I wrote an article for the Bagel Tech Network on the topic of Mac security, specially relating to a report published last week by F-Secure. Quite an interesting report in my view and I would, humbly, recommend you go check out what I had to write about it.
Harry McCracken wrote an article a few days back, where he muses around a laptop with iOS. He specifies many of the good properties of his current setup with an iPad and an external keyboard, and how it would be glorious if Apple decided to build a laptop proper, running iOS instead of Mac OS X. I don’t think that McCracken is wrong or that it’s a bad article. Not at all! I just have a different idea of how Apple will deal with something along those lines.
I just don’t think we will see a laptop running iOS as its main operating system simply because Apple wants to keep the two systems separate. The intended use-cases and intended types of devices are different and I firmly believe that Apple will keep it that way. There has been a lot of mumblings in the rumor underground that iOS and Mac OS X will become one in the very near future, often followed by some finger-pointing at Mac OS X 10.7 for proof of this statement. I think that is just a big misunderstanding of what is really going on.
The two systems are actually the same, to a certain degree. While the name for iOS is different it’s still very much Mac OS X tailored for running on an ARM processor along with a whole hoopla of customized API’s, not to mention that it’s built around the notion of all input coming from the touch screen as well as the many sensors in the device. Under all the specialization the code is most likely quite similar and will just as likely stay that way for the foreseeable future too.
One of the many features of Mac OS X from the start, back when it was NextStep, was the ability to port it to many different processor architectures, which was used by Apple to move from the stagnating PowerPC platform to the Intel platform. That same mentality and design process allowed Apple to be able to run pretty much Mac OS X on an ARM chip, namely in the iPhone.
Why the short history lesson above? Well, I think that it would be more likely that Apple moves Mac OS X to ARM than that we will se iOS run on a laptop. As I mentioned, being a highly portable operating system is one of the strengths of Mac OS X and I’m willing to bet that they have had it running on most imaginable architectures for some time. This includes ARM.
Apple doesn’t need to build a laptop that runs iOS when it can just move the best features from iOS to Mac OS X, as they have done in the case of Lion. As time goes on I think there will be no merge of the existing code bases, but rather that the most crucial functions will migrate between platforms depending on which platform gets the specific feature first. This would be an appropriate way of doing things in that it would save Apple, developers and users a fair bit of trouble in the short term. No new architecture to have to take into consideration as we did back in 2006 when things moved to a new platform the last time.
I do think that a move to ARM is in the cards, sooner or later. The advantages are many and Apple has quite a lot of staff specialized in the field now, after buying several companies over the last 6 years. As soon as there is enough computational power in the ARM chip to at least keep even pace with the Intel chips, Apple will move there as fast as they can. Slimmer devices, longer battery life and no more fan to make noises while we work away on our computers. The very same reasons that many favor the iPad in terms of hardware, over an Apple laptop.
So eventually I think Harry McCracken will get his dream machine, only it will be a MacBook of some kind. It’ll still be whisper quiet and blazingly fast, while not stealing attention from what you really want to be doing, but it’ll still be a Mac.
I remember watching Inspector Gadget on TV as I was growing up. It was and still is a relatively funny show, with a complete nincompoop, Inspector Gadget himself, as the main character. Loaded to the brim with all manner of gizmos and devices, he is essentially a walking, talking device of mass destruction. But despite being a bit on the dimwitted side of things, he was a likable character and has managed to stay around for quite a few years now. I guess it was inevitable that there would be a game starring the famous inspector sooner or later, specially for iOS since it’s such a popular platform.
Originally released quite some time ago, it was only recently I discovered it. I have never heard of the company behind its development either, but that doesn’t mean the game is either good nor bad. I had never heard of Chilingo before Cut The Rope either, so any given game can be awesome. Question is though; is Inspector Gadget’s MAD Dash a good game? Let’s find out!
The one thing I noticed from the get go, besides the horribly long loading time that made me think the game had managed to freeze up my iPhone, is that you might as well say Go, go gadget Canabalt gameplay, because that’s what you get. Again though, this does not have to be a bad thing, and I honestly think this is one of the better games I’ve come across for a little while now. The control scheme is appropriate for the format, since you only have to press the screen to activate the action. Harkening back to the ultra-simplistic games of yore with a one-button interface, but doing so in a functional way. Not bad at all!
Just like the aforementioned Canabalt, you run along rooftops and various locations, moving from left to right and having to avoid the obstacles that are in your way. Unlike Canabalt, you are going to collect a bunch of “Gadget Coins” along the way, the mandatory item you have to amass a great amount of in this game. The use of the coins is to serve as currency in the Gadget store where you can buy upgrades for Inspector Gadget, episodes of the original TV-series, ringtone, concept art, a soundboard and even unmask Dr. Claw. Since this is a “freemium” class of game, you can also spend real world money to get Gadget Coins, in case you are feeling impatient.
As far as game mechanics go, it’s pretty well balanced and responsive. The physics are appropriate and it feels like there is a certain weight to the good inspector, as he is courageously bouncing around on rooftops in an attempt to catch Dr. Claw. And that also happens to be everything I have to say about the story of the game, which really isn’t that horribly relevant anyway. Like in Super Mario Bros, it’s more of a reason for all the fun stuff to happen, rather than an absolute necessity for us to want to start playing. Just don’t expect works of Shakespeare in terms of writing!
As far as the graphics go, I think it has a nice look to it and it fits with the Inspector Gadget cartoon style. While smooth animations are an exception on my old iPhone 3G, the game is quite playable after some loading screens that take their sweet time to go away. The one thing I would like to whine a little bit about is the choice of font in the user interface; it’s pretty horrible. I guess it fits with the overall design, but it makes uppercase “G” and the number “6” look very similar. And it’s pretty ugly otherwise too. But otherwise it’s perfectly acceptable in terms of graphics and design.
Sounds and music is sampled right out of the TV-series and I personally find it to work really well. While other, usually older video games, have had the theme song of the original looping in the background for music, it never gets horribly tedious in Inspector Gadget’s MAD Dash. I guess partly because there is at least some variation to the musical style throughout the whole theme song as well as that it does have a fairly high quality. It adds to the general atmosphere, more than it ruins it. Sound effects are clever for the most part and things sound the way they “should”. Well done!
Right before you get to the game title screen there is a somewhat annoying ad of sorts, advising you to check out other games by the same company. I feel that this kind of advertising is some of the worst that the whole “freemium” concept has brought us. If I’m diving into a specific game, would I really be all that interested in being force-fed ads about other games before I even get to the title screen? I don’t think so. I have found no way to get rid of this screen so I assume it’s there for good and there’s nothing to do about it.
The Gadget Store is an interesting aspect of the game, as long as we leave the real world money out of the equation. By using the coins you gather while playing you can get upgrades that makes the game more enjoyable or easier to play. Or perhaps you just want to watch one of the episodes in the original TV-series? I tried it and it did take a while before it started, but once it had done all the caching it needed to do, it really looked good. No blur or stuttering and the sound-sync was good. Fairly impressive, although it does not add to the game per say, I still think it’s a nice touch for the developers to add it as a bonus.
All in all, I think this is a pretty good game. It’s well designed and respects the original material quite well, so if there are any die-hard Inspector Gadget fans out there I guess they will be happy with this. There is nearly infinite replayability since there is no real end and if you grow tired of one particular level, there are several others to choose from. While some might dismiss it at a blatant Canabalt ripoff, I think it stands on its own with the small additions to the gameplay it offers. And finally, quite unlike Canabalt you can also slip an a banana peel while jumping around on the rooftops. That is almost enough to make me think it’s just a teensy bit better than Canabalt. I mean, how can you argue with someone slipping around on a banana peel? While on a rooftop, no less!
Verdict: Good game!
Yes, there will always be idiot bloggers and ill-informed pundits clamorous for page views. I think as time marches on, writers who preach on the impending implosion of Apple will be held in the same regard as the sidewalk preacher claiming the world will end unless you repent and tithe.
Let’s party.
— Stephen Hackett, Our Time is Now — 512 Pixels
Source: 512pixels.net
I’m a huge fan of William Gibson and the works he has produced so far. In my mind Gibson is one of the most interesting authors active today. The Verge got a pretty darn nice interview with the man himself and I do recommend it.
Since over a year back there have been various rumors and speculation about wether there will be a bigger display, usually a size of 4 inches is tossed around, in the next generation iPhone. It didn’t happen for the iPhone 4, which a lot of people thought it would and it also didn’t happen with the iPhone 4S last fall. Why do I think that it is unlikely for Apple to put a 4-inch screen in the iPhone? Follow me, and I shall try my best to explain.
Physical size
In terms of physical size, the whole device would have to be bigger in order to contain the bigger screen. Under the assumption that Apple chooses the path of the least resistance, which would be a screen at the same resolution and ratio as the current display, the whole unit would have to be longer and wider because such a screen would no longer fit in the same dimensions as the current iPhone. Add to the mix that we still need room for speakers, microphones, sensors and the front-facing camera above and below the screen. There is no way to stuff a screen of the same ratio into the same physical dimensions as the current iPhone models.
Given that the 3.5 inch display size that has been in every iPhone so far has widely been considered the best average for most people, there aren’t really too many reasons for Apple to change the size of the display in any future iPhone. While some people might stand up and cheer at such an announcement, there are many, many more who would consider it too big to handle comfortably on a daily basis. Many people already complain about the size of their smartphone as it is today, and we have plenty of them around that are bigger than 3.5 inches as it is.
Resolution
If we make the screen bigger, we have two choices of what to do with the “extra” physical space we find ourselves with. Either we use the extra space for more pixels and increase the total resolution of the display, making it have more pixels than the 960x640 that the current 3.5 inch screen has. In doing so we introduce a compatibility problem with older software which does not take advantage or accommodate this higher resolution. If you stretch an old app to fit over the whole screen it wouldn’t get 1:1 pixel-mapping and it would look blurry as a result. Developers would also get another display resolution to think about when they develop apps for iOS, which will most likely not make any developer pleased.
Another option would be to keep the same resolution despite the difference in physical size, so it would be a 4-inch display with 960x640 resolution. But then we would have a pixel density of 288 pixels per square inch, a good 41 pixels less per square inch in comparison. This would lower the density under the barrier for what Apple themselves have coined “retina display”. While one could argue that most eyes won’t be able to see the difference anyway, I’m not convinced Apple thinks the same. Once Apple latches onto some sufficiently advanced technology that works well, it’s unlikely that they will degrade below it in any way in a future product.
Ratio
Theoretically Apple could put a much more widescreen ratio display in the iPhone, but in doing so they would introduce a new element of having to both make some hardware aspects smaller as well as taking care of software compatibility in software. Any new app can be designed to use the extra pixels in height, but for old apps there would have to be a lot of updates and tinkering to maintain compatibility between the various different iPhone screen sizes. Developers wouldn’t appreciate that all too much. There would also not be any huge gain from making the display larger in this matter, other than to have a number to toss around in marketing, which is not exactly how Apple plays the game.
And let’s not forget about the simple fact that Apple doesn’t follow trends in the market all too much. Just because everybody else is competing over who can shoe-horn the biggest screen into their smartphone/small tablet computer, doesn’t mean Apple will join in the fight.
All these factors make me think that it is unlikely to see a bigger display in a future iPhone model, despite what analysts and people who have contacts in the upstream manufacturing process have to say on the matter. Too many things point towards that there would be too much effort for little to no positive outcome as well as that there would be annoyance in the developer camp, incompatibilities in software and hardware (accessories).
I have been thinking about this for a while myself and I’m inclined to agree with Mr. Brooks. Speaking for myself, I use a search engine to get valid and relevant results on whatever it is I’m searching for and I’m starting to feel like Google is straying from this.
DuckDuckGo might not yet be a complete replacement, but as far as I have tried it, the results are quite nice. The design isn’t exactly to their negative either, just like their privacy policy.
So for the time being, and perhaps permanently, I’m going to join Ben and roll over to DuckDuckGo for my search needs.
I normally don’t peruse Cult of Mac, but the article More Chatter That iPhone 5 Will Get4-inch Display caught my attention. While it’s not bad in the whole, there are just a few things that I want to comment on:
A Wall Street expert lent his voice to the chorus, telling investors the new device will begin production in June
The same kind of people who keep misunderstanding Apple as a company, think Apple will tank any day and never get their speculation about Apple’s quarterly result right? Sure. I’ll listen to what such an upstanding person has to say…
Susquehanna Financial analyst Chris Caso didn’t reveal his sources on the 4-inch screen, but it isn’t the first time we’ve heard talk that Apple could follow other smartphone makers that also are expected to offer bigger displays.
Because Apple always follow what other manufacturers are doing, right? Right? Is it just me or does it smell like DigiTimes did something on the floor again? Also, I have never heard of Susquehanna Financial, but maybe that says more about me than it does about Mr. Caso.
Some observers even suggest the iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS could be kept at 3.5 inches while the new handset upgrades to the four-inch display.
I would be so bold as to speculate that Apple will not go around and retrofit millions of existing devices with bigger screens. I see no other way of offering an iPhone 3G with a bigger screen, since it has not been manufactured for a few years.
Essentially, the article comes to the same conclusion that I do, namely that Apple is unlikely to get on the huge-screen-bandwagon that every other smartphone manufacturer seems to be riding. I’ll save my exact thinking behind this speculation on my behalf for another article, in which I can properly express my thoughts on the topic.
I found an article in Macworld which basically says that smartphones are killing video cameras and a few other devices. Can’t say I’m all too surprised at the numbers presented, considering the impressive progress in technology.
This makes sense from the perspective of the average person who doesn’t crave any special features that go beyond what a commonplace camcorder would get you. Most smartphones deliver perfectly acceptable video in terms of clarity, video quality, functionality and even audio pickup. It might not be the ultimate device in terms of doing video capture, but it’s just “good enough” for most people to not consider any other device for that purpose. Add to the list of benefits that a smartphone is most likely always with you and that it can also perform a myriad of other functions and I don’t think there is much left for most people to think about.
I want to point out that for those who are more serious about their video capturing, smartphones aren’t and perhaps never will be a real alternative, except if you are looking for exactly what they deliver in an artistic sense. There are just some things you can’t do with a smartphone right now, like specific frame-rate capture and hooking the devices up to all manner of extra hardware. Let alone that the sensors in smartphones are not up to spec when it comes to capturing all kinds of footage in all kinds of light or situations.
As much as technology as improved over the last 10 years, I will admit that I am a bit surprised that this has not happened sooner than it has. For many years I have been saying that a device convergence has been in the cards and that it will ultimately be inevitable, which has turned out to be true at least to some degree. Where you once needed to drag around a lot of different devices and equipment, you now pretty much only need your smartphone to do recording, editing and publishing it online. Quite remarkable when you think about how this was sci-fi not too many years ago.
Even though the numbers of sold devices in these specific categories have indeed declined, I wouldn’t make such a drastic an assumption as to think that any other class of device is doomed and will disappear from the market. Not yet anyway. There will still be a lot of things that dedicated devices can to better than a device with no specific purpose which is built for more general usage. Some people will still want to have a dedicated camera for photography or video recording or a dedicated games console for their video game playing. These devices will just get more clever and integrate even more into how the rest of the world operates on a bigger scale, just as things have been changing in that very direction so far.
Some purposes no longer demand a specific hardware to do their job, so perhaps some manufacturers better start figuring out how to live as an app developer, rather than someone who makes, distributes and sells a physical device of some sort. It’s all about reaching that “good enough” for it to be in everyones pocket.
[Via: Macken]
