Apple among finalists for 2008 Life Science Industry Awards
Posted by Dennis SellersApple is among the finalists for the 2008 Life Science Industry Awards, which recognize life science suppliers that are best-in-class in both product categories and customer communications and support categories. The 45 finalists represent the five companies receiving the highest overall scores in each of 20 award categories. The finalists...
-
Apple announces deadline for Design Awards
Filed under: Software, WWDCApple has announced the submission deadline for the Apple Design Awards (ADA). The ADA take place every year during the World Wide Developer Conference, and recognizes the best efforts in several categories including user experience, overall application, student project and more. Previous winners include Coda (best user experience 2007), CSSEdit 2.5 (Best Developer tool, 2007) and Comic Life (Best New Product for Mac OS X, 2005). New this year is the iPhone category, which should be very exciting. The deadline for the 2008 ADA is May 12.Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments
-
Forbes Prints Insanely Self Serving Attack on iTunes by MediaNet CEO Alan McGlade
Daniel Eran DilgerForbes, best known to many readers as the soapbox Daniel Lyons used to promote--perhaps unwittingly--a pro-Microsoft agenda backing SCO and vilifying Linux and open source, has taken another opportunity to present outrageously false information serving the interests of Microsoft: an impassioned outcry of rage over the success of iTunes.This time, rather than using a journalist Forbes gave its bullhorn to Alan McGlade, the CEO of MediaNet Digital. Although not identified as such by Forbes, his company supplies the music library behind MTV's Urge, Yahoo, FYE, and the Zune Marketplace, all of which are Microsoft’s partner Windows Media DRM stores. I wonder if he has anything bad to say about Apple and its music business?[Daniel Lyons: Fake Steve Jobs and the SCO Shill Who Hated Linux]Tear Down This Wall!In a rapturous plea to abandon Apple, McGlade complained that "In a flat, digital world, walls don't need to be torn down. Thanks to online file sharing and social networking, people are able to go over, under and through walls." No doubt the company stocking Microsoft's Windows Media stores would like nothing more than an open playing field where everyone could compete. Oh wait, companies already can. Stores like eMusic profitably sell MP3s online next to iTunes, and Apple has made no efforts to erect barriers to sales of open music on the iPod. Apple does stop DRM providers from using the iPod, and this incenses DRM providers like Real and Microsoft.The other problem for companies selling egregious DRM is that customers hate their business models. People don't want to pay to rent music, or they would be. They have had lots of opportunity to do so.McGlade is bitter to have partnered with Microsoft--the most deviously anticompetitive and monopolistic company in technology and the biggest proponent of the most restrictive types of DRM--only to lose out in the music business to more permissive and liberal stores like Apple's iTunes and the popular iPod, which will not support anti-consumer Windows Media DRM at all.[Of Apple And Oranges - Forbes]McGlade Cries Over His Own DRM Failure. McGlade weeps out a portrait of his own failure, writing, "How is it then that one of the world's most innovative technology companies has managed to erect its own exclusive, and so far impregnable, kingdom? A relatively small percentage of world music sales occur through digital downloads. But, those that do, happen mainly through iTunes, Apple's online music store. "It's hard to remember any one company establishing such total control over a segment of our culture as Apple has on digital music. The iPod accounts for 70% of personal music player sales, while iTunes is estimated to direct more than three-quarters of all music downloads."Yes it is easy to forget about Microsoft when you are bound to the company's teat. With some objective perspective, perhaps even McGlade could recognize that he bought into a deal that was 'guaranteed to win' because of Microsoft's 97% monopoly hold over computers worldwide. But he lost, and miserably so, as he points out. Now he wants the market to pay him without having to compete. McGlade expects the world to ‘correct’ his defeat because he is simply owned profits for offering DRM in partnership with Microsoft. Sorry McGlade, you have to earn your money.[Microsoft’s Outrageous Office Profits]Double Locked Down!"Apple has maximized its dominance of the digital music market with a double lockdown." McGlade says, but leaves it somewhat unclear what either of those locks are. "The combined clout of iPod and iTunes is mutually reinforcing and gives Apple enormous marketing leverage." Is the iPod at all locked to iTunes music? No, in fact we know, as McGlade earlier pointed out, that downloads only amount to a small percentage of music on all music players, including iPods. Most music comes from users’ own CDs.McGlades' comment is particularly saturated in hypocrisy because the stores he represents--as a competitor to iTunes--are mostly geared toward subscription plans, and therefore lock users to to a specific store and lock them to a monthly fee. That's the real double lock down, but McGlade doesn't want his readers to think about that. He just wants their money.[BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple]Remember: Apple is the New Microsoft.McGlade then describes how Apple is defining popular music, and that it has the power to promote music on the front page of iTunes. He warns that "as digital devices diversify [through the imminent adoption of Microsoft-partnered players]... music lovers will inevitably seek digital music from a multiplicity of sources [selling music from MediaNet]."This makes lots of sense! I know when I find a grocery store offering good deals on everything I need, I run to competitors to see if I can pay more to sign up for subscription memberships that will bill me whether or not I shop with them.McGlade then describes Apple as the Orwellian "Big Brother of the digital music scene." In case you didn’t get the memo that’s being passed around by every flack in the business of shilling, Apple is the New Microsoft, and so consumers should revile the company and flee to the safe harbor of Microsoft, which is now, logically, less of a Microsoft than Apple.Forbes’ Lisa DiCarlo paints ugly pictures of Apple at every opportunity, but really outdid herself with the 2005 headline “Is Apple The New Microsoft?� which castigated Apple for its lawsuits against bloggers. In the same year, Daniel Lyons advised in Forbes’ “Attack of the Blogs� that, “you can't stop bloggers from launching an allout attack on you or your business if that's what they decide to do--but you can defend yourself.� So which is it Forbes?Since then, the idea that “Apple is the New Microsoft� has been aped by such objective thinkers as Paul Thurrott of Windows Supersite, and supreme shill Mike Elgan, the former editor of PCWorld. How they can claim that Apple is bad for being like the company they have made excuses for over the last two decades is difficult to explain. Fortunately, they’re still wrong.[Microsoft Surface: the Fine Clothes of a Naked Empire][Paul Thurrott's Merciless Attack on Artie MacStrawman][Myth 4: The iTunes Monopoly Myth]Forbes' Fraud in Photos.We don’t expect much from Thurrott and Elgan. We might expect more from Forbes. However, in a move that erases any suggestion that Forbes is objective and honest in the information it publishes, McGlade and Forbes put together a slide show of stomach churning, false information that goes far past disingenuous and lands directly in a patch of flat out fraud.The first slide depicts a “DRM is Killing Music" t-shirt featuring an iPod. McGlade says "It's through proprietary DRM software that Apple enforces iTunes/iPod exclusivity." Except that that is a lie. The iPod doesn’t use DRM at all unless users chose to buy tracks online, which only a minority of users do.He then notes that things are changing, starting, he says, with Universal and WalMart. He also notes that "Apple, to its credit, has embraced this shift, offering DRM-free downloads on its site. However, every other retailer chose to offer-DRM free in the open MP3 format except for Apple."This is all very convincing except for the fact that we all know that Apple shocked the industry by announcing the first DRM free deal with EMI. Other groups slinked along later, offering a few MP3s only when browsing Windows-only sites as WalMart does. Apple sells its music in AAC format, which is as open as MP3, but more technically sophisticated and easier to license. McGlade is working hard to associate DRM with the iPod, but he’s withholding the truth to do so.The second slide of misinformation depicts the clunky failure of the Zune, along with a McGlade caption that notes "Serious competition [to the iPod] has emerged in the past year or so, and its impact is beginning to be felt." No it hasn't. The Zune is a joke and a major failure. Microsoft is losing billions in its consumer electronics efforts in order to establish a monopoly position in music with Windows Media, but is failing. McGlade is just sorry to be on the losing side, and is scrambling to tell us that up is down. [Ten More Myths of Zune]More Promotional Zune Fraud.McGlade dives deeper into the toilet to fish out a third slide, which depicts a man in a wireless cafe using a Titanium PowerBook, photoshopped to obscure its Apple logo and further tampered to include what appears to be fake Intel and Windows stickers. To what further fraud will Forbes stoop?Dear Forbes: your next assignment to is photoshop a VW Beetle to look like a generic car, and then use it in an article assailing Volkswagen for being too much like General Motors in the 1970s.But what does a doctored Apple laptop at a hotspot have to do with the music industry? "Samsung, Sandisk and Microsoft's Zune were the first to innovate with features like wireless, access to music subscription services, unprecedented battery life and larger screens,� the caption announced. “Fast wireless puts the 'music anywhere' dream within reach.�The Zune did include WiFi, but it was completely worthless for anything apart from draining the battery. Microsoft limited it solely for use as a way to send exploding commercials to other Zune users. It was Apple that delivered the first and only WiFi music store, delivering the supposed 'dream' of buying music anywhere. McGlade makes no mention of this because he makes no money on sales through iTunes.[iPod vs Zune: A Buyer's Guide]Enter the iPhone."While Apple has scored another hit with the iPhone, the company will posses only a tiny segment, about 1%, of the global cellphone market in the product's first year." McGlade wrote. He should have said, "1.5% of the market in its first month," but his version sounds better for rivals. Why would he need to lie about the iPhone in a music article? "By 2008, hundreds of millions of these phones will employ standard Microsoft software that will make them compatible with most download stores and subscription services." Because that "standard Microsoft software" would sell McGlade's MusicNet content, he has to desperately overreach to suggest that the future will suddenly change and consumers will somehow get excited about Microsoft's truly awful Windows Mobile products, despite their being a complete failure on the market even prior to the release of the iPhone. Microsoft only has a tiny scrap of the smartphone market, about 5%, despite representing a broad selection of phone makers for half a decade. Apple outsold every one of those models in its debut month, selling at a premium price. That adds up to a wide spectrum of flacks, shills, and desperate CEOs ready to bad mouth Apple for their own loss in supporting Microsoft.[Secret iPhone Details Lost in a Sea of Hype and Hate][Apple: iPhone Now Costs Less than Ballmer's Lame Motorola Q]Music Anywhere.The next slide describes diverse devices that can play digital content, and depicts a Pioneer car CD player, which can play MP3 CDs and the radio. That means it can play CDs burned with iTunes, including purchased tracks, but not subscription music or WMA DRM.It strangely makes no mention of AirPort Express or Apple TV and their ability to play iTunes content wirelessly to home stereos or TV, or Apple’s lead in iPod integration with car makers, or its deals with airlines to plug the iPod into in-flight audio and video playback systems. That would undermine the intent of the photos. Besides, Forbes just printed an article by Scott Woolley which pretended that Apple TV was a huge failure compared to the massive losses behind Tivo (tens of millions per year) and Microsoft (billions).As reader Timothy Bandy pointed out, “overall, TiVo-owned subscriptions totaled 1.71 million, up 136,000 on an annual basis compared to the year ago-period.“So if Apple sold 250,000 Apple TVs, it's already doubled the amount of new customers Tivo made last year; or to put it another way, they already have 1/7th of Tivos' customer base without hardly trying. And as you pointed out, I doubt they've lost several million bucks in the process.�[Scott Woolley Attacks Apple TV in Forbes, Gets the Facts Wrong]Double Locked Down Subscription Services.Touting the double locked down rental music business McGlade represents, the next slide notes, "subscription services, which allow unlimited access to millions of music tracks for an average set monthly fee of $10 to $15, have been around for some time." Yes, and have failed miserably! "But with the advent of wireless-enabled players, phones and home devices, they are just now poised to deliver on an awesome promise: access to virtually all recorded music, anywhere, any time." How? Ubiquitous networking "may soon render the idea of exclusive music ownership obsolete." In other words, no CDs for you. You will rent what MusicNet sells you, and you'll like it at whatever price they set. You can rent access from any Microsoft/MusicNet store you chose, and play it on any Microsoft PlaysForSure or Zune player you pick, just not both, because they’re aren’t compatible with each other. Both are, however, double locked down.Music You Want.Speaking of which, McGlade reaches out embrace Latinos and Christian music buyers by advertising two specialty web stores that sell music from... well, you-know-who: MusicNet. For this shameless and desperate advertisement / hit piece masquerading as news, Forbes gets a Zoon, as does MusicNet and its shameless CEO, Alan McGlade. Good luck trying to sell it, they’re worthless! I crank them out like paper money.What do you think? I really like to hear from readers. Comment in the Forum or email me with your ideas. Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast! Submit to Reddit or Slashdot, or consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!
-
Todd Sullivan: Round 2
On his own site now, Todd Sullivan fires back at the Macalope, asking Is That The Best You Got? Well, the Macalope doesn't know about "the best". It was OK, he supposes. Good for a Wednesday night. But "best"? Hmm. That's kind of asking a lot, Todd. It's not like yours was very good. Why should the Macalope have to do all the work? But if you want to go another round, the Macalope's got the time. His nightly frolic with the nymphs doesn't start for another hour. Sullivan's site, incidentally, has those awesome keyword ads that everyone loves so much that pop up all over the place like whack-a-moles that just hit a vein of underground crack. As Merlin Mann has noted, they are really useful for first-time visitors to the site because they're a quick way of knowing you won't ever be back. So, now it is CNET taking swipes at yours truly for having the audacity to doubt all things Apple (AAPL). Actually, CNet takes no responsibility for the Macalope's writings. They were really clear about that! So, the Macalope's words are his own. As for doubting all things Apple, please note that the Macalope has been known to agree with criticism of the fine folks in Cupertino from time to time. He just asks that it make sense. This one is priceless..... Well, thanks, Todd. That's really nice. He then cherry picks sentences from the post to make the math seem impossible. The Macalope's not sure how that would be possible as you didn't actually do the math in your post. More to the point, though, what he said was that the particulars of the math didn't even really matter, because the underlying premise stinks. Where did the number come from? Apparently he has never heard of these little publications called the New York Times, or CNN or MSN Money? Too bad because had he even attempted to read them, he would have found the sources of the numbers and save a whole lot of typing and embarrassment. Uh, yeah, see the thing is, Todd, if you click through to those links you provide, they don't show the math either. Or even name a name. The New York Times: For Apple, the booming overseas market for iPhones is both a sign of its marketing prowess and a blow to a business model that could be coming undone, costing the company as much as $1 billion over the next three years, according to some analysts. "Some analysts". Hmm. Well, that's not terribly elucidating. How about CNN? The growing usage of unlocked phones could cost Apple $1 billion in lost revenue over three years, analysts said. "Analysts". Huh. OK. MSN Money? This could cost the company about $1 billion in lost revenue over the next three years, analysts estimate. Yeah, OK, starting to see a trend here. Well, "analysts", whoever you are, as the Macalope's 9th grade chemistry teacher Mr. Robinson was fond of saying, "Please show your work. Because it's bound to be pretty funny." It is unfortunate but he based the whole article (rant) on the flawed assumption I made the number up. Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd! The Macalope did not. He based the whole article (rant) on the assumption that the number is based on crappy assumptions. You didn't make it up, you just took it at face value because it fit this preconceived idea you've been humping for the last year. Let's move on: Yes, let's. Responding to the Macalope's example of unlocked phones in China, Sullivan says: Well, or maybe China mobile has figured they can put 400,000 iPhones on their network without paying Apple a dime, why negotiate a deal and start paying them now? Todd, this actually proves the Macalope's point, not yours. If there's no way they can get the favorable revenue sharing they get from AT&T then how is Apple supposedly forgoing it? Is this thing on? Test. One, two. Check. Check. Check. Then he moves on to question (mock) my thought that Apple's cutting back on component orders can only mean sales are going to slow. Can we be clear on what the Macalope was questioning (mocking)? He was questioning (mocking) the implication that this is somehow surprising. The first quarter is always slower than the fourth quarter and, yes, Apple has cut that already lowered estimate even further. Of course, you can't tell how much of that is because of iPods and how much is because of iPhones, but the Macalope fully admits that iPhone orders might be lower than hoped for in the first quarter. It's not exactly like the economy and/or the tech sector is going gangbusters. Timing is everything in life and had he waited 2 more days to post, he would have again saved himself the inevitable embarrassment of this being affirmed on Thursday. See, you're still acting like this is "news". It's not. Again, this recent report confirms the previous report which confirms what Apple said in its conference call with investors in January. To quote: "Apple has slashed its 2008 NAND order forecast significantly and has informed suppliers that its demand growth will slow in 2008." OUCH... Yeah, and that's all got to be the iPhone, right? It's not like Apple makes anything else that uses flash memory. He then goes into some wandering diatribe about Research in Motion (RIMM) or Google (GOOG) coming out with new products somehow does not matter or should be dismissed? I can't figure out what the point was. The point is, Apple will also come out with new products. Everyone will come out with new products. The fact that one phone maker will come out with a new product means nothing unless you know something about those future products that makes them inherently better than the other company's future products. And, as you admit, you know nothing. As for the gPhone which you spookily allude to, the Macalope will just quote Panic Software's Steven Frank: Hm, a 34-company committee overseeing an open-source suite of mobile software. What could possibly go wrong. Now, some of the Macalope's antler scratching over Todd's "analysis" probably stems from the fact that he says he was only considering the U.S. market. Frankly, the Macalope didn't catch that assumption, probably because it's not spelled out anywhere. It does explain why he said RIM was #1 and it conveniently allows him to dodge the embarrassment of having to explain why he thought all 10 million iPhones had to be sold to existing AT&T customers. (And even then, he got the number of AT&T cellular customers wrong, saying it was 47 million in May of last year. At the end of April of 2007, AT&T had 62 million wireless customers. But that's really beside the point.) Comparing Apple sales that until recently were only in the US would have been unfair. And you certainly wouldn't want to be that! The irony here is that had I done a post that claimed Apple was a distant third in market share, I am sure his response would have been to attack me for an unfair comparison. See, the Macalope used to take a somewhat U.S.-centric view and a number of readers outside the States wrote in and said "Hey! Goober! What are we, chopped liver?!" And the Macalope said, "No, indeed, dear international readers. You are not chopped liver. You are fois gras." And they said "That's better!" Then a couple of days later they wrote back and said "Hey, that's just a fancy way of saying 'chopped liver'!" And then we all had a good laugh. Ha-ha! But, anyway, Todd, the fact of the matter is, the Macalope can't ignore the rest of the world, scary numbers or not. And your contention that while the Macalope pointed out that Apple was third he would have said it was unfair if you had done so really doesn't hold any water. Because, you know, it was the Macalope who pointed it out. See? Is there something wrong with selling phones in only a handful of countries and still being third in the world? That sounds pretty darn good. Why is the horny one supposed to have some kind of problem with that? All cell providers have revenue share agreements. They have them with software developers, providers, wireless companies etc.. it is the way the industry functions. It is the degree of the revenue share that dictates the exclusivity in Apple's case. The Macalope knows that other firms get revenue sharing, but that's not even the point. The point is, as you note, that Apple gets more revenue sharing because of exclusivity. What the Macalope is saying is that the $1 billion figure is simply a bogus multiplication of the revenue Apple gets from AT&T times the number of unlocked phones times the number of years. You can't do that. If you open the phone up to multiple carriers in a single market, the revenue sharing number is going to drop like a rock. If there's another way to come up with such a ridiculously large number, the Macalope is all ears and antlers. If only we could track down "some analysts"... There are two ways to play this game. One is to open up your phone to every provider, sell a mess of them but get very little extra per phone sold. The other is to lock it to one provider, sell fewer phones but get a whole lot extra per phone. Apple's predilection when entering a market is lower volume and higher margin. And when you're a company that puts emphasis on selling products that "just work" (or, at least, "just work" better than your competitors' products), starting with one provider makes more sense. None of this discussion takes into account the changes AT&T needed to make to enable visual voicemail and, more importantly, the control over the user experience it ceded to Apple (activation alone was a huge sea change -- moving it from the store to the customer's home). Other carriers were reportedly not willing to make such concessions, but it was critical for Apple because ease of use is one of its primary differentiators. One last thing... he has not mentioned in any of his "posts" that my call before the first phone was sold on the need to drop the price of it was DEAD ON.... Well, the Macalope wasn't aware it was his job to run around patting you on the back for your brilliance. Why is he supposed to keep track of all of your posts when you clearly don't keep track of his? See, you wrote: A $599 phone will not gain mass acceptance no matter what it does... To which the Macalope responded: Like a monkey typing on a keyboard, you've finally typed something that's true. Looks like the Macalope actually agreed with you on that particular point! Yay! We both win! High fives all the way around! Long-time readers may remember that as the post you're referencing as the one where you also said that no one wanted an all-in-one device and that you wanted to be able to drive your family down the highway, listen to music and talk on the phone all at the same time. Yeesh. Are you sure you really want to call attention to that particular oeuvre?
-
Article: 2008 Best of Show Winners Announced
iLounge's annual Best of Show awards are designed to recognize standout products and major innovations in iPod, iPhone, iTunes and/or Apple TV products and services. This year, iLounge considered hundreds of newly announced 2008 products, planning to award as many as 20 Best of Show awards to deserving recipients. On January 16, 2008, 13 winners were selected, with an additional 10 finalists selected as runners up. Here are this year's…
-
BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple
Daniel Eran DilgerThe BBC has joined the London tabloid press in printing a series of articles skewering Apple over invented suppositions based entirely upon misinformed speculation and some outright lies. The worst part is that the BBC is being grossly hypocritical in its misinformation campaign against Apple, because the company is up to its eyeballs in the Microsoft-encrusted scandal surrounding its proprietary, Windows-only iPlayer imbroglio.[UK Tabloids Pick Up Zoon Awards for Technical Incompetence]Beyond Spin: Bill Thompson Wades Through BBC Hypocrisy to Spread False Information.It's bad enough that the BBC needs to bend facts to support fear, uncertainty and doubt about the iPhone. Now consider that the BBC--as a public corporation funded by British TV license taxes--is building its web video strategy on failed, proprietary technology propped up by an internationally convicted monopolist. At the same time, its publishing a uninformed rant based on speculation and conjecture that accuses Apple of doing things that approach the gravity of its own activities.This hypocrisy slows from the words of Bill Thompson, who followed the crowd in reporting that Microsoft's failed appeal in its EU monopoly case says less about Microsoft's established, anticompetitive practices spanning the last thirty years than it does about Apple's iPod popularity over the last five. Thompson weeps for Microsoft because "its every move is examined for evidence that it might be making life difficult for its rivals," while noting that "some of its competitors seem to get a very easy ride." One might expect the BBC to make excuses for the crimes of its iPlayer partner as it giggly walks lockstep with Microsoft in using the company’s proprietary and Windows-only DRM for video distribution of its publicly funded content.[BBC's iPlayer's Prospects Looking Bleak - Slashdot]Thompson's Specious Attack on Apple."The best example of this [easy ride] is Apple," Thompson announced, because the company got so much coverage for the iPhone despite it being "closed, locked down and restricted." Actually that's not a good example at all, because Apple doesn't have a market monopoly in mobiles. Apple has also never been convicted of monopolistic behaviors in the UK, the EU, or the US because it doesn't have a monopoly and doesn’t act to stop competition the way Microsoft has. Thompson admits that the iPhone doesn't leverage monopoly control among mobiles, but says "the situation is very different" in the area of music players and music downloads. What is this very different situation?"Apple has spent much time trying to ensure that anyone who buys an iPod is completely locked in to an Apple-centred world," Thompson wrote, "in which they use iTunes, buy from the iTunes Music Store, purchase only Apple-certified iPod accessories and, ideally, abandon their plans to migrate from Windows XP to Vista and instead purchase a shiny new iMac." Yes, Apple does want to sell Macs and serve its customers. However, it's simply a lie to say that iPod users are "locked into" anything, let alone being harmed by not being able to migrate to Vista, which Apple actually supports on the iPod and iTunes.Users are not locked into iTunes Music Store purchases; recall that the wags like to point out that a tiny minority of the music on iPods is purchased from iTunes and the vast majority comes from ripped CDs. Purchased tracks from iTunes can also be effortlessly burned to CD for use other other players, following the most liberal and open fair use rights in the industry. Thompson simply lied.
Saying that iPod users are locked into Apple-certified iPod accessories is also not true at all. Apple tries to earn licensing revenue from putting a "made for iPod" logo on devices in the same way Nintendo puts its "seal of approval" on its games, but anyone can deliver iPod accessories, and there's no way for Apple to stop headphones and boomboxes from working with the iPod. Thompson lied again.
His first idea was that iPod users are locked into iTunes. Yes, Apple sets up a system that's easy to use out of the box, but users aren't forced to use it. The iPod can be used with a variety of other applications, or even wiped clean and used with completely alternative firmware like RockBox. Again, Thompson just lied.[Time for Apple to face the music? - BBC NEWS]Thompson Lies Some More: Ringtones.In order to jump from lying about the iPod with generalities and get into specifics, Thompson announced, "the recent launch of the new range of iPods, including the video Nano and the iPod Touch, has shown just how far Apple is willing to go to make life difficult for its users in order to shore up its dominant position in the market for music players and downloads." He backed up his claim by browsing for some sensationalist headlines, doing zero fact checking, and then printing his findings with an enraptured spin that is simply shameful hypocrisy coming from anyone working for the BBC.First, Thompson complains, Apple now sells ringtones and doesn't support homebrew attempts to copy ringtones to the iPhone. Yes, this is unfortunate. Users shouldn't face limitations from using their own song clips, and they shouldn't have to pay extra to carve out a ringtone from songs they purchased or already own. However, this isn't entirely Apple's decision because it has to answer to the labels. It's not illegal, and it has nothing to do with anticompetitive monopoly dominance of the music industry. It's really the opposite: an opportunity for rivals to compete against the iPhone by offering a nicer way to play "My Humps" when their phones ring. So far, the US ringtone industry revolves around $2.50 - $3.00 clips that expire after several months. Thompson lied with a half story and a false premise that do nothing to support the idea that Apple has a monopoly.[Apple's iTunes Ringtones and the Complex World of Copyright Law]Thompsons Lies Some More: Video Output.His second proof that Apple is "shoring up its dominant position" is that "it seems that the new generation of iPods will not output video through cables or docks that aren't Apple authorized and have a specific 'authentication' chip." It seems? Why doesn't Thompson point out that he read some high pitched conspiracy theory about why older cables and docks don't work with the new models, and is presenting it as a proof of anticompetitive, monopolist behavior without even checking the claim out?The reality is that all the new iPods continue to support the same docks as they did, but their video output has changed due to using different hardware. The Nano and Classic continue to work with old docks and cables, while the Touch and the iPhone will require a new dock connector cable because they now output both composite and component video. They work differently; no conspiracy, no spy authentication chips. The iPhone and the latest generation of iPods will work via a dock connector cable without a dock unit, so there's no chip involved. Even if there were, it would not be illegal for Apple to sell proprietary cables such as those that come with the Xbox, the Zune, the Palm Pilot, and most every music player and mobile phone on the market. The only difference is that Apple has kept its dock connector the same over the last several years so that iPod customers can reuse their old cables. Even if Thompson doesn't understand the issues and didn't bother to look into it, presenting false information as facts to support an idea that they do not support is still a lie. [An in-depth iPod Touch review: Video output differences - AppleInsider]Thompsons Lies Some More: Linux Music Management."The nastiest little change is to the iTunes library itself," Thompson wrote. Apple made minor changes to the metadata database used on the iPod. When this change broke unauthorized music management software, some Linux advocates announced press releases saying Apple was persecuting them and trampling their rights to use the iPod. It turned out that the outcry was simply overwrought, and that a fix was easy to deliver. What Apple had really done was improve how the iPod stores its data so that it would be less susceptible to file corruption. Apple doesn't officially support the small minority of people who use the iPod with Linux or alternatives to iTunes on other platforms, so it bears no accountability for fixing their homebrew software when it makes changes to its products. It might be valid to complain that Apple should offer such support, but ignoring Linux has no relationship to establishing a monopoly or market dominance. If Apple was offering a locked in, anti-consumer product, it wouldn't have open source users buying its product in the first place. Unlike the Xbox and Zune, Apple doesn't stop users from installing Linux or RockBox on their iPods, a difference Thompson can’t seem to grasp. Thompson admitted that Apple "will not limit copying or restrict attempts to strip digital rights management code from tracks" and "will not stop people adding non-DRM files they have downloaded from the internet to their library," but then jumped at the opportunity to speculate that Apple is shutting out Linux users, as if Apple would prefer Linux users to either install Windows or buy a music player elsewhere. Which scenario helps Apple "maintain music dominance?" It's an inane argument.Irresponsible Open Source Mouths.Remember when the EFF irresponsibly announced its speculation that Apple was stuffing megabytes of personal information into iTunes tracks? It later recanted, but didn't apologize for the false accusation. The fact that open source advocates are quick to fire out accusations but commonly shrug off any accountability for what they say makes their comments very hard to take seriously. Thompson's uncritical, uninformed parroting of such accusations is not only stomach churning, but egregious given the BBC's wholehearted support for a video distribution system that unilaterally forces people to use Windows to access content that is not available elsewhere, as iTunes music is.Thompson keeps going, castigating Apple for stopping Real from selling its own flavor of DRM that promised support for the iPod, and impugning Apple for supposedly having "business practices do not stand up to scrutiny." Thompson added, "when it comes to music downloads it [Apple] is just as bad as Microsoft on servers."Oh really? Do you have to pay Apple client access licenses for the right to connect your iPod to iTunes or to access the Music Store? Does your music die after three plays or three days? Do you have no choice in the market for MP3 players apart from devices that run the iPod firmware or use Apple’s iTunes software? Equating Apple with Microsoft would be foolish for anyone to do, let alone some misinformed, generalizing, sensationalist wag writing for a public corporation that ties its video downloads to Microsoft's Windows-only DRM.Thompson's Faulty Conclusion to a Shoddy Article.The great model of interoperability, Thompson points out, is Microsoft's PowerPoint. That's because Apple was able to deliver Keynote with PowerPoint compatibility. "Apple can sell Keynote because it took PowerPoint apart and figured out how the files work," Thompson explained.Perhaps Thompson doesn't get it: Apple's ability to maintain compatibility with PowerPoint is just as tenuous as Linux users' ability to make iTunes-compatible song management software for the iPod. Microsoft doesn't support standards in PowerPoint. It uses a crufty, weird, undocumented, proprietary format that changes with every release. That's why the industry is aligning behind Open Document as an international standard, and why Microsoft stuffed ballots in Cuba, Azerbaijan, and Sweden to fast track the establishment of its own proprietary formats as a false "standard" without having to answer the concerns of worldwide standards organizations who overwhelmingly determined that Microsoft's OOXML format was problematic and technically inferior.Oblivious to all this, Thompson announced, "had Apple been unable to do so [reverse engineer the proprietary PowerPoint format], or found that every time it figured out what was happening Microsoft changed the format, it would have complained loudly." Apparently Thompson has been paying no attention to technology over the last two decades as the world community has complained about Microsoft's doing just that.[Office Wars 3 - How Microsoft Got Its Office Monopoly][Office Wars 4 - Microsoft’s Assault on Lotus, IBM][Myth 4: The iTunes Monopoly Myth]The reason Microsoft was on trial in the EU dates back to complaints filed in 1998. The independent US monopoly trial followed up on earlier complaints from the FTC and Department of Justice. Similar complaints haven't ever been filed about Apple's iPod business, but rather only about the arcane, territorial pricing of music established by the big labels, most of whom are owned and managed by European companies.The EU certainly should fix the problems of the music business in its countries, and demand fair use provisions from music and media providers. However, trying to spin the complex situation off as proof that Apple is anything like Microsoft is not only disingenuous, it's an outright lie. Using a bunch of half-baked, ignorant web rumors to support a position that Apple should just allow anything and everything is also dishonest. Doing all of this speciously false complaining while standing on the Microsoft-enamored soapbox of the BBC just makes Thompson look even more incompetent and clueless about the reality around him. What do you think? I really like to hear from readers. Comment in the Forum or email me with your ideas. Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast! Submit to Reddit or Slashdot, or consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!
-
'setteB.IT': Apple wins four IDEA 2008 design awards
Posted by Dennis SellersBy Fabio M. Zambelli Apple has won four IDEA 2008 design awards. Co-sponsored by BusinessWeek magazine and the Industrial Designers Society of America (IDSA), the IDEA awards aim to foster business and public understanding of the impact of industrial design excellence on the quality of life and the economy.
-
Apple TV's "failure" depends on your yardstick
It's a slow news week. So what better to add spice to your life than Phillip Swann, president of TVpredictions.com, who claims that Apple will dump Apple TV by the end of 2008. He also doesn't put any facts behind this prediction, relying instead on estimates of 400,000 units sold as the basis of his argument. He also complains about the $300 price tag which he seems to think is excessive considering that it only lets you buy videos from the iTunes store.Now I'll be the first to admit that the Apple TV value proposition is incomplete; I've been expecting Apple to offer high-definition movies and rental content for the Apple TV for more than six months now. And why haven't they done so? That's simple: for Apple to provide HD content and movie rentals, they need deals signed with the movie studios, and the movie and TV studios fear Apple having as much power in their industry as it now does in music. So instead, Apple now has hardware in the field waiting for the content that makes it valuable to the consumer.But that 400,000 estimated sales number isn't the damning evidence that Swam thinks it is. That number from a Forrester Research report that we've noted has some logic flaws before, and follows up on its earlier incorrect claim that paid media can't ever compete with free TV (Comcast, HBO, and Showtime will be very upset to hear that given the billions they make from paid media) and Forrester's incorrect claim that iTunes music sales were slowing back in January). Quick quiz: how many dedicated HD DVD and Blu-ray high-definition players have been sold in the US, excluding game consoles? Turns out that the TOTAL number of HD-DVD players sold to date after almost two years is about 750,000, of which 269,000 were sold as attachments to XBox 360 game players, leaving only about 580,000 as pure high-def TV players. The Blu-ray numbers are similar: There have been about 2.7 million Blu-ray players sold to date in the US, but those include all Sony Playstation 3 gaming consoles. Subtract out the roughly 2.5 million PS3s in the US, and Blu-ray is left with only 200,000 or so stand-alone players. Suddenly 400,000 Apple TVs doesn't look bad, not bad at all. Oh, and last time I checked, consumers had to pay hundreds of dollars for those devices that allow them to play high-definition content, a flaw which Mr. Swammi claims dooms Apple TVOne more point: I was in a recent brainstorming session for a client with about 20 or so other consumers. At one point, one gentleman from the audience struggled to articulate what he wanted an upcoming product to work like, and he ended up raving about his Apple TV, which was small, easy to use, and produced beautiful results, particularly with his home photos, on his HDTV (he didn't get the memo that the lack of HDTV content made it a failure). So even without HDTV content, Apple TV isn't a failure in consumer minds; Apple adding HDTV content could be as explosive a boost to its fortunes as the iTunes store was to the iPod.The bottom line: Yes, Apple could decide to cancel Apple TV. But my bet is that they won't, since by my analysis, they will be #2 in the high-definition TV movie player market when they release high-definition content. The only thing that could stop them would be the movie studios deciding that they don't want their content distributed by Apple to consumers. And given that Apple customers have been proven to provide more revenue to music labels than the general population, that would be the movie studios loss, not Apple's.One final bit of irony: Phillip Swann, the analyst who posted this prediction, didn't write it. He posted the prediction on YouTube. So far as I know, the only way you can easily sit down at your HDTV, pick up your remote, and watch Mr. Swann's predictions without firing up a computer is, you guessed it, to use an Apple TV.Full disclosure: the author was a Forrester analyst until 2002 and is long Apple at the time of writing.Technorati Tags: Apple, Apple TV, Blu-Ray, Forrester, HD-DVD, HDTV, TVpredictions.com
-
Ultra-portable MacBook display rumors surface
Filed under: Laptops Apple rumor mill aficionados, prepare for action. According to reports that are making their way out into the public arena today, the Cupertino monolith has placed orders for a new type of 13.3-inch LED backlight unit, destined to be used in an as-yet-unannounced product... like, say, a new ultra-portable MacBook. The "news" here, as divulged by "industry sources" is that Kenmos Technology and Taiwan Nano Electro-Optical Technology (Nano-Op) have recently become suppliers to both Apple and Dell for the aforementioned goods -- meant to be used in "high-end models" -- with a shipment of over 90,000 units this month. Those numbers are expected to rise to 200,000 before year's end, and 300,000 during Q1 of 2008. Whether or not this tips the scales in favor of a new Apple MacBook is questionable, but it certainly provides some food for thought.[Via AppleInsider] Read | Permalink | Email this | CommentsOffice Depot Featured Gadget: Xbox 360 Platinum System Packs the power to bring games to life!
-
Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News
Abysmal auto sales. U.S. auto sales plummeted 36% in December, depressing industry volume in 2008 to a 16-year low. Vehicle sales for the year totaled just 13.2M, and the pain is expected to continue into 2009. Breaking U.S. December sales down for individual automakers: Ford (F) -32.4% to 138K units vs. -33% consensus, with market share of 14.6% up 0.77% from a year ago. Honda (HMC) -34.7% vs. -36% consensus, with 2008 sales of 1.28M (-8.2%). Toyota (TM) -37% to 142K units vs. -40% consensus, with 2008 sales down 16%. General Motors (GM) -31% to 222K units vs. -41% consensus, with total deliveries up 67K (+43%) from November. GM delivered 2.98M units for the year (-23%) for a market share of 22%. Nissan (NSANY) -30.7% to 62K units, and 838K for the year (-10.9%). Toyota cuts production. Following dismal 2008 auto sales and rapidly growing inventory, Toyota (TM) will suspend operations at all of its Japanese factories for an additional 11 days between February and March. Toyota had already planned a three-day suspension at most of its Japanese factories for January. The rare output reduction is expected to have a ripple effect through its subcontracting firms, including auto suppliers. Fed enters MBS market. The Federal Reserve began buying mortgage-backed securities issued by Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and Ginnie Mae yesterday, the latest in its unconventional efforts to kickstart the economy. The aim of the program is to provide an incentive for buyers to return to the housing market and to reduce monthly payments on existing loans. The $500B program has already had an effect, as mortgage rates dropped significantly in anticipation of the purchases after they were announced at the end of November. As of the end of December, the rate on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages was 5.03%; some analysts expect the Fed to try and push the rate down to around 4.50%. Apple a day fails to keep doctor at bay. Addressing persistent rumors about his health, Apple (AAPL) CEO Steve Jobs released a public letter yesterday, explaining that he's in treatment for a non-life-threatening hormone imbalance and will continue as Apple CEO while he recovers. Shares rose 4.2% on the news, though not all investors were pleased with the lack of disclosure until now. (Read Jobs' letter) GE offers FDIC-backed debt. General Electric's (GE) finance division launched a $10B sale of FDIC-backed debt yesterday, the largest sale under the government guarantee program since it was created in November. GE Capital's offering includes $2B in two-year notes, $5.5B of 3.5-year debt and $2.5B of 18-month securities. The sale will push total issuance under the government program to $115B. Clearinghouses move forward. Nasdaq OMX Group (NDAQ) has opened a derivatives clearinghouse and has started clearing over-the-counter contracts tied to interest rates. The clearinghouse will be competing with rival platforms operated by Chicago's futures giant CME Group (CME) and European clearing company LCH.Clearnet. Separately, derivative exchange operators CME Group and InterContinentalExchange (ICE) are preparing to launch their respective CDS clearinghouses later this month once they receive final approvals from U.S. regulators. Logitech cuts jobs, forecast. Logitech (LOGI) withdrew its FY 2009 financial targets (which had already been reduced in October) and announced it will cut 15% of its non-manufacturing jobs in the face of the deepening global recession. The company will also take an unspecified one-time charge in its FQ4 ending March 31. "The situation is really bad," said Chairman Guerrino De Luca. "We're on really shaky grounds with the consumer. The situation is really unprecedented." Madoff off to jail? U.S. prosecutors are trying to have Madoff jailed for violating the conditions of his bail. Currently under house arrest, Madoff mailed over $1M worth of jewelry and other items to family and friends despite a court-ordered freeze on his assets. Germans eye more-generous stimulus. German lawmakers agreed on the broad outlines of a second stimulus plan worth €50B ($69B) over two years. The country's initial stimulus, worth €12B over two years, has widely been seen as inadequate to pull Europe's biggest economy out of an increasingly severe recession. Lawmakers are hoping to have full agreement on the package details by Jan. 12. Construction spending wobbles down. Construction spending in November fell 0.6% from the month before, better than the expected 1.3% drop, and was down 3.3% from the previous year. Residential private construction fell a heavy 4.2%; non-residential +1.4%. Earnings: Monday After Close Mosaic (MOS): FQ2 EPS of $1.53 beats by $0.10. Revenue of $3.01B (+36.9%) in-line. Shares -1.7% after hours. (PR) Today's Markets Asia markets closed mostly higher. Nikkei +0.4% to 9,081. Hang Seng -0.35% to 15,510. Shanghai +3.0% to 1,937. BSE +0.6% to 10,336. In Europe at midday, London +1.1%. Paris +1.2%. Frankfurt +1.5%. U.S. futures: Dow +0.7%. S&P +0.7%. Nasdaq +1.0%. Crude +2.7% to $50.14. Gold -2.0% to $840.50. Tuesday's Economic Calendar 7:45 ICSC Retail Store Sales 8:55 Redbook 10:00 Factory Orders 10:00 ISM Non-Manufacturing Survey 10:00 Pending Home Sales 2:00 PM FOMC Minutes 5:00 PM ABC Consumer Confidence Index Seeking Alpha editor Eli Hoffmann contributed to this post.
-
★ Notes and Observations Regarding Yesterday’s ‘Let’s Rock’ Apple Special Event
Overall Scope The overall takeaway from yesterday’s news is that Apple’s music and iPod business is right on track. There was nothing exceptional or particularly surprising, but the incremental improvements and changes were significant. A solid year’s worth of progress. One thing that wasn’t mentioned, though, and which has figured prominently in past music-related special events, was growth. In past events, the overview of iPod sales has included charts showing tremendous year-over-year sales growth. Not yesterday. Instead, the charts emphasized only market share and total unit sales since 2001. The news there is good — Apple has sold a grand total of 160 million iPods since 2001 and today commands 73.4 percent of the U.S. retail market (followed by Sandisk at 8.6 percent and Microsoft at 2.6) — but the lack of any braggadocio regarding growth indicates that the market is saturated. That’s not to say unit sales are decreasing, only that they’re no longer accelerating. Of course, one reason iPod sales growth has slowed is that iPhones aren’t included in the tally. (There was no mention during the event of how many iPhone 3Gs Apple has sold so far, however.) Growth can only come where there’s room to grow, which is why even Mac sales are growing faster than iPod sales. Speaking of Macs, contrary to speculation, there were no announcements regarding new Mac notebooks. Such speculation was misguided; Apple has held an iPod/music special event in September or October every year since 2001, and, to my knowledge, has never once used such events to announce new Mac hardware. Those of you holding out for a new lineup of MacBooks will have to wait until October 14, according to sources who, as they say, are familiar with Apple’s hardware plans. iTunes 8 The high-level new features in iTunes 8.0 are the new “Genius” recommendation engine, a revamped iPhoto-like grid view, a new visualizer, and improved accessibility on both Mac OS X and Windows.1 The Genius feature is exposed in two ways. First, you can create a new on-the-fly “genius playlists” by selecting any one song and clicking the Genius button at the bottom of the window. This creates a 25–100 song playlist based on songs in your library that the genius algorithm determines goes well with the song you started with. (The button is disabled if you select multiple songs, so you can’t start with, say, two songs and ask for a genius playlist of tracks that go well with both.) Second, there’s a new Genius Sidebar on the right side of the iTunes window. After opting in to the Genius system, the sidebar contains recommendations from the iTunes Store based on the first song in the current selection. (If you have more than one song selected, the Genius Sidebar only shows recommendations based on the first song in the selection.) The recommendation engine seems pretty damn smart. The genius playlists are a clever idea, like the shuffle feature but with a hint. After a few hours, I like the results better than either my own manual playlists or purely random shuffles. The store recommendations in the sidebar seem equally good, but imperfect, in that it sometimes recommends songs which I already have in my library, ripped from CDs. At first I thought the problem might be with the Genius engine not recognizing songs that weren’t purchased from the iTunes Store, but that’s not quite it, since it does correctly recognize most of the ripped-from-CD tracks in my library. For example, the Genius Sidebar’s recommendations based on The Beastie Boys’s “Sabotage” included “Intergalactic”, a song I already had in my library. The problem seems to be with track metadata; if, say, the album name on the track in your library doesn’t exactly match with the album name in iTunes, it doesn’t recognize it as the same song. If I select “Sabotage” and click the Genius playlist button, I get this error: Invoking the “Update Genius” command in the Store menu, as prescribed in the dialog, had no effect. The album name on my version of the track, ripped from CD and filled in by iTunes using the CDDB database, is “The Sounds of Science (Disc 2)”. The version from the iTunes Store has the album name “Beastie Boys Anthology - The Sounds of Science (Box Set)”. Changing my copy’s album name to match the iTunes Store’s made no difference either — iTunes still claims “Genius is unavailable for the song ‘Sabotage’.” The new visualizer is stunning. The old one remains available (View → Visualizer → iTunes Classic Visualizer) but it’s hard to see how anyone wouldn’t prefer the new one. In the details, iTunes 8 introduces a few noteworthy changes. The Preferences dialog has been simplified. Podcast settings are finally adjustable on a per-podcast level. Visually, in the new grid view, Apple has introduced yet another new scrollbar flavor — black ProKit-esque buttons with a dark gray background. But the scrollbar thumb itself is the same as iTunes’s regular slate-blue scrollbar thumbs (which don’t look like system-standard thumbs) — except when the window is not frontmost, at which point the scrollbar thumb changes to dark gray, rather than light gray. New grid-mode scrollbar, active. New scrollbar, inactive. And speaking of background windows, the main iTunes window now supports click-through for a small number of elements, including everything in the toolbar (e.g. the playback controls) and scrollbars. iTunes 7.7 did not support click-through for these elements. NBC and HD TV Shows NBC withdrew its TV programming from the iTunes Store last year. As of yesterday, it’s back. It’s hard to see that NBC gained much of anything in the form of concessions from Apple. NBC executives stated publicly that they wanted Apple “to take concrete steps to protect content from piracy, since it is estimated that the typical iPod contains a significant amount of illegally downloaded material.” I.e. they wanted Apple to somehow magically prevent iPods and iTunes from playing NBC content obtained from sources other than the iTunes Store. That didn’t happen. NBC also wanted variable pricing for its shows. They sort of got that, in that library content — old shows like “The A-Team” — are available for just $1 per episode. But NBC also wanted to raise prices for episodes of popular new shows, and that did not happen. Standard-def episodes of all new shows on iTunes remain at $2. High-def shows are $3, but that’s not variable pricing — it’s the same for all HD shows, not just NBC’s, and as far as I can see all HD TV shows in the iTunes Store are also available in SD. There are no shows which are only available in HD. It’s a win for everyone — Apple, NBC, and customers — that NBC shows are back, but there’s nothing NBC has today that they wouldn’t have had if they’d never pulled their shows from iTunes a year ago — except for millions of dollars in lost revenue. New iPods The hard-drive-based iPod Classic continues to fade toward irrelevance. Last year it was available in two capacities, 80 and 160 GB. The bad news is that it’s now down to a single capacity, 120 GB. The good news is that it’s in the same slimmer form factor as last year’s 80 GB model, and at the same $249 price. To my recollection, this is the first time that the size of the highest-capacity iPod has gone down year over year. Jobs stated during the event that the 80 GB model out-sold the 160 GB model, but for those people who value maximum storage capacity above all else, a 40 GB drop is significant. The design effort regarding traditional click-wheel iPods all went toward the new Nanos. On the outside, they’ve returned to the long-and-narrow form factor, abandoning last year’s “fat Nano” design. And they’re now available in a full spectrum of vibrant colors: all six colors of the original Apple logo, plus pink, silver, and black. In a change from previous years, all colors are available in both capacities — 8 GB for $149; 16 GB for $199. On the inside, Apple added an accelerometer, which allows the display to rotate when you rotate the iPod. Video plays horizontally, and when you rotate the iPod to horizontal while playing music, it switches to Cover Flow mode, just like with the iPhone and iPod Touch. You can create “genius” playlists directly on the Nano. It even has a voice recorder, which works if you connect a microphone. Even the iPhone doesn’t ship with a voice recorder app.2 The iPod Classic gets none of these new features other than genius playlists. The new iPod Touch gets closer to being a thinner iPhone sans phone. The original iPod Touch lacked hardware volume controls and an external speaker; the new Touch has both. Significant price reductions bring the prices closer to the selling prices of the subsidized iPhones: 8 GB for $229, 16 GB for $299, and 32 GB for $399. (I strongly suspect these new prices for the Touch are the margin-reducing “product transition” Apple alluded to in its quarterly finance call in July.) The portable gaming angle was promoted heavily during the event, and is the crux of the “Funnest iPod ever” slogan. Apple is clearly positioning the iPod Touch as a competitor to handheld gaming devices from Nintendo and Sony. Discussing the 2.1 release of the iPhone OS (available as an update for iPod Touches now; slated for release for iPhones this Friday), Jobs was brutal regarding the quality of the 2.0 release, saying: “2.1 software update is a big update. It fixes lots of bugs. You’ll get fewer call drops. You will get significantly improved battery life, for most customers. We have fixed a lot of bugs where if you have a lot of apps on the phone, you’re not going to get some of the crashes and other things that we’ve seen. Backing up to iTunes is dramatically faster. And so just a lot of bugs have been fixed.” His tone wasn’t so much apologetic as it was scornful.3 One gets the feeling Steve Jobs was about as happy with the problems in the 2.0 iPhone OS as the rest of us. Even if you’re not hearing or vision impaired, you may well benefit from these accessibility improvements. Better support for Mac OS X’s Accessibility APIs directly correlates to improved UI scriptability of the app itself. These two tweets from Nicholas Riley show one example — using AppleScript to determine whether iTunes is talking to AirPort Express. That wasn’t possible until iTunes 8.0. ↩ There are numerous voice recorder apps available in the App Store, of course. ↩ In the video stream from the event, this bit starts around the 48:35 mark. ↩