Thoughts on the iPad 2

First of all I would like to clarify that this is not a review, I don't think I'm qualified to pass judgement upon a product of such advanced engineering. I originally had an iPod touch for about 18 months and almost immediately I fell in love with iOS. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon at all, I'll explain. During sometime in late 2009 I was watching that famous interview of Steve jobs where he said Microsoft had no taste, but the statement which struck me the most was when he said that Microsoft never brought any culture into their products. I was quite confused and skeptical when I heard El Stevo say that. Because like so many others who had never experienced Apple's products, I had always thought of technology as nothing more but a means to an end, something which you use everyday but have no spiritual common ground. However after falling in love with iOS I realized that in a way, after you get used to having such a capable device in your life, you can't really regress back Into a lesser form factor of media consumption. Hence after having a lengthy love affair with iOS on the iPod touch, I decided to pop the question (metaphorically!) and buy an iPad 2. I love it. The user experience I have had with this thing has been phenomenal. Blazing quick hardware. The flash conundrum solved by buying a very capable and affordable flash enabled browser. A fantastic integrated AppStore (something which can't be said for Android since they have to have a different app store for each new iteration of Android). I could go on for hours. It's a very intimate relationship you share with this thing as there is a lot of physical manipulation involved with your computing on the iPad, whether if it's cropping a photo or playing a game you are more guided by your natural intuition of touch rather than the usual software protocols of a keyboard, this may not sound like a big deal but when you have a beautiful 9" touch sensitive screen, even doing homework becomes fun, and I totally mean this. A major reason I wanted to buy iPad was for content creation on the go, I was apprehensive that it wouldn't work out, boy was I worried for nothing. The iWork suite is fantastic. Pages especially is excellent, it offers full functionality, anything you could ever want to do on a document you can do on pages. Guaranteed. I was especially impressed with it because it's rather like a cousin of the iPod music player, because you can get to any feature you want within 3 or four presses of the button, for a mobile word processor, that certainly deserves credit. So kudos Apple, kudos. Pricing is usually something I've never seen eye to eye with Apple, but for a device of its capabilities, it is the best NZ$770 I ever spent. If you think it's just an oversized iPod touch, it's absolutely untrue, because quite honestly, it's common criticisms fall away in the face of it.
iLove my iPad.

Thoughts on the free software foundation and it's philosophy.

I recently discovered Richard Stallman and his free software foundation. To sum him up succinctly, his stance is that All software must be of a nature that does not decentralize the power between users and developers. That the users should have the right to change the source code as they see fit and to distribute the modified recipe as they please. So in this context, free doesn't mean price, but as in freedom or autonomy in ones own computing. Obviously he is the father of Linux if you haven't guessed already.

Dr Stallman also claims that Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X directly violate these basic "rights" by discreetly coding a lot disgusting back door programs intended for malicious purposes such as to spy on the user and restrict the users freedom in computing.

Ethically, I have a lot of respect for this philosophy, yes, it would certainly be ideal for one to be able to access the source code to change the program as one see's fit, but technology has mutated beyond recognition since Dr Stallman's 1980's heyday. Back then, computing was as robotics is today; a hobby, an underground technology if you will, something which wasn't mainstream and in the public consciousness yet. So back then, it wouldn't have been of great consequence if everyone would have had the right to do as they please.

However in the 21st century, software isn't really a technology, but more of a society. Peoples lives are ever increasingly dependent upon the Internet and computers, so to have the free software foundation's vision of a lawless, frontier of an environment would be inherently chaotic. Because not everyone is as ethical as Dr Stallman ( or at least as he claims to be).
If cyber crime is already such a massive problem even with the regulations in place, imagine how much of a problem it would be had the world followed the vision of the FSF? I shudder to contemplate how much of an insecure place the web and computing in general would be.

So proprietary software, even though it is annoying at an everyday scale, is a necessary evil. We need boundaries, we humans can't be trusted to play nicely without any supervision. Computing will increasingly become more of a sophisticated society for humans, and we need regulations.

I can't help but think that you don't need to worry about your privacy being invaded if you are leading an ethical life anyway, so all in all, I must say I disagree with the views of Dr Stallman and his foundation, he obviously is one of computing's most important pioneers, but his idea of an open development society is too optimistic and impractical in my humble and honest opinion.

The Stallman conundrum

The blogosphere these days is more excitable than a woman going through menopause. Richard Stallman's "eulogy" of Steve Jobs caused quite a stir, but for what? Are dead people really beyond being subjected to the opinions of other people? All Dr Stallman did was to was to reiterate that he was glad that Job's overwhelming power and influence (so much so it was almost sinister)in the industry and in software was finally gone. What's the big deal? It's not as if he had insulted or attempted to besmirch Steve's unquestionable legacy. So grow up guys, enough with the iLove for Steve already, he's in a better place now.

iPhone 4s - The new Vista?

So i woke up today and immediately switched onto the blogosphere to read about the new iPhone and not even in my most pessimistic guess could I have imagined this.

Apple of all companies should realise that the typical consumer of today is much more well informed and confident of their own judgement.

Therefore the common expectation with any new design of an iPhone is that it must absolutely be of a new design. There is no escaping this due to the fact that a cute looking product is one of the main ways Apple differentiates itself from it's competitors and maintains it's rockstar image and most importantly; ensures it's position as the stock market's darling. So it's a baffling move that Apple hasn't catered to this rather primal taste. I mean seriously, how hard would it be for a certain Mr Ive to whip up a cute looking design twist? Duh!

Another huge point of concern is the price, I'm sorry but NZ $800 for an 8Gb iPhone 4 suggests an almost cavalier disregard for such a loyal consumer base. Quite simply put, Apple doesn't deserve this loyalty.

I would say that right now the only Apple products which are fairly priced are the iPod and the iPad's. I was also bewildered when the iPod touch wasn't given an A5 chip as well, to me this is a wrong turn as I think this could have posed as a real alternative for potential smartphone buyers who don't want to rob themselves by buying an iPhone with it's ridiculous pricing.

As sorry as Iam at Steve Job's death I can't help but think that this is a rather tame and uninspired product refresh. It would be heartbreaking to see this iconic company's spirit die with it's founder, I hope fervently that this is not the case.

Rest in peace Steve Jobs.


I'm just surprised at what Apple been doing for the last 16 months, in the Android universe that's a couple of generations!

Why I think this generation of MacBook Pro is not worth buying.

I love Apple. I love their devices. I love iOS. I love how shiny my iPod Touch is. But what i dont love is when Apple thinks it knows whats best for us when it comes to functionality, and sells us that sexy but brainless glamour model instead of the intelligent but ugly girl-engineer.

Yes, the MacBook pro is the glamour model, and the girl-engineer is most Windows laptops being produced by the orifices (Dell, HP, Acer and Toshiba). You might I have noticed i didnt label Windows laptops as PC's, mainly because i don't want to give Apple the sense of market differentiation that their current generation of laptops don't deserve, and the minor fact that it is an axiomatic error.

Firstly both the 13" MBP's doesn't have dedicated graphics, nor the option to upgrade. Given their NZ$2000-2500, it is disgraceful. Instead they've named it "Intel HD 3000", a lovely and impressive sounding title glossing over its dirty little secret of integrated graphics. This is the first of the deal breakers.

When Thunderbolt was announced to ship with all future releases of any Mac, i was excited. I couldnt wait. I was happy about how Apple had differentiated itself from the orifices yet again and hadnt sold its soul to USB 3.0. Then in my elevated high I hurriedly followed the link to Thunderbolts' storage peripherals website and by smile vanished off my face quicker than the amount of provocation Steve Ballmer needs before he starts screaming "Developers, developers, developers". NZ$1600. That is the lowest priced external storage for Thunderbolt. I refuse to consider Thunderbolt as a high speed transfer output until their peripherals are actually the price of their units, not the patents themselves. Speaking of outputs there isnt even a HDMI output, and two USB 2.0 docks spaced so very conveniently together so that you probably have to buy a hub to accommodate your peripherals. If people like Sheldon Cooper on Big Bang Theory are reading, THIS my friends is sarcasm.

Screen resolution is another wet towel to my soap and you-know-what. 13" MBP's have native resolutions of wait for it....1366 x 768! That is the standard resolution of any equally equipped or better Windows laptops, usually 15" as well.

After years of scrutinizing Apple products, I can confidently say that Apple purposefully make their products flawed in some aspects, to keep the dogs( that is the Apple Fan-boys and the Macintosh faithful) to keep lapping the water at the bowl and lick their master's feet. Yes, I mean the folk up at 1, Infinite Loop, Cupertino. This time they've gone too far.God have mercy on your digital souls.

How can the new iPod touch be approved?

OK, let's cut to the chase. Apple's rumored October event is around the corner, and we're all expecting an iPhone 5 and a new crop of iPods, right?

Now, it's no mistake that I gave iPods second billing in that sentence. The iPod line doesn't print money for Apple the way it once did, especially now that the iPad and iPhone have entered the spotlight. Still, the iPod Touch continues to sell well as the often overlooked third pillar of iOS.

Apple needs to do more to bolster its star iPod, but what more can it do to improve the iPod Touch and keep it selling in spite of the allure of its higher-profile siblings? So let's put on the thinking cap, break out the crystal ball, and try to piece together the future for the iPod Touch.

Make it thinner
Gadgets can never be too thin, right? This is especially true for any iPod, which must fight desperately for pocket real estate in today's world of gigantic smartphones.

The problem is that its current 0.28-inch depth is already barely adequate for fitting today's standard headphone minijack.

Apple could give it a wedge shape, like the Macbook Air, keeping ports on the fat end and thinning to a blade at the other. Or, it could go without the headphone jack altogether and create a boon for the Bluetooth headphone market.

Regardless, thinness alone is not going to make the iPod Touch a holiday must-have. Apple must have something else up its sleeve.

Photo of the iPod Touch headphone jack.

The headphone jack on the 2010 iPod Touch takes up nearly the entire width of the device.
(Credit: Donald Bell/CNET)

Make it white
I want to laugh, but sadly, this is probably true. Now that there's a white iPad and a white iPhone, you can bet there will be a white iPod Touch. How about a gold one to mark the iPod's 10-year anniversary? No? Too much? Yeah, probably.

Make it 3G
I've been over this one before (exhaustively). An iPod Touch with the iPad's no-contract 3G cellular service would shake up the mobile industry and give antisocial misfits like me a way to text, tweet, and e-mail without the whole awkward voice calling thing.

Unfortunately, there are reasons to believe a 3G iPod Touch won't happen. For one, it would cannibalize iPhone sales. Two, carriers might not support the device if it presents too much of a threat to their business. And finally, the 3G hardware would bloat the design and the price.

Photo of iPad 3G.

If there's a reason Apple is keeping the iPad's 3G capability out of the iPod Touch, it's just as much a political concern as a practical one.


Better cameras
I really hope this one is true. The exceptional photo quality of the iPhone has always been part of the secret sauce that's made it such a hit. Unfortunately, the iPod Touch uses an entirely different sensor and the results are less than spectacular.

Rumor had it that the iPod's thinner design made it impossible to fit the iPhone 4's camera sensor. Perhaps technology has advanced sufficiently enough over the past year to solve the problem.

Faster processor
While we're collecting all the low-hanging fruit, let's assume Apple will upgrade the iPod's processor to at least be on par with the iPad 2's dual-core A5 chip. With any luck, more power will translate into faster performance, and smoother gaming.

Glasses-free 3D screen
Lord, let's hope not. You're better than that, Apple. Let's not resort to gimmicks. Plus, remember that whole lawsuit about iPods making people deaf. Imagine the lawsuit in store for Apple when parents are convinced the iPod's 3D screen is melting their kids' eyeballs.

Price drop
Right now, a $399 iPod Touch (64GB) is just $100 away from a 16GB iPad. That math seems off. Make the base 8GB model $149 (kill off the Nano while you're at it, or take it down to $99) and you'll make Nintendo weep as kids unwrap their iPod Touch from Santa and pour money into your App Store and iTunes store.

Lose the dock connection
Apple has already made it perfectly clear that the new version of iOS allows you to activate and sync devices without physically connecting to a computer. It calls the feature PC Free, and the icon shows a pair of scissors cutting away the dock cable. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to put this one together.



Users can sync their media and contacts via iCloud, and continue to download new content through the mobile iTunes and App stores. You can stream content via Bluetooth or AirPlay. The world becomes wireless, and Apple gets to brag about pushing you into the future.

You still have the problem of charging, but I'm sure Apple could whip up some MagSafe style connection from its MacBook line or go with some newfangled inductive charging system.

What's the payoff for Apple? Well, aside from preserving its legacy of pushing the envelope, it gets to extract one less component from the guts of the device, giving it room to make it thinner. Add this to the theory about it ditching the headphone jack and you could really start making an obscenely thin device.

Apple will also benefit from the flock of third-party accessory developers who will need to create new solutions for charging and streaming media from these connection-free devices. That means a lot of AirPlay licenses, as well as whatever proprietary charging standard it comes up with.

Bigger screen
If Apple really wants to differentiate the iPod Touch from the iPhone, why not give the thing a bigger screen? Make it the Goldilocks device between the iPhone and the iPad.

A 5-inch screen like the Dell Streak's would be really interesting. It's still small enough to fit in your pocket, but the added screen real estate is a great match for games, video, and e-books (sorry, iBooks).

Final thoughts
Some of these ideas will undoubtedly filter into the iPod Touch we see next month. A few probably won't emerge until next year, and some may never happen at all.

In my experience covering Apple announcements over the past four years, these things are always a mix of surprise and disappointment. Inevitably, Apple gives with one hand and takes with the other, always leaving you wanting more but still reaching for your wallet.

If Apple is in top form this fall, I suspect the new iPod Touch will be yet another beautiful, flawed, but nonetheless drool-worthy gadget for us all to rant and rave over for another year.

Tax.

It's a word people today hate, yours truly included. I'm not going to lie to you saying I believe we should just hand over a sizable percentage of our earnings to the government so that it can be out to use for the "betterment of the nation". I hate this notion as much as anyone. The taxation system everywhere in all nations is flawed in almost every aspect. It's no wonder we citizens view tax as a bottomless pit which almost nothing good comes out of. This is because we are used to a system where when we pay money for something, we see an immediate, short term result. This isn't so with tax. We don't get to see what happens with our money, we just have to make do with the "annual budget" the government announces every year. It's of little wonder dissatisfaction is rampant as there is no transparency and more importantly the money is almost never used for each tax payer's individual needs. For example, students would like university fees to be further subsidized. Families with members afflicted with medical conditions would prefer health care to be taken more seriously. The politically aware and the paranoid would believe Homeland security and the defence budgets should be given higher priority. Humans are divided, selfish creatures existing to serve their own purpose, so wouldn't the best solution be to make the tax system typical with our usual notion of the function of money? In other words, we should CHOOSE what we pay tax for. We must have a restructured system with a publicly audited distribution medium so all citizens can monitor how the money is divided and spent. This is the best way where we the people can choose where our priorities as a nation lie. If we can choose what we pay tax for, people no longer have the right or reason to complain that their tax dollars are being wasted. Taxation can then almost be viewed as a type mandatory philanthropy, that's as close to utopia as we can hope to get.