Content vs. Platform

I think Apple has historically made a good habit of ensuring they provided platforms for developers, artists, and others, without making too much content for those platforms. It kept Apple's image neutral and professional. However, as of late, Apple has begun making a lot of content that's out of the norm of Apple's regular habits. Whether it's Apple TV+, Carpool Karaoke, or Warren Buffet's Paper Wizard, I find it hard to find the target audience for the content Apple makes. When I ask others about things like these, they tell me they've never heard of it. So, you could narrow the audience down to those who follow Apple news. I personally don't plan to get Apple TV+ or any of the things I've mentioned. I think Apple should focus on what they do best, which is providing a platform for other content creators. We've seen it work with the App Store and the iTunes Store. And if Apple wants to make money with subscription services (which is a can of worms by itself), the solution has to be better than Apple News+. I think the service can be better if it gets more support and lowers its prices. Maybe if Apple provided a single subscription solution that supported App Store developers, we could see both benefit to Apple and less apps that require subscriptions for basic functionality. The App Store is plagued by apps that lock basic functionality behind subscriptions because the App Store is becoming less profitable. I think Apple needs to be looking towards a solution that solves this problem, while giving the user reason to support the solution.

Adobe Warns of Legal Risk to Customers Using Old Versions of Software

I've been vocal on my opinions of the changing landscape of software ownership. I think owning software is a fantasy today, forcing developers to step out of their lane and create subscription models. That's scratching the surface, and I usually don't fault the developers for this, but you can read about that in full here. Adobe recently sent an email to Matt Roszak regarding the use of older Adobe software. It states that because they discontinued some older versions of their software, the user is no longer licensed to use them, and as a result, they may be liable to legal action. Now, please do not take anything I say as legal advice. I don't claim to be knowledgeable about this kind of stuff, but this is what I take from this. Adobe software is used at big companies for big projects. Adobe makes professional software for photo editing, video editing, and way more. So, if a big company were to used software that they technically didn't have the license to because it was out of date, hypothetically, someone could take legal action against them. I'm not saying that's Adobe, but for a company, it's a risk not worth taking. I don't think those using Adobe software for personal use should have much to worry about, but again, I'm not a lawyer. That's just my uneducated, shot-in-the-dark guess. By saying certain versions are no longer licensed to users, Adobe is heavily incentivizing its users to stay up to date with their software. This is a big deal for Adobe because they are able to do this with their subscription model. I'm not saying it's necessarily bad, just clever. Again, I heavily prefer the major update model that lets users choose when to upgrade. The scary part comes when Adobe decides to remove a feature. What if a business needs that feature for a project? What if a professor requires that feature for a class assignment? These features could be deprecated at any time with this rule. In short, this likely won't affect too many people, as most (I believe) are satisfied with the current version enough to not care, but we'll have to see if that changes one day.

I just got an email from @Adobe that I'm no longer allowed to use the software that I'm paying for. Time to cancel my subscription I guess.

Share plz. pic.twitter.com/ZIIdqK5AkM

— Matt Roszak 🍞 (@KupoGames) May 10, 2019

2019 iPhones Could Charge AirPods

Two-way wireless charging is becoming more common in smartphones, and iPhone may add this to its skillset this year [Source: Bloomberg]. I think this would be very timely, as there is currently no official way to wirelessly charge the AirPods Wireless Charging Case. Because AirPower was canceled, the only way to do so currently is use a third-party wireless charger. Believe me, that isn't the end of the world, but it's very un-Apple-like to have a flagship feature that requires a third-party accessory. Being able to charge the case with an iPhone would be a pretty interesting selling point. I think brining wireless charging to more devices would be great too, like the Beats and iPad lineups.

The Monitors at the Genius Bar

I had to go to the Genius Bar today and while I’m waiting, I usually like to watch the videos that play on the monitors at the Genius Bar. Usually, they have tips and some support information, along with some marketing. However, when I went, I only saw two videos on loop: a video for the iPhone XS and a video for the iPhone XR. Nothing else. Most people wouldn’t think much of it, but I’ll always prefer the short videos that could teach you something new while waiting. After all, the Genius Bar is for those who already own an Apple product, so why not teach them something new rather than constantly ask them if they want a new phone. I know I’m looking way too into this, but part of the experience of an Apple Store is that the experience is usually more than just buying something. Hopefully this is temporary and they bring back the videos, assuming other Apple Stores are doing this too. 

Adobe Doubles Price of Photography Plan

I remember working with Adobe Photoshop as a young child, probably around five years old. It was a different time where you could actually own software and opt not to upgrade. That's why it pains me when people my age don't realize that there was a time where you could get Photoshop without buying an Adobe Creative Cloud subscription. Today, Adobe says it's "testing" a new pricing for their Photography plan, which includes Photoshop and Lightroom. Previously available for $9.99 a month, some users are seeing it at $19.99 a month.

I get it. A lot of software can't make it work with one-time payments. But I think the model where users can choose to update to a major new version is a fair compromise between consumer and developer. It lets the user have a choice as to if an update is worth it. A lot of these apps have subscriptions when they shouldn't. Note, journal, calendar, and sketching apps really shouldn't have subscription plans for use, additional tools, or dark mode. I won't name any names, but I can't think of a reason to pay a monthly fee to use something like a calendar or a mail client that provides very little over the default calendar or mail client.

If Adobe doesn't change their payment model, I think a new developer needs to step in and take over Adobe's reign with a new payment model. I think Procreate and Pixelmator are the closest to doing so with Photoshop. They both have one-time purchases and they take full advantage of iOS and macOS respectively. I've made it very clear that I'm done with keeping track of so many subscriptions, and that I think the bubble of subscription services is ready to burst. I hope we can move away from this and find a better way to support app developers in the long-term that benefits both the developer and the consumer.

Could the Galaxy Fold Delay Be Intentional?

The Galaxy Fold was set to release today, but as we know, that has changed. Due to a large proportion of review units essentially having their displays bricked, Samsung has delayed the product until they can release a working product. It seems like a Herculean task to be able to make a hardware change and get the phone out to market within a few months. But I personally has a suspicion that it could have been an intentional move. While I highly doubt this is the case, we're now all talking about the Galaxy Fold. I didn't realize the phone was launching this week until they delayed it, and that could be the case for many others as well. If they already had a design change ready for the mass market, but gave out faulty review phones, they would not only have days of free press, but also a quick turnaround for the phones. It would be an easy way to get free press without having your phones posing a safety hazard to people. The only other thing is that I find it very hard to believe that Samsung let this phone pass their quality standards. Having a non-functional $2,000 phone is unacceptable. I don't think Samsung would be willing to have one-in-four of their phones become bricked. It all seems a bit suspicious.

Why Apple Should Stop Using Roman Numerals

Apple used roman numerals starting with the iPhone X. It seemed appropriate for the tenth anniversary of the iPhone, especially given the radical design change. Then we got the iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max. These are the eleventh iPhones, but the XS and XR convert to nothing using roman numerals. That's fine, since they're essentially just slightly better versions of the iPhone X. The issue is that most people refer to them as the "ecks-S" and "ecks-R" instead of the "10S" and "10R" respectively. With rumors of an iPhone XI (iPhone 11 in roman numerals), this gets way more confusing. Will the successor be named the iPhone XIS? Beauty lies in simplicity. The single number was very clear, and adding an "S" to the end communicated an improved version. But with all the different variations of iPhone today, the public doesn't want to waste their time trying to learn the naming scheme of the iPhone. It's an annoying nightmare that we hopefully don't have to deal with in the near future.

What a Loading Screen Can Tell You

The other day, I opened my Desktop folder and Finder had a minor hiccup where it hung for about 5 seconds. In those five seconds, it showed the infamous "Beach Ball of Death." After it disappeared, my day went on as normal. This is rare for a typical Mac, but it made me think of Windows. In Windows 10, without fail, opening my Downloads folder will result in the same hang, often for around 15-20 seconds. But instead of an indicator that says something is out of the ordinary, the window just says "Working on it..." And I think that one difference can speak volumes about the differences in macOS and Windows. The Beach Ball of Death occurs when something is out of the ordinary, while "Working on it..." is an office worker before they've had their morning coffee. It leads me to believe that this is something that Microsoft knew the user would encounter often. Maybe not. Maybe my PC is just slow, but I now have to assume that the average user will face this screen often. I think it's a bit ironic that the rarity of this in macOS is what reminded me of how often it occurs in Windows. macOS is so quick with it, you don't even realize it could hang.

The Streaming Trend

With the recent news on Disney+ and Apple's announcement of Apple TV+, I hear more and more people saying they're tired of the "streaming revolution" because it's ending up to be more expensive than cable. YouTube TV, Hulu, Netflix, and Crunchyroll are seeing subscription fee increases while regular cable TV with on-demand remains the same. YouTube TV is most notable, as it is now moving up to $50 a month. At that point, just stick with cable. You'll have basically the same service, except without the reliance on the internet. And you'll still be able to connect your cable subscription to all your favorite on demand apps for internet streaming. I think people are going to see this streaming bubble pop very soon and will take one of two routes. Either stick with cable or just cut the cable and switch to YouTube. I almost exclusively watch YouTube and most people my age I know feel the same way. I'm sick of keeping track of how many times I pay a service $9.99 each month and seeing it add up to a colossal amount. And with that, I think it's easy to see why I give a sigh with the magnitude of a major underwater seismic event when I see Apple announce three subscription services in one day. Of course, the only big difference with Disney+ is that Disney owns a third of the film industry with beloved properties that span multiple generations. I think it will be interesting how all of this plays out in the next year or two.

The Ying-Yang Relationship of the Smart Music Industry

I bash a lot on the HomePod and often compare it to the Google Home and the Amazon Echo. I think a lot of people see it as a failure that has a lot of obvious flaws. It's easy the point out the obvious when it comes to HomePod and its competition. So, in the smart speaker market, Apple is floundering compared to its competitors. But things get interesting when we look at the opposite of a smart speaker: smart headphones. AirPods has been absolutely dominating this market, becoming an icon in modern culture. AirPods are instantly recognizable and have had constant press for the two years they've been on the market. Meanwhile, it's hard to name one single competitor. With rumors of Amazon potentially making their own competitor, it will be interesting if they will take off like the Amazon Echo did, or flop into an endless sea of AirPods competitors.

Apple Sued for Swollen Apple Watch Batteries

Gina Priano-Keyser is filing a class action lawsuit claiming that Apple Watches are subject to having their batteries swollen, ultimately causing the screen to pop off [Source: MacRumors]. The lawsuit states that this could pose a safety issue to consumers. Apparently, Apple was supposed to repair these for free for up to three years after purchase, but supposedly attributes the damage to an accident, which voids the offer.

This issue actually happened to my first generation Apple Watch last year. I was sitting in a chair and I suddenly heard a loud pop come from my wrist and the screen had popped off. It occurred on July 8, 2018 and I had received my watch in early June of 2015, so the three year deadline was gone by then. When I took it into the Apple Store, I was told that it was likely due to a swollen battery and that it would cost about $100 and take 5 days to fix. They ended up replacing it with an Apple Watch Series 1 (instead of first generation) with an aluminum case. I gave it back stating I had a stainless steel case. A few days later, I got a refurbished original Apple Watch with a stainless steel case, but then they overcharged me by about $150. After they realized they made an error, they sold it to me for $80, since it was a refurbished replacement. Overall, it was a frustrating experience that went in a lot of circles. If people really were injured due to the swollen battery, I can only imagine how much more frustrating it was for them. Apple should find a way to properly address this issue and do more testing as to what makes these batteries swell.

Apple's 'It's Showtime' Event

Apple today announced a slew of services. They announced Apple News+, Apple Arcade, Apple Card, and Apple TV+. I don't have the time nor energy to talk about every little thing about the event, but, in short, I was underwhelmed. This was genuinely the worst Apple keynote I have seen yet. There was nothing interesting for the people who usually watched these keynotes, with a few exceptions. This presentation basically sums up how different Apple is now then from 5-10 years ago. The most interesting thing for me was the Apple Card, which adds features to iOS while staying true to Apple's commitment to privacy. Apple Arcade seems like a slap in the face to macOS users and a quick excuse to get Apple in the conversation about gaming. Apple News+ and Apple TV+ aren't for me. I'm sure someone is excited for these services, and more power to you if you are. That's all I'll say on that matter.

It's good for a tree to grow and branch out, but it's pointless if your trunk being chopped with an axe. I can't take Apple seriously if they're going to make services like these while their software is notoriously buggy and hardware is outdated. My Apple Watch crashed and restarted without explanation in the time it took me to write the last paragraph. I know that different teams work on different things, but what matters in the end is where Apple puts their resources and focus. We wait for so long for updates with a laundry list of problems, only to have a small fraction of them checked off every few months, with new problems constantly being added. It's frustrating and I know Apple can do better. 

My Thoughts on Google Stadia

It's undeniable that gaming (and probably every other form of entertainment) is going in the way of streaming. When Google announced their entrance into the gaming front, Google Stadia, on Tuesday, I was both intrigued and skeptical. There are parts that are genuinely cool, but a lot felt like fluffed up PR talk. I felt a lot of the vibes that I get when I think of Apple's service-centric event coming this week. "You're great as a company at X, so why try going into Y, when you should be focusing more on X?" That being said, here are my thoughts.

The Good

The idea of taking the focus of gaming away from hardware and instead realizing that games can be cloud streamed is a cool premise, at least in a perfect world with no input lag. But for now, let's pretend that there are no connection issues with Stadia at all. Suddenly, your phone or low-end laptop has the graphics and rendering power of a high-end PC, because all it needs to do is stream what is essentially a video stream. The idea of this evolving without the need to upgrade hardware sounds like a dream. You can look at the same game running on a Nintendo Switch and a PS4, and the graphical capabilities are night and day, but the Switch gives up the extra power for portability. With Stadia, you get the best of both worlds, where you can have portability and great looking visuals, because all of the processing is done on one of Google's servers. The continuity features with the controller are also very Apple-esque. Some of the in-game features are also pretty cool. Share states, anti-cheating, and 4K are nice touches provided the product works as advertised.

The Bad

The main issue with this event is what we don't know. We don't know what games will be on this service, aside from a select few. We don't know how much it will cost. We don't know if this will even catch on. Aside from their grasp on the internet, what makes Google qualified to run the gaming service that is supposed to revolutionize video games? I'd rather have a company that didn't have a smartphone OS bias, so iOS users don't miss out on certain features. That's not to say I want Apple to do this by any means. Sundar Pichai began the conference stating, "I'm not actually a big gamer." But then you see the Konami code on the bottom of Google's controller, which is cringy at best. It feels like Google is stepping into the gaming arena because market research shows that it's becoming bigger by the second.

Moving on, what Google had to show at their event wasn't super impressive. I'm all for not giving me a false perception of a product, but if what they showed in their controlled environment is average performance to best case performance, I'm not looking forward to how it works on my network. I've tried PS4 Remote Play on my phone, and as cool as it is, the input lag on my local network was frustrating for any game that wasn't a button masher. So, if that didn't work on my local network, who's to say Google can pull that off with internet involved? Don't get me wrong, I'd love for them to prove me wrong. I'm sure Google invested more into Stadia than Sony into the PS4 Remote Play app. A big hurdle for Stadia is the network performance aspect.

Also, the fact that Google's controller has an always-on microphone is a turn off for me, though I'm glad they let me use my own controller.

It's hard to see Stadia being what Google hypes it up to be. It isn't like movie streaming where movies are significantly cheaper than most games. If we put games to a streaming model, I think that could set a bad precedent for game developers. I'm by no means knowledgable on how video game economics work, but here's my interpretation. If they make their money from someone clicking a play button, would developers feel as incentivized to put as much quality and content in their games? A lot of games that don't live up to the $60 price point usually go on sale pretty quickly and eventually end up in the bargain bin, but when there's no price tag attached to any specific game, there's no depreciation to be had. 

In Summary

Google Stadia could be revolutionary, or it could be the next Ouya. I can't give a full conclusion until we hear more about Stadia in a few months. I can definitely say it has captured my interest way more than this news subscription thing Apple has been drumming up these past few months. I will continue to follow Stadia up to its launch to see if they make any revolutionary announcements.

Rolando Makes a Return to the App Store

For my tenth birthday, I got an iPod Touch, and I have so many fond memories of it. So many apps I owned then are no longer available today. Super Monkey Ball, We Rule, and countless others. They just haven't been maintained for the most part. And the other day, I was thinking of one of my favorite games, Rolando. Rolando was a game heavily advertised by Apple in the early years of the iPhone. It was a fun platforming puzzle game that demonstrated the accelerometer feature of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Rolando: Royal Edition will be returning to bring back some of the nostalgia of the early days of the App Store. It is a remaster of the original game. It is available for pre-order for $1.99, which is 60% off the full price [Direct Link].

This does beg the question of whether other apps and games could do the same. Rolando comes from a time where you would buy a game and you owned it. Today, it's hard to find apps that cost more than 99¢. It's all about in-app purchases or mining your personal data or processing power today. I think it would be cool to see a return to form for some part of the App Store. It's not going to happen just because that's not how money works, but I do long for those days sometimes.

Apple's AR Glasses

Whenever Apple announces a new genre of product these days, we usually hear about them years in advance. Take the Apple Watch. The long-rumored "iWatch" had a lot building up to it. The same goes for the AR headset that Apple has been working on for some time now. It's no secret that Apple sees a lot of future in AR, and these glasses would be the perfect medium for AR-based apps. Apple would probably be the best company to do it considering how many resources they've put into AR, in addition to Apple's stance on privacy. Ming-Chi Kuo is now saying that these glasses could be releasing in 2020, which feels relatively close. Whether this will be an actual trend or just another Google Glass will likely be up to timing.

New iPhone Features Page

Apple has released a new site for iPhone designed to show existing users some features about the iPhone. This site is very useful for those who don't know every nook and cranny of the their iPhone. If I could change one thing, it would be to put the Measure app closer to the top. This app is genuinely one of the most underrated utilities on the iPhone. Think of when people realized they could use their iPhone as a flashlight. I get similar vibes with the Measure app. Overall, this page is a nice tips page for iPhone users, but I wouldn't suggest it for an Android user considering switching to an iPhone, as it mostly touches on features that aren't mind blowing and can make iOS seem dull without any context.

Apple Looking to Social Media to Improve Siri

Siri is notorious for its constant mistakes when compared to other smartphone assistants. Siri’s goof ups are perfect material for a short tweet. Now, Apple has posted a job listing that will check how Siri is perceived by the world on the internet. This would effectively be finding issues that are common on the internet and reporting them to the team that works on Siri. Most people are finding this as either the world’s slowest knee jerk reaction or as job that shouldn’t exist. Siri has so many issues, it’s hard to believe hiring someone to look up issues on Twitter would do much. Siri needs improvement, that’s for sure. How to get that improvement is up to Apple, but it needs to be effective and fast. 

Why I Trust Amazon More Than Google

Occasionally, you hear the debate between Amazon Echo and Google Home. Which is the better smart speaker? And it eventually boils down to someone bringing up the issue of privacy. Some people say they trust Google before Amazon and others say vice versa. As in the title, I would trust Amazon with my data before Google if given the choice. With Google, it's made very clear that you are the product. Google makes way more money using your data than they ever could selling a product given their operation. Meanwhile, Amazon's operation relies heavily on selling physical products, so you have a better picture of where Amazon gets a good chunk of their income from. In addition, they run Amazon Web Services, which powers so many web-based operations around the world.

This isn't to say that Echos are completely innocent. But, I would trust my data with an Echo before a Google Home. What's the worst an Echo can do? Recommend me dog treats on Amazon after hearing mentions of a dog? Google knows every detail about you to produce a unique digital footprint across every site you go to. A microphone in your house leaves no stone unturned for Google. In short, are any of these smart speakers completely innocent? Likely not, but I believe that some can be trusted over others.

The Music App Needs An Overhaul

I am a loyal Apple Music subscriber. Yes, I do have occasional gripes with the service, but for the most part, it gets the job done. I think the general rule of thumb is if you use iOS, use Apple Music. Otherwise, use Spotify. There are some key differences in the services, but most people will not notice them. The biggest difference between the two that everyone will notice is design.

Apple Music has this weird pink and white blend while Spotify has their iconic green and black design. I genuinely cannot figure out how Apple thought this design was good, nor how they haven't fixed it yet. The previous design was so much better, but was so short-lived (I think it lasted about two years). Most people have moved on to using darker primary colors with light accents. It's modern and so much easier on the eyes. I think a black and blue color scheme would work way better, blue as a subtle nod to the old iTunes logo. I would've said orange, since it references the old Music icon pre-iOS 7, but black and orange gives off a weird Halloween vibe.

Aside from this, a new Music app should revolve around a proper centralized "start screen." It should be modular, like an Apple Watch watch face (I think several apps could benefit from this idea). When I open the Music app, show me this page. It will have a row of music that I have picked myself. This row can consist of playlists, albums, artists, and so on. Think of it as a quick access area. Another row will have recently played music. Then, an audio source row. This row has all audio devices my iPhone can AirPlay to. Apple TVs, Smart TVs, HomePods, Amazon Echos, AirPods, Beats, the iPhone's speaker, and so on. This list changes based on what devices are powered on, nearby, and available. A checkmark appears on the audio source that will play music if you tap a song. Finally, a row for Apple's curated playlists. These can cycle throughout the day. Road-trip playlists, workout playlists, and so on.

You may notice some of these elements are similar to the "For You" tab in Apple Music, but that tab feels so static. It's not really "for me." It's one interface for every user. Yes, the music that appears is different, but not everyone cares about Artist Spotlights or "Heavy Rotation." The point with my idea is that it's fully customizable. You can add and remove different rows at a whim. What I described was just an example, but I would imagine there being way more rows to pick and choose from.

In short, my ideas may not be for everyone. But, I do believe that Apple Music and its users would greatly benefit from a major overhaul to the design and interface of the Music app. Hopefully, we get some news like this for iOS 13 at WWDC this year.

The Potential of Foldable Phones

Samsung unveiled their Galaxy Fold phone today. As the name suggests, the phone is foldable. It also starts at $2,000. I think it's funny when people called the original iPhone expensive, but now phones costing $1,000 isn't unusual. But, let's put price aside. Modular phones were hyped up, but quickly died off. Phones aren't about compromise, but about tailoring the experience around a small screen. But I do think Samsung's execution of their Galaxy Fold is a good one. In practice, I think it would be cool to use a phone-sized screen on the go, sit down, and switch to a more tablet-sized screen. It would make tasks like internet browsing, reading, and video watching more enjoyable. Of course, that all relies on making sure the apps are compatible. I feel it would work better in an iOS environment, just because Apple is really good with making their apps work on multiple screen sizes without much extra work from the developer. Will it catch on? I have no idea. I think the phone looks pretty ugly when it's folded. I also think it may be self-deprecating. Aside from being easier to fit in my pocket, why not just buy a 7-inch tablet and have cellular on it? If users find themselves only wanting the unfolded form, they'd probably just go for a phablet. Samsung does seem to be testing the waters with this phone, which is why it was announced alongside the Galaxy S10. If the Fold concept flops and people don't end up buying it, the mainline of Galaxy phones won't be affected. I am looking forward to the reviews of the Galaxy Fold when it comes out April 26.