Alice for the iPad

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gew68Qj5kxw

Video Chat Coming To The Next iPhone? All Signs Are Pointing To Yes

As they do with any major new iPhone OS release, people have been tearing apart the iPhone OS 4.0 SDK from the very second it was available. Almost immediately, someone noticed that bits and pieces of iChat had found their way into the new software.

By itself, it didn’t really make sense. The iPhone has plenty of incredibly solid third-party IM applications — some of them being amongst the App Store’s best sellers. Why would Apple be sneaking any parts of iChat onto the iPhone? Then the first mentions of a front facing camera were unearthed, and it all started coming together in the form of two little words: video chat. Alas, there was no concrete proof that Apple was following the same train of thought.. until now.

You see, much of iPhone OS’ underpinnings can be revealed through tricks called “class dumping” and “string dumping”. Through class dumping, you can take a peek into which frameworks and APIs are being used by any given application. (Ever heard of an application using “unpublished” APIs? This is how the developers found those APIs in the first place — and how Apple caught them, for that matter.) Through string dumping, all of the various bits of text pre-programmed into an app can be ripped out and displayed.

When the guys over at 9to5Mac started using the above techniques to explore the innards of the new SDK, it all came spilling out. There they were, in good ol’ plain English: references to video chatting, ranging from inviting users to terminating calls. More digging unveiled that Apple appears to be testing video chat on four servers: three privately located on Apple’s own intranet, and one which is (currently) open to the world (albeit mostly useless).

We spoke to our own sources, many of whom were tight-lipped on the matter. Of those who did pipe up, they were able to confirm 9to5’s findings, along with at least 30 other references to video chat support that went unmentioned. All of them — and us, for that matter — seem to be wondering the same thing: why the heck did Apple leave this in (semi-private) public view? Apple’s known for shrouding even the most minute details in secrecy; here, it’s seems as if they’re almost intentionally throwing many dozens of hints about an unannounced feature in a place where tinkerers were almost guaranteed to find it. Is Apple learning to love the rumor mill?

My current educated guess based on everything that has been whispered to me so far: I don’t think iChat, as an IM client that would compete with the third party apps, is coming to the iPhone — but that Apple will be using bits and pieces of the iChat core to power their video chat service. I’ll keep my ear to the ground for more.

 

http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/04/10/video-chat-next-iphone-hd-iv/

iPad Marriage Proposal: Congrats Zach, You Dork

From Zach Iniguez:

Hi TechCrunch,

I’m a huge fan of your blog and read it every day, and I thought you might be interested in this. This weekend I brought my girlfriend to a local ice cream shop where we had our first date. I also brought along my iPad, since I wanted to “field test” it, as I told her. We sat outside on the same bench we had 2 1/2 years ago, and I asked her to put on earphones. I then handed her the iPad and played a slideshow with music and photos of the two of us together, with a message at the end: “will you marry me?” I got down on one knee and proposed, and fortunately she said yes. Maybe Steve Jobs was right–the iPad is magical!

Thanks for providing me with years of news and entertainment.

Zach

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/11/ipad-marriage-proposal-congrats-zach-you-dork/

What Background Location Brings to the iPhone

In the midst of the SXSW festival last month, we reviewed a mobile social network called LoKast. Our one lingering question about the app's utility, at the time, was were we really going to run around town staring at our phone to see if someone else nearby was running the same app?

The answer was "no" then and is "no" now, but the difference now is that the iPhone OS 4.0 that was announced yesterday allows for background location multitasking. This opens up a whole new realm of experiences for the iPhone.

First, LoKast. LoKast is a self-described "disposable" social network. That is, as you move about and come near other people running LoKast, you can quickly interact with them. Then, when you move ot of range, you may never see them again. It is social networking based on location, without a persistent friends listing.

So now, with background location monitoring, an app like LoKast is actually feasible. I can turn it on, leave it running and wander around town and perhaps have it notify me when I'm within range of someone.

As Kim-Mai Cutler notes, background location also brings up some "slightly creepy" privacy concerns relating not only to applications running in the background, but also location based advertising. But what if you think about location based advertising like you think of iTunes' "Genius" function or all the other recommendation engine software you use?

It may be tough to realize that you are not quite the unique snowflake you thought you were and that, indeed, everyday around three you end up at the same coffeeshop, but wouldn't it be nice for your iPhone to realize this and get you 20% off? Without you even having to lift a finger? Well, fine, maybe you have to lift an iPhone.

The list of ideas for background location are endless. Of course, we'll have to see how quickly a battery gets drained with persistent GPS monitoring. Having the ability to let our phones deliver us information, as we move about the world, based on our location has some amazing potential.

Think of EveryBlock, the hyperlocal news aggregator that Marshall Kirkpatrick went ga-ga over when it arrived in Portland. The block-level delivery of news wouldn't even need to wait for you to check it any more - it could simply deliver relevant information as you move about your day. Real-time rideshare services like Avego and Flinc suddenly become that much more feasible, in fast-paced, real-life situations.

We could go on, but we have another couple of months before the next version of the iPhone OS comes out and we're already too excited as it is. What crazy, creepy or otherwise cool potential do you see with the new background location capabilities?

 

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/what_background_location_brings_to_the_iphone.php

Why iAds Could be Bigger Than iPads

Apple unveiled the 4.0 version of the iPhone operating system yesterday and a big part of the announcement was about a new advertising platform called iAd. Apple will soon provide an easy way for app developers to put advertisements in their mobile apps and keep 60% of the revenue.

Tech financial analysts are going bonkers over the news, with one headline-grabbing prediction putting the opportunity at $4.67 billion per year for Apple. Why? Because the platform has the potential to change online advertising like nothing else has in a long time.

Cullen Wilson offers this explanation on the Austin Startup Blog:

The reason iAd has a chance to change how users interact with ads is simple: The fear and unknown of clicking on an ad is gone. Apple is throwing its brand behind an entire ad network to create the perception that if you trust Apple, you can trust these ads too! Worried about installing malware from clicking on that ad? Hate that ads open up a new window? No problem, Apple has solved this by keeping these ads within the app itself and vetting all of the ads on their network.

iAd reminds me of two ad networks I'm already a fan of, The Deck and Fusion Ads. Their ads are well designed, they advertise in applications I use and love, and they vet everyone on the network before accepting them. If you've ever used the free Twitter clients Tweetie or Twitterrific, you've seen these ads.

If Apple can convince its users that it's safe to click anything with the iAd logo they will have single handedly changed the perception users have of ads, resulting in more clicks and more money made by both Apple and developers.

They will have done this by taking advantage of a closed system, their own brand, and a platform that their users already love (the app store).

The iPad is clearly changing peoples' experience with computing - take one out around non-geeks and you'll see strangers clamor to get their hands on it. But if Apple can transform mobile advertising from an annoyance to a trusted, appealing experience - that would be huge. The iAd platform could impact advertising more than the iPad impacts computing. It may very well generate more revenue, too.

Wilson points out that though many people complain about the closed nature of the App Store, this is the other side of the coin and is worth considering. One question I have about this is how scalable vetting such a huge ad platform could be. Where there's money to be printed, there must be money to pay ad examiners, though.

If the platform can prove effective and make app building all the more financially viable, then we as users can cheer for a new world of apps that will be built in the future. If Apple can deliver a high-quality experience on the iAd platform, then we as users can cheer for a less grating experience than a wild west of mobile advertising would likely deliver. There is something a little frightening about Apple's end-to-end control over the platform though, isn't there?

What do you think about iAd? Do you think it will be effective? Revolutionary? Do you think it's fair?

 

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/why_iads_could_be_bigger_than_ipads.php

Apple Gives Adobe The Finger With Its New iPhone SDK Agreement

Earlier today, Apple held its iPhone 4.0 event, where it showcased some of the new features the latest release of the mobile OS will offer. Just after that ended, Apple released a new beta SDK to developers, complete with a new developer license agreement. And nestled in that agreement is a passage that may have major implications for developers, and disastrous consequences for Adobe’s latest release of Flash: Apple has banned “applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer”.

So what does that mean? Apple may have just made the flagship feature of Adobe Flash CS5, which allows developers to port Flash applications to the iPhone, totally useless. John Gruber of Daring Fireball was the first to point out the change in the License Agreement. Here’s the relevant text:

3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

The ban appears to directly apply to the new Flash feature, but Adobe said it was still “looking into” the change when we asked them about it. Here’s the brief statement they sent us:

“We are aware of the new SDK language and are looking into it. We continue to develop our Packager for iPhone OS technology, which we plan to debut in Flash CS5.”

Should this affect Adobe, as Gruber believes it does, it would be a huge loss for the software maker — Adobe CS5 is due to launch in less than four days. It’s also an especially vicious move on Apple’s part, because it seems quite clear that Adobe didn’t know this was coming (they’ve spent many months marketing the upcoming feature, and it obviously took plentiful developer resources to build it). Adobe and Apple have been waging a vocal battle over the last few months, with tensions mounting as Apple announced that the iPad would not offer Flash support. The fact that Google and Adobe are now working tightly to improve Flash integration in Google Chrome probably doesn’t help.

There is still quite a bit of ambiguity as to who this might impact. One increasingly prominent tool that could be affected is Sequoia-backed Unity Technologies, which offers a platform for quickly designing three dimensional applications. In the original version of his post Gruber theorized that Unity may be affected, but he’s now less sure. Reached for comment, Unity gave us this statement:

“We have no indication from Apple that things are going to change. We have a great relationship with Apple and will do everything we can to comply with Apple’s TOS (also, these are ‘beta TOS’, and these easily get changed) so that we can provide uninterrupted service to our more than 120K users.”

In other words, nobody seems entirely sure what this means quite yet. But the backlash has certainly started. Many developers have taken to forums like Hacker News to voice their opinions, with the most up-voted comment stating “What a horseshit maneuver by Apple.” Some have taken to Twitter to denounce the move, with prominent developer Joe Hewitt (who was responsible for Facebook’s iPhone application for years) tweeting “So much for programming language innovation on the iPhone platform”.

If it wasn’t abundantly clear before, it certainly is now: Apple is playing dirty. It doesn’t care what the developer community thinks. It has the users, it has the media’s undying love, and it has an incredibly impressive line of products. If a developer decides to quit the iPhone over this move, that just means less competition for the rest of the developers looking to capitalize on the flourishing platform. The media may pick up on the story briefly, but most people don’t care, so it’ll move on. And the iPhone will keep selling like hotcakes.

 

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/08/adobe-flash-apple-sdk/

iPad Hits a Bump: Wi-Fi Woes Point to Apple Bug

Some new owners of Apple's slate computer, the iPad, are having issues with the device's Wi-Fi connection. Multiple forum postings, both on Apple's own support site and elsewhere, have users reporting that they're experiencing weak signals in an area where their other Internet-connected devices have no issues. Another common complaint, which appears to be related, is a dropped connection. Some iPads lose their connection to the Wi-Fi network, then prompt the user to re-enter the network password. But doing so doesn't work. The only "fix" seems to be either shutting Wi-Fi off and back on again via the settings, or worse, rebooting the computer...err...iPad.

Network Password?

There doesn't seem to be any determinable factor connecting the users experiencing the problems - different models of the iPad are in use, different routers, different security settings, etc. However, one name came up dozens of times in the forums: Verizon FiOS. A number of the complaints came from customers of Verizon's high-speed, fiber-to-the-curb service known as FiOS. Along with TV and phone, Verizon provides Actiontec-branded Internet routers to establish the home's Ethernet (cabled) and wireless networks.

We got in touch with the company, who had yet to hear of the problem at the time. After much research on Verizon's part, including speaking with members of their hardware teams and call center operations, it appears the issue has simply not crossed their radar.

According to Verizon's Media Relations Director, Jim Smith, the call center has not received calls from iPad owners about failed connections on the iPad, although some have phoned in for help setting up WEP security connections on the devices. He did, however, hear from one person on his team who said Apple had advised iPad owners to turn off WEP security. We could not confirm this to be the case, but it does match up with a few of the recommendations found on user forums. Those forums are hosted on Apple.com, so this is where the confusion may lie. For example, a customer reading the forums may have mistakenly assumed these were suggested fixes from Apple itself, and not from other affected users.

Smith also told us that, as of now, Verizon has no evidence that the connection issues iPad owners are experiencing are related to Verizon's broadband services in any way. iPad users among the company's own employees have also not reported any trouble, he says.

Apple Bug Resurfaces

We typically believe that statements like these are just PR gloss-overs of an issue, but in this case, we tend to believe Verizon. The reason? This Wi-Fi bug is not a new issue. It happened to iPhone users, too, when the iPhone 3.0 software, a mobile operating system upgrade released via iTunes, was launched a year ago. Several iPhone owners then experienced issues that mimic those now being reported by iPad users. In July 2009, owners of the latest iPhone, the iPhone 3GS, which had launched the prior month, also reported similar issues. Despite rumors that the fix would be included in iPhone OS 3.1 in September 2009, the issues remained. There have even been three additional minor OS upgrades since then, to no avail.

Apparently this is a bug that Apple just can't quash.

As far as we can tell right now, some people are having limited success by either disabling WEP altogether on their wireless network - not a good idea from a security perspective as it opens up your home network to public access - or by setting their routers to "G" only, when formerly set to B/G or "mixed" mode. (To the non-technical, those letters refer to wireless networking standards. "G" routers are newer than "B" routers, but older than "N" routers. Routers can broadcast in B mode, G mode, N mode or a "mixed" mode where they support connections to devices of varying ages and supported standards.) For what's it worth, neither of those workarounds resolved the issue in my tests.

Unfortunately, adjusting router settings isn't something everyday, mainstream users would think to do. Many of them buy Apple products because they're marketed as devices that "just work." Hopefully, Apple will soon live up to the image they've created for themselves and fix the Wi-Fi bug for good. In the meantime, learn how to reboot your iPad.

 

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/ipad_hits_a_bump_wi-fi_woes_point_to_apple_bug.php