Apple and HTML5∞
Horrible and dishonest webpage by Apple pushing HTML5—whoops, pushing Safari, because Apple blocks any browser other than Safari from viewing the demos.
Those features are really cool, but they work on quite a few browsers. Firefox, for one. And Chrome, which is built on WebKit, the same rendering engine as Safari.
How ironic is it that they claim that only Safari can render these demos that are supposedly being used to showcase new web standards and interoperability?
Here’s a tip, guys: http://www.modernizr.com. If you’re going to prevent people from seeing the demos, do it based on which features of HTML5 and CSS3 their browser actually supports, not which browser they’re using.
This Is How Apple Rolls∞
Great piece by Jon Gruber.
What Bothers Me About The Apple vs. Adobe Issue#
First things first. It always amuses me when people publicly make blatantly false claims. Latest offender: Jonathan Fildes, writing about Adobe’s “We ♥ Apple” ad campaign. Let’s dig in.
But Flash is commonly used to build smartphone apps. As a result, developers commonly used automatic translation tools - some built by Adobe - to convert Flash code to run on Apple gadgets.
These allowed developers to make applications once and then distribute them for use on various phones and operating systems, including Apple’s iPhone.
Uh, which apps and “Apple gadgets” are these? Since 2001, Apple’s only two platforms have been Mac OS X and iPhone OS. Of these, only Mac OS X has ever supported Flash. So, if by “developers commonly used automatic translation tools… to convert Flash code to run on Apple gadgets”, you mean “developers commonly write Adobe AIR apps for Mac OS X”, then I guess you’d be right. But it’s not relevant, because it has nothing to do with the current smartphone/mobile market.
The thing that really gets me about this quote—and this whole situation, really—is that while Adobe constantly complains about Flash not being allowed on iPhone OS, they haven’t released a version of it for ANY major mobile OS. BlackBerry OS? Nope. Android? Nope. webOS? Nope. So the question is, if Flash is this great open cross-platform technology that Adobe is serious about pushing, then where is it?
The answer, of course, is that Adobe doesn’t care about Flash helping developers or being a cross-platform tool as much as they care about it being on iPhone OS. The only reason they’re even pushing it to other platforms now is to make Apple feel like they’re missing out on something—they’re doing it to force Apple’s hand. Adobe wants Apple to feel like they need to include Flash in iPhone OS.
Well, let me tell you a secret, Adobe: it won’t work. Maybe that time spent adding a Flash-to-iPhone-app compiler in CS5—something you knew Apple would have an issue with—would have been better spent adding Flash support for platforms that actually want it?
So I have no sympathy for Adobe. They’ve done a lot of complaining about Apple being anticompetitive and restricting developers’ choices, but they haven’t done anything to actually give developers the choice they preach about. If it’s really so important to let developers choose between platforms, then why can’t they choose Flash on any platform?
You’ve had two years. It’s still not ready.
If you don’t like the fact that Flash is rapidly becoming less relevant, this probably isn’t the best way to go about rectifying that.
¤
Thank you Mario! But our multitasking is in another device!
Not sure how much I agree with the whole the iPad is just a big iPod touch
sentiment, but there have been some pretty clever ways of expressing it.
“
— Jason Snell, via Twitter (via nikf)When iPhone was announced, the big question was when or if it would support Flash. With the iPad the debate is if Flash is irrelevant.
Apple, Adobe, and Flash∞
John Gruber gives good account of why Apple won’t allow Flash on the iPhone or their rumored tablet. I also share Gruber’s distaste for Flash—I don’t see its exclusion from iPhone OS as a bad thing, and I’m not super excited to see it on webOS.
So Is PC World Run By Morons, Or What?∞
I guess PC World knows something I don’t about the Apple tablet. Somehow they’ve found out not only the price (“too expensive”), but also what it does (“things you don’t need it to do”).
The entire article is just a bunch of bullshit claims about why the not-yet-announced tablet is bad for you (It uses an on-screen keyboard! It runs “iPhone 4.0 [sic]”! It’s insecure! It’s twice as much as a netbook!)
What I really love here is that PC World isn’t just making these outlandish claims about a product that they’re never used, or even a product that they’ve never seen. No, they’re saying all this about a product they don’t even know EXISTS.
Thanks to John Gruber for pointing out this beautiful piece of journalistic garbage.
Apple Confirms Mystery Jan. 27 "Creative" Event∞
On Wednesday, January 27th at 10am Pacific (1pm Eastern) Apple is holding an event. Most rumors point to the tablet being announced then.
¤
The TextEdit icon contains the words to the “Think Different” television commercials that Apple ran in the late 1990s.
————
I always did wonder what was written on that TextEdit icon. I think it’s beautiful :)
“
— Dan Moren, Apple’s Mythical Tablet: The Text’s The ThingSteve Jobs’s antipathy for buttons is well-documented. Why does he wear turtlenecks and sneakers? No buttons.
Corner Case∞
Great writeup by dwineman on some clever UI design in Mac OS X.
Google Android Personal Thoughts∞
Boy Genius has a scathing critique of Android—Android as a platform, mind you, not just any one device.
His main complaint is that Android has no “emotion”, which is to say it’s difficult for the user to connect with their device on a level deeper than they would with, say, a hammer. Google thinks of Android as a tool, and as a result it feels clinical and systematic.
The problem with Google is that they are an engineering company through and through. Doug Bowman (of Stopdesign fame) gave a good account of some of the obstacles designers face there.
Yes, it’s true that a team at Google couldn’t decide between two blues, so they’re testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better. I had a recent debate over whether a border should be 3, 4 or 5 pixels wide, and was asked to prove my case.
Google approaches everything as an engineering problem, even when they absolutely shouldn’t. Yes, you’re creating a sophisticated piece of technology, but designing what the user sees is an art, not a science. The engineering ends where form takes precedence over functionality: the interface.
And the interface is arguably the most important part of any system. Pack Android with as much awesome functionality as you want—the thing people will judge it on is its interface. Apple understands this, which is why Apple does not release anything—ANYTHING—unless they can design it well. That is why it took two years for Apple to release copy-and-paste on the iPhone, and that is why people develop a connection with their iPhone that they never will with their Android phone.
As so often happens, John Gruber put it best:
Apple is a design company with engineers; Google is an engineering company with designers.
“
— John C Dvorak, San Francisco Examiner (via CNN Money)Apple makes the arrogant assumption of thinking that it knows what you want and need. It, unfortunately, leaves the “why” out of the equation — as in “why would I want this?” The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a ‘mouse’. There is no evidence that people want to use these things. I don’t want one of these new fangled devices.
