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

Interview: The Omni Group’s Ken Case

I had the pleasure of enjoying a casual talk with The Omni Group CEO Ken Case and took the opportunity to ask him some questions on their upcoming release, OmniPlan for iPad. We also had some time to talk about potential updates to other Omni products, as well as projects Ken would like to work on, given more time and resources.

Don: First off, what where some of the challenges you had porting the OmniPlan for Mac experience to the iPad?

Ken: One of the challenges we have had with all of our apps is that the Mac has more screen real-estate available, or at least the design we have used for our apps use a lot more screen real-estate than we have available on the iPad. We had already started noticing that some of our apps were starting to feel a bit squished on laptops – we have typically designed them to work with large desktop displays. When we watched people try to struggle through using some of our apps on the nice new MacBook Airs like the ones we’re starting to use here we found it just felt too cramped. So starting with OmniGraffle we had to re-picture what is the focus of the activity and how can we get rid of the physical controls without burying them so deep that they are no longer accessible. We faced this challenge even more so in OmniPlan for iPad because OmniPlan typically uses more screen real-estate due to its task outline on the left and the large visual GANTT chart timeline on the right. So we decided that the most relevant part of using OmniPlan is not the outline which may be of interest for structuring your plan data, but what people are most interested in is the GANTT chart timeline; so, for Omniplan for the iPad we just focused on that being the entire contents of the screen and working with that and trying to create the content in the visual timeline in ways we would normally rely on the outline for doing. If you wanted to have a task and break it down into subtasks, on the Mac we’d have you go over to the outline and create new rows and indent them underneaths as they were subtasks. If we’re only using the GANTT chart, we want to be adding subtasks – be able to show containment of subtasks under the parent task right there in that live timeline. I’m not saying we’re going to be giving up the outline, we’re not done yet, that’s the struggle we’re trying to work with and maybe the real ultimate answer is to flip back and forth between the two but there’s definitely not room to have both at the same time. Screen real-estate is a real challenge.

Don: Now when you guys released OmniFocus for the iPad, there were some things that a lot people thought the iPad did better than the Mac version. Is there anything in OmniPlan you guys feel is better suited for the iPad?

Ken: There is, but not quite as strongly as there was with OmniFocus. The biggest benefit of OmniPlan on the iPad is that it’s mobile, so you can bring it around with you and have it everywhere. But there isn’t – there aren’t any big features like the forecast and review modes we added to OmniFocus on the iPad where we could say “Oh no, now you can use the app in a whole other way that you couldn’t use it before”

Don: I read on your blog around the release of OmniOutliner for iPad that you wanted to offer 90% of the functionality that people wanted with about 10% of the effort. Do you think that also applies to OmniPlan, were you able to fit as much in without sacrificing the usability?

Ken: I think we were able to get a lot of the info in we wanted – it was a little bit harder, this was a specific challenge to OmniPlan – with OmniGraffle or OmniFocus it was easier to find parts of the application you could live without on the iPad on Day 1 or maybe forever, and just leave that out altogether and maybe bring back in later or maybe not, but you have a useable, cohesive, coherent application you can sit down and work with. With OmniPlan, you’re talking about an audience of project managers who really need to have all the same project details they’re used to typically. If we left out some piece, like, say, cost accounting, then people who are trying to do cost accounting will be stuck, and they can’t do it at all anymore. They can’t partially use it and then go up to their desktop later. If you have that then you probably want to bring all those details to a meeting that you are bringing your mobile device to. That was another challenge with OmniPlan – it was harder to find things we could cut out. We couldn’t cut out any of the data model, which we had done with all the other apps. With OmniFocus we left out time estimates altogether on the iPad – most people didn’t use it and it was more cluttered to try and fit in there. With OmniPlan we have all those fields, all those details, and the change tracking, mechanisms and so on. We did find some areas we could cut out and leave out, like printing. Our hope is, part of the reason you’re bringing this around with you on a mobile device is so you don’t have to bring paper around with you. Showing people the plan right there, live and making changes – you couldn’t do that with a printed document.

Don: So it sounds like it could be a great addition to the current OmniPlan for Mac product.

Ken: Yes, we really wanted it to be as complete as the Mac version and try to leave as little out as possible, but we did have to in some situations. For example, in version 1.0 we are not providing printing because we are not trying to make it do everything the Mac version can do. We do want it to be a standalone tool so if all you’re using is OmniPlan on the iPad, you’re still able to do the complete project management and planning you would’ve done on the Mac including collaborative editing. Plus, change-tracking is there, so you can review other people’s changes, accept and reject them and so on.

Don: Is there anything you can tell me about the tentative release or pricing for OmniPlan iPad app?

Ken: We haven’t announced pricing yet because we like to finish what we’re building, and then decide how much it costs, but if you look at our pricing to date it has been remarkably consistent. The iPad app – every single one – is half the price of the corresponding Mac app. Read more

MacStories Reading List: Special Mountain Lion Edition

As the majority of East Coast Apple users were sipping on their morning coffees either in front of their Macs or on their way to work last Thursday morning, Apple’s PR department prepared to lift the embargo on one of the most unusual Apple product announcements to date: Mountain Lion.

At 8:31 AM on Thursday, February 16, the Apple community came to a full stop as publications like The Loop (they tweeted first), Macworld, and TechCrunch unveiled the details of Mountain Lion, the next major version of OS X set to ship this summer. After an initial shock due to the surprising nature of the announcement (hotel rooms? Good hot coffee? Private briefings with Phil Schiller? Apple PR is on to something here), you could hear the Internet fell silent as millions of eyeballs quickly skimmed through the iOS-inspired feature set of the next big cat. Notification Center, Reminders, Notes, iCloud – the next OS X (just don’t call it a Mac OS X) surely is something worth keeping an eye on. Because, stay assured – the thing is going to keep its eyes on you.

With this week’s Reading List, we’ve collected the best articles from around the web about the recently announced Mountain Lion. If you’re looking for more Mountain Lion coverage, make sure to check out our newly created hub as well.

While we can’t offer you a good coffee with Apple’s Phil Schiller, we still think this week’s Reading List will fare pretty good next to your favorite cup of Americano. Enjoy. Read more

iOS-ification Addendum

Following the announcement of OS X Mountain Lion and the release of the first developer preview, I’ve been seeing a lot of new commentary being added to the longstanding argument that Apple is “iOS-ifying” the Mac with features and apps from the iPad. Matt Alexander has probably the best metaphor on the subject:

And then yesterday, OS X and iOS announced an impromptu decision. Many had already (reluctantly) seen it coming but most chose to ignore the possibility, hurt that OS X might do that to them (to them!). But now it’s real, the two are moving in together, and that means a lot of things for the end-user.

Of the utmost importance is the fact that such a step does not suggest that the two entities are merging. Separate identities remain, but assets and possessions are shared. The decision comes when two individuals decide that, as a couple, they are better together than they are on their own. Moving in together, the couple is free to communicate more clearly with each other, to really learn about themselves, and to face complex life decisions together. The two are not somehow merging into the same entity, they’re merely moving under one roof, sharing some belongings, and generally learning how to co-exist in a new contextual environment.

The image of two OSes “moving in together” works exceptionally well in this context as Apple isn’t merging iOS and OS X – they are trying to get the best features “inspired from iPad” and bring them over to OS X. Anyone who’s ever been in a stable relationship understands that the single characteristics of a person (the “features” in OS parlance) mostly remain intact over the years, but as two people decide they are better as a couple, there might be some influence over each other’s distinctive traits (cue definition of “ecosystem” and “inspiration”). I think Matt simply nailed it with his article.

I believe, however, that there’s still much of a debate going around as to whether Apple is 100% clear in admitting “they are borrowing” from iOS to enhance the Mac, or Mountain Lion and the whole “iOS-ification” theory shouldn’t be a surprise at all because Apple isn’t trying to “iOS-ify” anything.

A few weeks ago, I wrote:

Today’s (relatively minor) software update reminds me, however, that the iOS-ification goes far beyond simply converting graphics and updating apps from one platform to another. It is actually more a conversion of the entire Apple ecosystem to an iOS-inspired system of graphical elements, user interactions, business models, user experience paradigms, and functionalities. The iOS-ification isn’t simply visual, it’s a fundamental shift of strategy that, ultimately, I believe begins and ends with iCloud — something that I have discussed before.

After the release of Mountain Lion, Jim Dalrymple wrote:

If Apple were trying to make Mountain Lion more like iOS we would be touching the screen of our computers to interact with out apps instead of using the keyboard and mouse.

Mountain Lion is about familiarity and integration. The new features and apps in Mountain Lion make sense for a desktop operating system.

To which Ben Brooks responded:

I don’t disagree with what Dalrymple is saying up and until the last line. Apple is indeed trying to bring some familiarity and integration between the two platforms, but there’s more to it than that.

The way I see it, Apple is trying to simplify OS X and bring to it some of the features from iOS that make sense. To that end Apple is very much making Mountain Lion more iOS like.

And then Jim wrote a smart counterargument:

I’m going to use the same faulty logic that some people have used to claim that OS X Mountain Lion is being iOS-ified to show how iOS is being Mac-ified.

Having watched some old Apple material on the matter (more on this in a bit), I see both ends of the controversy now – and I think the main issue here is that many  (including me) haven’t properly explained what they meant by “iOS-ification”. So, before the discussion continues, here’s my take on the feared word: I see “iOS-ification” as “inspiration” from an OS (and ecosystem of devices) that’s been insanely successful over the past five years. Inspiration, not copying, and not “making the Mac like iOS”. In fact, I think that “making the Mac like iOS” is the wrong expression to use – there is a subtle difference, but I’d use “iOS has inspired some changes in OS X” rather than “iOS-like” or “more like iOS”. It’s merely semantics, I know, but I’d like to settle this, and it’s important to use the right terminology.

In order to properly move forward, here’s a few things we can agree upon:

  • OS X is the technological foundation of iPhone OS (now iOS).
  • Once on iOS, Apple developed some new apps and user features for it.
  • After a few years, Apple decided to take some apps and user features from iOS (iPad and iPhone) and bring them back to the Mac.

These are the facts. Now, the problem is the interpretation of these facts, and how writers like Ben and Jim see the aforementioned process of “bringing back” as iOS-ification, inspiration, natural evolution, or whatever they want to call it. In fact, I believe the real issue is the meaning we want to give to these facts, and how they play in the bigger picture of Apple being committed to the Mac platform.

As usual, I’d like to turn it over to Steve to remind us how a particular subject was first introduced. Here’s how he described the process behind OS X Lion at the Back to the Mac event in 2010:

What is the big idea, what is the philosophy behind Mac OS X Lion? Well, that’s where Back to the Mac comes from.

What we’ve done is we’ve started from Mac OS X and we created from it a version called iOS, which we used in the iPhone, and we invented some new things and we’ve perfected it over the last several years and it’s now used in the iPad as well. What we’d like to do – we’re inspired by some of those innovations in the iPad and the iPhone, we’d like to bring them back to the Mac. And so that’s what Lion’s about: Mac OS X meets the iPad.

If you watch the keynote again, you’ll notice how Steve and other executives often mention the word “inspiration” while demonstrating features that are “convenient just like the iPad” and “iPad-style” in the way they are presented on screen. I don’t think there’s any doubt that a) iOS is technologically based off OS X and b) Apple created new features on iOS that were eventually ported to OS X. The latter point is happening once again with Mountain Lion, as things like Notification Center and Twitter integration were chronologically iOS-first – and they are now displayed “iPad-style” on the Mac.

With these facts available, I’d like to lay out my own conceptual compromise we can (hopefully) agree upon while we’re waiting to see where Apple is headed with Mountain Lion and its Mac hardware line-up.

Here it goes: iOS-ification indicates the process of being inspired by the iPad’s success to port some apps and features to OS X. In this process, the operating systems are kept separate, and features are developed to take advantage of each device’s nature. Ultimately, iOS-ification is aimed at making iOS and OS X coexist in a single iCloud ecosystem.

Before I continue, allow me to present more fact-checking straight from Apple’s PR:

Lion (2010):

Lion brings many of the best ideas from iPad back to the Mac, plus some fresh new ones like Mission Control that Mac users will really like,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “Lion has a ton of new features, and we hope the few we had time to preview today will give users a good idea of where we are headed.

Mountain Lion (2012).

Apple today released a developer preview of OS X Mountain Lion, the ninth major release of the world’s most advanced operating system, which brings popular apps and features from iPad to the Mac and accelerates the pace of OS X innovation.

As I said above, I see both points in this argument. “The Mac is still a Mac and these are just features” and “The Mac is starting to be a lot like iOS” both make sense (and are factually correct) depending on how you look at the issue, which is a complex one in that it’s got a lot of history behind it, subtle changes in marketing (“best ideas” from 2010 compared to “popular apps and features” in 2012), and an overall “we don’t know yet” aspect due to Apple’s ever growing success and sales numbers.

I do believe, however, that if we consider iOS-ification as “inspiration” and agree that when iPad features comes to OS X they retain the Mac’s best advantages and functionalities (an example is Notification Center having a keyboard shortcut in Mountain Lion), we can find a sweet spot that makes everyone happy and excited about the things to come.

Whilst drawing a line between familiarity and integration is hard because, after all, we’re just writers and we’re not aware of Apple’s real goals, I believe the unification that’s happening now isn’t about the two operating system – it’s iCloud. I’ve written about this before, and I won’t repeat myself here – iCloud is becoming Apple’s “ecosystem for everything” on each release. iCloud is the platform for the next decade no matter if iOS and OS X will eventually merge or not.

The iOS Permission Dialog Dilemma

For anyone who used Windows Vista, you will be well aware of the frustration that UAC (User Account Control) caused. That permission dialog popped up far too frequently, constantly asking the user for permission to execute a particular task. In theory, it was a good idea: give the user more control over what was allowed to run. The problem was that because the dialog box popped up far too often, people quickly learned to ignore it and blindly click “Allow” whenever it appeared - nullifying any of the security benefits of UAC. Thankfully Microsoft relaxed the pervasiveness of UAC in Windows 7 and it is now a far more useful security tool.

Why did I just spend a paragraph talking about UAC? Because to a certain degree, Apple is facing a similar dilemma with iOS and its permission dialogs. It recently faced scrutiny after it was revealed that a number of apps were accessing a user’s entire address book and even uploading it to their servers - without any user approval. Apple has now pushed back and announced it will soon require user permission for apps to access a user’s Contacts. But will it resemble yet another blue dialog box, just like access to Location, Push Notifications and Twitter already do? If so a user will face a barrage of those dialog boxes, asking for permission, one on top of the other.

It’s after reading Marco Arment’s thoughts on this issue earlier today that I thought I would weigh into the discussion and suggest one idea that may (or may not) be a potential ‘solution’. While there can never be a single solution that will be perfect for everyone (what may be overly cautious for one user may be overly lenient for another) the goal as I see it is to arrive at a solution somewhere in the middle ground; one that achieves an acceptable mix of precaution and freedom.

Essentially, my suggestion is that rather than let users face a stacked barrage of blue permission dialogs, is to flatten them all out on one clear screen when they first launch an app after installation. Users would see a list of what the app would like permission to access and the user would be able to (with one tap) allow all, or individually deny permission for the various databases. Furthermore, with one tap, a user could see a short justification from the developer for why the app is requesting that particular access - giving a little bit more control and peace of mind to the user. If a developer lied on this page it would almost certainly be grounds for expulsion from the App Store. The one final goal of my proposal is that it would also inform the user that these options can be changed the Settings, something many users may not be aware of at the moment.

I myself am not sure this is the best option, because there is one critical weakness. With my design, an app would have to upfront ask for permissions for whatever it might want to access in the future - but as Marco points out, some apps (like Instapaper) require access to something like Location for a minor feature that not everyone would even use (in that case it is to determine if it’s night at the users location, in which case it can switch automatically to dark mode).

If I asked most careful people if Instapaper could have their location, they’d refuse, because there’s no obvious good reason. But if the app asks right when they enable a location-based setting from a screen that shows why it’s asking for their location, they can make a more educated decision. Similarly, if an app doesn’t seem to have a good reason when it asks for Contacts, a skeptical person can decline.

Although to counter that point, I would note that not only can a user choose to individually deny Instapaper access to their location, but if they were curious as to why Instapaper would need access to their location, they could quickly read Marco’s explanation with one tap. Furthermore, my suggestion wouldn’t entirely remove the blue permissions dialog, as an app could ask again for permission later on if access was initially denied but a user is trying to use a feature that requires permission – in that case, the app could trigger the dialog to ask the user permission again.

Accompanying my suggestion would be something similar to Rene Ritchie’s app permission sheet in Settings. It would list all apps that have asked for permissions and you could dive in and edit those original options from when you first installed the app. As for allowing an app to send push notifications, I would probably keep that separate, as its own blue dialog box. My permissions “screen” would be solely dedicated to access permissions, to information that is privately stored on your device. One big benefit of such a permissions screen of course is that Apple could theoretically add more things that require permission to be accessed by apps, without a user becoming too overwhelmed, because such a layout is far better than stacking dialog boxes. Think about access to NFC or perhaps your music library.

OS X Mountain Lion: The iOS-ification Continues This Summer

Earlier this morning Apple caught the Internet by surprise with a series of major announcements regarding the future of OS X. To put it simply, Apple officially unveiled OS X Mountain Lion, or version 10.8, the next major iteration of OS X that will become available later this year – the initial targeted release date is a vague “this summer” – through the Mac App Store. A preview of Mountain Lion was given to a few selected tech blogs, including The Verge, Macworld, Daring Fireball, and The Loop, which we are linking back to summarize the new features of Mountain Lion and reflect upon the changes previewed by Apple.

The basic theme of Mountain Lion is iOS-ification.

Apple took the best features of iOS, and in particular iOS 5, and brought them “back to the Mac”, giving them a desktop-class facelift to make applications and services suitable for the Mac environment. Mountain Lion will feature some familiar faces for iOS users: iChat has been renamed Messages and integrated with the iCloud/iMessage ecosystem from iOS; Notes and Reminders are now standalone apps; Notification Center, Game Center, AirPlay Mirroring, Share Sheets, and a new security system called GateKeeper are now part of OS X as well.

In this post we’ll provide a quick description of the new features, a Storify bundle that aggregates the most interesting links and tweets about Mountain Lion (which is available as developer beta today), and some thoughts on what Mountain Lion means for Apple and its users. Read more

Tweet Library 2.0 Review

The last time I wrote about Twitter clients, I noted how I’d rather settle with a single app for power users, and have other developers innovate on top of Twitter and the technologies offered by Apple to provide a unique take on the standard Twitter experience. Unfortunately, until today very few developers seem to have believed in the market potential for innovative Twitter clients that go beyond refreshing your timeline and catching DMs, with Riverfold Software’s Tweet Library being the best example of what’s possible to do by leveraging the Twitter API, focusing on another kind of experience.

I initially reviewed Tweet Library when it hit version 1.0 on iPad. I wrote:

Tweet Library is a searchable local archive of your Twitter activity, with promising online functionalities that show good room for improvement. At $9.99 in the App Store it might not be an app for everyone, but if Twitter curation is your thing, this is the best you can have on the iPad right now.

Released earlier today, Tweet Library 2.0 offers some fantastic improvements for those who began using the app on the iPad last year, adding a completely new iPhone interface as part of the free, universal update that will have Twitter curation nerds drooling in new functionalities. Read more

iCloud File Sharing

It is often said that Apple doesn’t offer a filesystem for iOS devices. Sure enough, it is indeed not possible to manage documents and folders on an iPhone or iPad as you can on OS X. Apple does, however, offer a very basic file management system that works with iOS apps, and you’ve haven’t probably used it too many times:

Introduced with iOS 3.2 and iTunes 9.1, iTunes File Sharing allows applications to import files copied from a Mac or PC using iTunes, and export to a computer. In iTunes, all you have to do is connect an iOS device, head over the Apps tab, and choose File Sharing below the Home screen app management interface. You can copy almost any kind of file into an app’s internal directory dedicated to file sharing, and several iOS apps use this method to import or backup files and documents such as bookmarks, videos, or spreadsheets. I’ve often used this feature to import .avi files to watch on my iPad.

iTunes File Sharing doesn’t seem to get the attention other iTunes functionalities do, and I believe there are a couple of reasons behind this. First off, it’s quite cumbersome: the interface for File Sharing is buried within an iOS device’s settings in iTunes, and there are no options to, say, automate the process of importing files or setting up favorite sources for documents. Second, iTunes File Sharing only solves a partial problem, in that the majority of iOS users don’t lament the lack of a proper Mac-to-iOS file management system as much as they’re asking for an iOS-to-iOS centralized file storage solution that would also happen to sync back to a Mac.

So, I had an idea. I think the same iTunes File Sharing feature would work a lot better as a dedicated, native iCloud app for iOS devices (and maybe the Mac too). After all, if Apple is providing an iTunes-based file management utility for Mac users, why couldn’t they build an app that enabled any third-party iOS app to save and import files from iCloud? This app would be built into the system and allow users to simply collect documents, like iTunes File Sharing. Developers could easily add options to their apps to import files from “iCloud File Sharing” and export files to it. Users would have the same feature set of the existing iTunes File Sharing, only with an interface they are already familiar with, because iCloud File Sharing would resemble the existing file management workflow of iWork for iOS or iCloud.com. The only difference is that it would be integrated on a system level, work with any iOS app, and basically be an extension of the “Open In” menu that already allows apps to communicate with each other through supported file types.

I wouldn’t call such an app “Dropbox from Apple”, as Dropbox is mainly developed as a solution to sync files between computers, running in the background all the time, whereas this would be more oriented towards giving apps a better file sharing system. In fact, I imagine Apple could go as far as indicating the apps that can receive an iCloud file as they currently do with iTunes File Sharing for better organization and to maintain the app-driven model. iCloud File Sharing would play well with this strategy, and it would offer a basic way for developers to integrate iCloud in their apps.

Apps like GoodReader have already implemented a similar system of iCloud-based file management, and some third-party developers are experimenting with providing standalone apps for file management purposes over iCloud. A default utility from Apple would have the obvious advantage of not requiring any additional download: it would be integrated as a system action in any app for iPhone, iPad (and even the Mac). Apps would still have their own iCloud libraries and synced data; the file sharing part would ditch iTunes and become iCloud-powered (iTunes File Sharing would be kept around as an option for transferring large files such as videos through USB).

You might argue that Apple is trying to eliminate the concept of the filesystem altogether by embracing the app model with data silos that are self-contained and user-friendly. As iTunes File Sharing seems to be suggest, though, I think that Apple knows the app model and iOS only solve so much when it comes to file management – Apple has to deal with the fact that many people still work with files and folders, export them, move them around, and manage them. I believe the real winning scenario for Apple would be to make the management process as lightweight and intuitive as simple by relying on iCloud. Thus, iCloud File Sharing would serve as a better solution than iTunes File Sharing, ans it would strengthen Apple’s offerings requiring no or little effort from developers, ultimately providing an accessible way to manage files atop of Apple’s existing free 5 GB of storage for every iCloud account.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like the upcoming iOS 5.1 will introduce such a feature, and I’m not holding my breath for a surprise announcement during the iPad 3 event. But for the next major version of iOS, if Apple doesn’t think a better way to let apps communicate with each other is needed, I believe an evolution of iTunes File Sharing towards iCloud would be a sweet stopgap solution in the PC-free era.

MacStories Reading List: February 5 - February 12

The past week has been an interesting one, for a couple of reasons. First, we’ve seen Kickstarter breaking records for its most funded campaign, a record that didn’t last long as a new game by Tim Schafer quickly pulled in $400,000 in 8 hours. Then Path, the cool kids’ alternative to the “evil” Facebook, found itself in the middle of a PR brouhaha as it was caught uploading a user’s Address Book email addresses to its servers. Ouch. Luckily, the company was smart enough to reverse its decision and issue an update in less than a day. There’s more: Apple has started warning developers against manipulating the App Store’s charts, and more people every week are considering using the iPad as their only work machine.

It’s this week’s Reading List, best served with a good cup of coffee. Enjoy. Read more

“Okay, I’ll Remind You”

A few minutes ago Apple uploaded two new iPhone 4S commercials on its website and official YouTube channel. The ads, as with previous iPhone 4S promotional videos, focus on Siri, and they might just be the best ones about the voice-based assistant yet.

The ads, called “Rock God” and “Road Trip”, share a common theme: people talking to their assistant using natural language and a friendly tone, not simply asking a piece of software to execute commands.

In Road Trip, a guy and his girlfriend are organizing a road trip to California. Look at the initial setting: it’s cold outside, they’re about the get in the car, and they want to get from the cold of East Coast in February to the sunny Santa Cruz in California. The guy asks Siri, and they’re on the road. Camera cuts to the guy’s face in the car. He’s looking for a barbecue in Kansas City. Camera cuts to girl’s face in the car. She’s looking for a rodeo. Camera changes again, this time the couple doesn’t know where they are, and the girl asks “Where are we?”, with the look of someone who knows Siri will have an answer. They’re in Santa Rosa. Change again. How big is the Grand Canyon? Sure enough, Siri can look that up on Wolfram Alpha or Wikipedia. But then the gas runs out: how about finding a station the guys can walk to? Finally, the ad reaches its climax when our two characters have seemingly reached their destination, or are fairly close, and are looking at the stars. She asks: “What does Orion look like?”. Siri displays sky data inline. The video closes with the opposite setting of how it began: sunny California, he’s wearing a t-shirt, looking at the horizon, and she’s telling Siri like you would do with an old friend – Remind me to do this again. Siri, with its human-like voice, replies: Okay, I’ll remind you.

The second commercial, Rock God, has a more “fun” approach. There’s this kid that “has to get a guitar”, and he’s so excited about it he needs to ask Siri now. Why is he so excited about getting a guitar? What’s the story here? Perhaps, I imagine, he has just decided with his friends that it’s time to put a band together and start playing. So, Siri gives him location info about stores selling musical instruments, and in the next scene our kid is learning how to play. How do I play London Calling? Whole Lotta Love? How about that chord? Siri displays information on screen. Fairly regular stuff for now. Then the ad changes – our character is sending a message to Julie and Kate about playing at the garage tonight. Apple’s music stops. The kids are playing – they’re doing rock ‘n’ roll! – and finish their song. “Call me Rock God”, the kid tells Siri, softly.

You see, these aren’t just ads. In 30 seconds, we’re told stories. In 30 seconds, we are not shown technical features and RAM specifications, we’re given real examples of real people we can relate to. We’re shown two young people in love with each other that just want to get to California and see the sunset together. We’re shown a young boy with a simple dream, playing guitar, yet a dream that’s important to him – something that makes his life worth living and enjoying even for those 30 minutes when he gets his band mates together and nothing else matters. Just music. Call me Rock God.

In 30 seconds, we’re shown how technology can make people’s lives better. We’re reminded, once again, that this industry, this love for the latest gadget, doesn’t necessarily have to be about tech specs – it’s the technology married with the liberal arts. It’s about playing London Calling with your friends. It’s about driving to California with the woman you love and watch the stars just for one night.

He would be proud.

Read more