Link

“Apple has also said that existing iPhone applications will run on the iPad and that they will be able to be “blown up” in size to be full screen. From reports I’ve heard and my own experience in the simulator, this doesn’t look very good. Developers will want to have an iPad specific interface built into their app. The amount of work to get an iPad app’s UI to have the great polish it should have is going to exceed that of the iPhone. This will mean higher development costs. Presumably with higher development costs, higher prices will come with it. The rub is that these universal applications are going to be subjected to the same price pressures from the iPhone side of the market because users will buying a single binary.”

Link

“Built on Adobe AIR and developed with Condé Nast, the tablet prototype we showed during the TED “Play” session illustrates the possibilities for magazine publishers to reach readers in new ways. The concept enables — in digital form — the immersive content experience magazines are known for, and allows new interactive features to stimulate reader engagement”

Magazines built with Adobe AIR on the iPad? I’m very skeptical about it.

Neven Morgan on 16:9

Every aspect ratio is a compromise. If a device is ever to be used in portrait mode - and my guess is that people will use the iPad in this book-like mode most of the time - that compromise must result in something closer to 4:3.

Link

“The professional might need access to the filesystem and even need multitasking in order to debug or configure apps. That’s cool, you will have access to that, however it’s not going to be the default mode. It’s like a car, you don’t care about how the engine works, you just want to go from point A to B. If it breaks you can take it to a professional that has access to the engine (the filesystem) or become a hacker yourself and fix the engine.”

Link

“Lots of the criticism around the iPad mimics the same criticism that Apple faced with the introduction of Macintosh. Macintosh was the first computer of the era to not ship with a programming language. For the enthusiast of the time, it was a huge issue. For the consumers, the inclusion of MacWrite and MacPaint was far more valuable and useful.”

Great read over at Louie Mantia’s blog.

“While a computer can simultaneously run two applications at once, this does not mean a human can perform tasks in both applications simultaneously. For example, you cannot type two different messages in two different windows at the same exact time. While you are able to easily switch to another chat window or tab, you are not actually performing both tasks at the same time. Similarly, you are not able to read a tweet and read an article in your RSS feed simultaneously.

On a sidetone, take this into “real life.” You know when you’re with a friend in a busy coffee shop, and there’s a bunch of people talking? You focus on what your friend is saying while filtering out all the other people. It’s really hard (if not impossible) to truly listen to two people talking at the same time. Similarly, it is with your eyes. Try playing Super Mario Bros. while reading a book. Yeah, that didn’t work out so well. Your eyes are required in two locations. Remember when you were a kid and someone told you to try to rub your tummy and pat your head? Similar stuff, here. It’s impossible to give your full attention to multiple things. You can, however, sacrifice and divide your attention.”

Link

“Publishers joining Apple’s iBooks store are turning their back on Amazon and its vision of the flat $9.99 ebook. Apple forced the music industry to charge 99 cents per song, so why are they helping publishers set their own prices?

To screw Amazon.

The difference between Amazon and Apple is this: Amazon is very much in the ebook business to sell ebooks. They want you attached to their platform. That’s why the Kindle Reader is on both PC and iPhone, as well as the eponymous e-ink device. Ebooks are huge for them. They sell six ebooks for every 10 physical books. Apple, on the other hand, sells content in order to sell hardware. The iTunes Store, the App Store and the brand-new iBooks Store exist so you’ll buy iPods, iPhones and iPads, which is where Apple really makes money. iTunes revenue is just a bonus, though an ever fatter one with the explosion of the App Store.”

Link

“Unlike a computer, which it essentially is, you don’t have to wait for it to get started. Turn it on and you’re doing something. It’s got wifi and Bluetooth and will be able to make use of 3G on some models, too, so you can be online even when you’re not near a wireless internet connection. That’s a huge plus for aviation use. For the record, though, my netbook will do all those things, too, with the addition of a plug in 3G card.

[…]

For non-aviation use, I’ll probably stick to my netbook–the virtual keypad on the iPad looks awful. But for flying, the iPad sounds like a dream chart reader. It’s going to be quick to turn on, it’s going to have a brilliant display, and it’s going to be supremely easy to use. Charts, especially IFR approach charts, are a natural.”

“Constitutions which aim at the common advantage are correct and just without qualification, whereas those which aim only at the advantage of the rulers are deviant and unjust, because they involve despotic rule which is inappropriate for a community of free persons.”

- Aristotle -

I think we can still find a lot of wisdom in Aristotle’s words, even regarding our beloved technology world. Obviously Aristotle didn’t write anything about tech, but he did for politics and ethics.

I believe that Apple is doing nothing more than applying Aristotle’s concepts to his devices, both the iPhone and the iPad. I read a lot of negative comments about the recently announced iPad and its - again - closed system, but all these people don’t get the main point: a closed system is actually more open and reliable than an already-open one.

Let’s say Apple is the ruler and the iPhone / iPad is the country: with a closed OS (monarchy) Apple doesn’t want anyone else to get in their way of ruling. But clearly, Apple (the ruler) has the interest of his country at heart: it’s a strict type of government, yet focused on what’s best for the country (the device)

Other scenario: the country (iPad) is a democratic one. This means that the citizens (the users) are more directly involved in governing (OS), they can make requests and see them applied. Clearly, they only care about their own interest, they don’t want the best for the country: they just want the best for them.

Apple doesn’t want anyone to get in their way. They provide a closed OS, with strict rules and limitations but pay attention: having rules to follow is always better than having no rules. If you still think that “OS Democracy” is a good thing, please remember that many times in the past democracy deviated into anarchy. No authority means no control, and no control means terrible user experience. On the other hand, you could say that monarchy can deviate in tyranny. That’s true folks, but that’s where trust comes in: do you trust the ruler? Then you have nothing to fear. Can I trust some dude who wants flash on his iPad? Definitely not.

“We want flash” is the new “We want lower taxes”.