebook profiles.

The obvious hypothesis is that Instagram could remain a separate product – maybe just rebranded “Instagram by Facebook” – to become the Facebook app for photos. Facebook already has a dedicated Messenger app for messages; they understand that Facebook is so complex and rich now, people want some experiences of it to become standalone, more intuitive products. Photos are perhaps the biggest experience of Facebook – well, aside from the concept of “friending” itself – and Facebook must have figured out mobile users want to be able to shoot, edit, and share in seconds. They also must have noticed how users liked Instagram’s self-contained approach to a feed of photos that tell stories without necessarily using text captions. So perhaps Facebook could leverage its most visual experience yet – the Timeline – to integrate Instagram in a way to ensure photos are automatically saved in a dedicated album, nicely laid out on Facebook.com, but also available as a separate, still Facebook-made feed that only displays photos.

The “Facebook app for photos”, indeed: allow users to easily migrate Instagram accounts to Facebook, turn old Instagram comments and likes into Facebook’s versions of the same things, allow users to enjoy Instagram as a way to a) post photos, b) share them publicly, and c) have a feed of photos from friends or people you follow. It helps that Facebook has already enabled Subscriptions, which could be translated to Instagram followers. The transition should be simple, technically speaking; Facebook could benefit from a product that already has some users that are sharing to Facebook anyway, and that seemingly like the whole idea of filters.

Facebook was already playing around with that idea, too.

But will the transition be simple from a conceptual perspective? As with most popular acquisitions these days, nerds – who tend to be early adopters of social products – react with outrage and disbelief to news like today’s one.

There are five stages of web grief:

  • Disbelief
  • Outrage
  • Data exporting
  • Account deletion
  • “Five best alternatives to [x]”

In two hours, we have already seen all these headlines. You can love or profoundly hate Facebook, and I’m no judge of your criticism for Zuckerberg’s company. I am just trying to make some sense out of this.

There are some people who fell in love with Instagram, and now don’t accept the fact the company “sold out” to Facebook. It’s an understandable sentiment, as Facebook clearly will try to do something to connect its network with Instagram, otherwise they wouldn’t spend $1 billion. These are the people that liked Instagram because it was a social, but intimate, fun experience to share photos. A separate network with very few features, a focus on photos, and a general feel of “independence” that contributed to its rise to 30 millions. We all root for the small guys to succeed in this era of recession and corporate acquisitions. These people don’t simply fear Instagram will lose its “cool” – they are genuinely concerned their data is going to be acquired by Facebook. That’s why Facebook must be careful in how they figure out a migration from Instagram to its large network. But as for the factors above, there’s no doubt Instagram will lose its product independence eventually.

Some people, however, are more judgmental. They seem to think that every business is a mission, and that we’re all in this intricate, complex Web labyrinth to change the world one app at a time. We are not. A very few people, the Steves and Bills of this modern age, are in for the long haul – to change the way we think, and the way we live through technology. But the majority of founders – even the most passionate ones – run businesses as they should: like a business. With real money, not just ideals, to administer at the end of each month. With employees to take care of and investors to respond to. With privacy concerns, legal departments, offices, salaries, support teams, and families waiting at home, wondering why you’re sweating so much for a website anyway. Instagram is a startup with 10 employees, two co-founders, a lot of users, and no business model to start making money. Facebook comes in and offers $1 billion. What is Instagram going to say, no?

I am not saying what Instagram did was “right”. Let’s get real, it’s not about “right” or “wrong”. It’s a business. And if the solution to this business happens to be a huge social network with lots of money in the bank, and possibly a decent existing structure to migrate our product without screwing our users too much, even better. Facebook and Instagram did the obvious thing: they understood they needed each other and got together. The outcome of this choice is more blurry for now, because while Instagram gets the money, Facebook will have to do things right and figure what makes Instagram great, keep it alive, and improve on it while further connecting it to Facebook. I do hope Instagram will be kept around for the long term.

As usual, the users decide. If you are using Instagram on a daily basis, and you are sending all your photos to Facebook, then maybe this announcement won’t change anything, and perhaps you’ll enjoy some new Facebook-only perks too. If you are concerned about privacy, think Instagram has no way to work as a Facebook product, or generally don’t like the idea of a “Facebook owned” service, then you are perfectly justified to delete your account.

But we should stop thinking about web services as experiences bound to stay independent to change the world, because that is a bubble. The obvious ending is what’s best for the business.