My thanks to Squarespace for sponsoring this week’s DF RSS feed. When it comes to your craft, you’re the expert. With Squarespace’s designer templates and easy-to-use interface, you can create a website that brings out the best in what you’re passionate about. Not ready to design your website yet? Reserve a spot for your big idea with Squarespace Domains. Then roll out your website when it’s ready.
Try Squarespace for free today. When you decide to subscribe, use offer code “DARING17” to get 10 percent off.
Rene Ritchie, on a just-launched iPad commercial campaign:
“We Hear You”, Apple’s new iPad Pro campaign, reminded me immediately of “Get a Mac”, the classic series of ads that had John Hodgman as PC and Justin Long as Mac show how Windows pain points could be easily, often delightfully fixed simply by switching to a Mac.
A few thoughts:
Matthew Garrahan, reporting for The Financial Times:
The iPhone maker has been stalking Hollywood for more than a year, talking to leading industry players while it tries to formulate a cogent video strategy. It has considered a range of acquisitions and targets including, most recently, Imagine Entertainment, the Hollywood production company owned by Ron Howard and Brian Grazer, according to several people briefed on the discussions.
The talks were serious enough to involve Tim Cook, Apple’s chief executive, and Eddy Cue, its senior vice-president of internet software and services. The talks included a possible “first look” distribution deal of Imagine movies and television shows, as well as an investment by Apple — or even a full purchase. But, as with many other potential deals involving Apple, the discussions fizzled out.
Would have worked out just great if only Apple had hired some investment bankers, I’m sure.
2017-02-17T23:16:51ZIf a large corporation can be described as a homebody, Apple is it. And San Francisco is not Apple’s home turf. Here’s an announcement from Apple that I wouldn’t have guessed in a hundred tries: they’re moving WWDC back to the McEnery Convention Center in San Jose. The dates for WWDC 2017 are June 5–9. But the ticketing process isn’t until March 27. Like in previous years, it’ll be a lottery-type application system. I had the chance to speak with Phil Schiller about this yesterday. The call was scheduled a few days in advance, but as usual with Apple, I didn’t know the topic. I spent the intervening days trying to guess. Moving WWDC back to San Jose truly didn’t even enter my mind. But now that I’ve had a day to think about it, I can see the logic. First, announcing early really helps people who have to travel long distances to attend, particularly those from outside the U.S. In recent years, Apple has announced WWDC dates in April — as early as April 3 in 2014, and as late as April 28. Announcing the dates now, in mid-February, should help people save on airfare. It’s another sign that Apple is slowly getting more open. (Let’s see if they announce the dates this early next year too. It’s possible they only announced this early this year to brace people for the venue change.) For people who will travel only if they get a conference pass, the timing doesn’t change as much. But even a few extra weeks is an improvement. And in recent years — particularly since the demise of Macworld Expo — WWDC is more than just the developer conference. It’s become the communal heart of the Apple world’s calendar. I know more people who come to WWDC without passes for the conference than who attend. The San Jose Convention Center is the original home of WWDC — that’s where it was held from 1988 through 2002. (WWDC 2002 was the year Steve Jobs held a funeral for Mac OS 9 during the keynote.) San Jose is way closer to Apple headquarters. San Francisco is about an hour drive from 1 Infinite Loop. The San Jose Convention Center is only minutes away from Apple’s new San Jose campus, and is much closer to their Cupertino headquarters than San Francisco. Schiller emphasized to me that this is a big deal: more Apple employees from more teams will be present, simply because they won’t have to devote an entire day to being there. (This could be a particular boon to WWDC’s developer labs, where attendees can get precious face time with Apple’s engineers.) I asked whether the move to San Jose changed the number of people who’d be able to attend. Schiller said it did not — attendance will be about the same. (To my knowledge, Apple has never revealed exact attendance figures, and Schiller didn’t offer an exact number, but it’s somewhere around 5,000.) My first WWDC was 2006, a few years after the move to San Francisco, so I’ve never been to one in San Jose. The rap from my friends who did attend WWDC back when it was in San Jose is that San Jose was a bit of a sleepy town. It’s a work-oriented city, where it gets quiet after 5 pm. But WWDC was, compared to now, sparsely attended back then. WWDC didn’t sell out until 2008 (the first year of the iPhone App Store). Schiller seems confident that there’s going to be a lot going on outside the convention center. Apple is working with the city and San Jose mayor Sam Liccardo to stage events around the downtown area throughout the week. WWDC is the biggest event of the year for the Apple world. But for the city of San Francisco, it’s just another conference at Moscone. In fact, by Moscone standards, WWDC is actually kind of small. Oracle’s OpenWorld conference has over 60,000 attendees — 12 times the size of WWDC. Update: Salesforce’s Dreamforce conference had 170,000 attendees last year. WWDC will be the [...]
2017-02-16T06:26:35ZApple’s Beats acquisition suggests the opposite of this article’s central thesis: Apple is better off not working with investment bankers even for a $3 billion deal. I cannot believe that Bloomberg published this story by Alex Webb and Alex Sherman, “Apple Struggles to Make Big Deals, Hampering Strategy Shifts”. The entire story consists of quotes from investment bankers arguing that Apple should hire investment bankers to make more large acquisitions. Really, that’s it. But Apple has struggled for years to pull off bigger deals because of a series of quirks: an aversion to risk, reluctance to work with external advisers like investment banks and inexperience in closing and integrating large takeovers, said people who have worked on acquisitions with the company. They asked not to be identified speaking about private merger and acquisition deliberations. The only proof offered that Apple has struggled in any way to make any acquisitions is that they haven’t made more acquisitions. There’s no mention of any companies that Apple pursued but failed to acquire. Not one. Apple’s biggest deal in its 41-year history was the $3 billion purchase Beats Electronics in 2014, followed by the $400 million acquisition of NeXT Computer in 1996. In Facebook Inc.’s 13 years, it has made three acquisitions of at least $1 billion, including its $22 billion WhatsApp purchase. Google, founded in 1998, has done four such deals, while Microsoft Corp. has completed at least 10, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The comparison in the above paragraph completely rests on the assumption that more and bigger acquisitions are a good thing in and of themselves. No mention is made as to whether these acquisitions were actually good for the companies. (Apple’s $400 million NeXT acquisition worked out OK.) Instead of closing big deals, Cook has so far focused on growing Apple’s services businesses, including Apple Music, the App Store and iCloud. That’s beginning to work, with the company recently forecasting that annual revenue from those operations will top $50 billion by 2021. But even here, some analysts and investors argue for a big acquisition, especially in online video streaming. Apple has started distributing videos through the Music service, and pooling other providers’ video in its mobile TV app, but it has no service akin to Netflix or Amazon.com Inc.’s Prime Video. Apple can’t buy Prime, but they could buy Netflix. But Netflix has a market cap of just over $60 billion, and Apple has a service “akin” to Netflix called Apple Music. Netflix has over 90 million subscribers. Apple Music hit 20 million paying subscribers in December. At the Code conference this week, Eddy Cue claimed Apple Music hit 20 million paying subscribers faster than any other subscription service he’s aware of. And at this point they’re only just preparing to scratch the surface of including original video content.1 Apple would probably have to offer at least $75 billion to buy Netflix. At least. It would cost a fraction of that to turn Apple Music into a serious video service. On Friday, Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi said Apple needs at least one big acquisition in online video. No they don’t. All they need to do is negotiate with studios and TV networks to get movies and TV shows currently in the iTunes Store (as purchases) licensed for Netflix-style “pay $10 a month and watch what you want” streaming. To reach its $50 billion target, the company must find an extra $13 billion in services revenue over the next four years — beyond what it can generate itself. Netflix Inc. ended 2016 with sales of less than $9 billion, so even buying that business may not be enough, the analyst said. Even a $75 billion purchase of Netflix may not be enough. Who said that with a straight face? These fuckers wouldnR[...]
We’re down to two mobile OSes: Android (82 percent) and iOS (18 percent).
From SoundSource’s menu bar icon, you can instantly configure the audio devices your Mac uses for Input, Output and Sound Effects. In seconds, you can adjust the volume for each of your audio devices or switch between connected devices. SoundSource can also enable the soft play-thru of audio from input devices. Use the Play-Thru window to monitor any connected input, such as a microphone, right through your headphones or other output.
SoundSource is a superior sound control in a tremendously convenient package. It tucks out of your way in the menu bar until you need it, then provides easy access to swap audio devices, adjust volumes, and more. It’s the sound control that should be built into MacOS, now available from Rogue Amoeba.
$10 (cheap!) but even better: if you have a current license to any other Rogue Amoeba product, you get a license for SoundSource free of charge.
Nothing groundbreaking, but a nice preview of Apple Music’s two upcoming original shows: Planet of the Apps and Carpool Karaoke.
I see a lot of griping on Twitter that Planet of the Apps looks corny / phony / cheesy / whatever. Of course it does. This is mainstream reality TV. This is not a documentary about what it’s actually like to create a new app or app-based service. It’s reality TV.
For developers cringing at this — this is just how it feels to have your industry boiled down to a digestible TV nugget. Welcome!
Planet of the Apps: Not intended for “us” but for the mainstream. Or, now “we” know how cooks have felt about Hell’s Kitchen for a decade.
It need bear no more relation to actual app development than The Bachelor bears to actual dating.
The Macalope, responding to Ian Bogost’s “The Myth of Apple’s Great Design”:
The Macalope has made this point before but it’s one Bogost seems not to get: Apple products are never perfect, because we do not live in a world of perfect celestial spheres. What Apple usually manages to do, though, is make products that are so great during most usage that they make you forget the imperfections. So, if you believed Apple’s products were perfect then, yes, Bogost is right. That was a myth. But the Macalope has used products from Apple competitors and, in most cases, speaking personally, they’re worse.
The Macalope nails it. Bogost’s argument wasn’t that Apple is actually bad at design. His argument was simply that Apple’s products aren’t perfect. It’s a nonsense argument.
Alistair Barr and Mark Bergen, reporting for Bloomberg:
For the past year, Google’s car project has been a talent sieve, thanks to leadership changes, strategy doubts, new startup dreams and rivals luring self-driving technology experts. Another force pushing people out? Money. A lot of it.
Early staffers had an unusual compensation system that awarded supersized payouts based on the project’s value. By late 2015, the numbers were so big that several veteran members didn’t need the job security anymore, making them more open to other opportunities, according to people familiar with the situation. Two people called it “F-you money.”
Talent retention is one of the hardest problems in the whole industry. Pay employees too little and they’ll leave. Pay them too much and they’ll leave. And if they get bored, they’ll leave.
When it comes to your craft, you’re the expert. With Squarespace’s designer templates and easy-to-use interface, you can create a website that brings out the best in what you’re passionate about. Not ready to design your website yet? Reserve a spot for your big idea with Squarespace Domains. Then roll out your website when it’s ready. Try Squarespace for free today. When you decide to subscribe, use offer code “DARING17” to get 10% off.
Paul Kafasis, Rogue Amoeba:
Our charmingly simple audio recording app Piezo was originally distributed in both the Mac App Store and via direct sales, but it has since left the App Store.
After seeing Kapeli’s chart, I was curious about the App Store’s impact on Piezo’s sales. The restrictions and limitations of the Mac App Store ultimately led us to remove Piezo on February 12th, 2016. We’ve now been selling it exclusively via our site for a year. This has provided about as perfect a real-world test case as one could hope for. Piezo’s removal came with minimal publicity, the price has remained constant at $19, and we’ve had no big updates or other major publicity for it in either 2015 or 2016.
This is a really interesting case study. They saw a small decrease in unit sales, but an increase in revenue because they were no longer paying Apple’s 30 percent App Store tax on any of the remaining sales. As Kafasis concludes:
I certainly won’t state that every developer will have this same success if they remove a product from the Mac App Store and distribute it exclusively through their own site. Your mileage will undoubtedly vary. In our case, however, it’s clear that we were serving Apple, rather than Apple serving us.
My thanks to Jamf Now for sponsoring this week’s DF RSS feed. Jamf Now is a simple, cloud-based solution designed to help anyone set up, manage, and protect Apple devices at work. Jamf Now allows you to treat IT as a task, not a career. Easily configure company email and Wi-Fi networks, distribute apps to your team, and protect sensitive data without locking down devices.
Daring Fireball readers can create an account and manage three devices for free. Forever. Each additional device is just $2 per month. Sign up today.
For your weekend audio enjoyment, a new episode of America’s favorite three-star podcast. Special guest John Moltz returns to the show. Topics include: 🐩💭, iPad vs. Mac for productivity (and why the iPad isn’t a self-sufficient platform), nostalgia for System 7, speculation on this year’s upcoming new iPhones, and more.
2017-02-10T02:34:05ZApple needs to do what it has always done. They need to invent their future, not buy it. Eric Jackson, writing for Forbes: I have been a staunch critic of Apple’s capital return plan since it started in 2012. I think it signals to Wall Street that Apple is out of growth ideas, which is preposterous even though it’s now a $700 billion market cap company. […] I think I remember some Wall Street analysts defending the dividend component of the Apple capital return plan in 2012 because it would “bring in a whole new class of investors to the stock.” Congrats on attracting a few more widows and orphans retail investors. […] The whole capital return program has been a lot of work on Apple’s part to basically do a little bit of stock buyback. He quotes from my 2014 piece, “Just Do Something”, which you should read now to refresh your memory. Jackson ends the quote from my piece (in which I admit that a years-ago acquisition of Tesla at least made some sense, and argue against Apple having bought WhatsApp, on the grounds that they already have iMessage), and writes: I agree with Gruber about WhatsApp (and the Tesla discussion) but the rest was wrong then and is wrong now. And as time goes on, history is demonstrating the folly even more of this precious Apple type of thinking. I don’t see how history is demonstrating the folly of this. Apple is doing fine, and they’re not sitting still. Since 2014, they’ve added “second biggest watch company by revenue” to their portfolio. You can look back and say that Apple could have bought Facebook for $100 billion back when they were privately valued at $50 billion. I don’t think that would’ve been a good fit, though. A Facebook owned by Apple since 2011 would not be the Facebook we know today. There’s no integration between Apple and Facebook — the only thing similar about them is that they make a lot of money. Instagram is more of a maybe. It might have only cost Apple $1 billion (which is what Facebook paid for it), but if Apple had bought Instagram they almost certainly would have kept it iOS-only. If you recall, Instagram released their Android version on 4 April 2012; Facebook’s acquisition was announced just five days later. Phil Schiller deleted his Instagram account a few days later. You can’t buy Beats for $3 billion and then say you can’t (or shouldn’t have) buy Netflix. If Jimmy can work at Apple, so can Reed and Ted. I agree with this, partly. But maybe Apple does too. Regretting not buying Netflix might be one of the reasons they bought Beats. But 2014 was too late to buy Netflix. Look at Netflix’s market cap from the last four years — by 2014 (the year Jackson wrote his early piece encouraging more M&A from Apple) Apple would have had to offer at least $30 billion for Netflix. Maybe more. The lowest their market cap dipped to was around $20 billion. The time to buy Netflix was 2012, when they could have gotten them for maybe $4-5 billion or so, roughly the same scale as what they paid for Beats in May 2014 ($3 billion). An argument about whether Apple should have bought Netflix needs to have started in 2012, not 2014. Should Apple do more dividends or use the cash to do M&A? They should immediately cancel all dividends, wipe out their debt, and (without saying they will) start doing smart, focused, and sometimes expensive M&A. Investors want to pay for growth. Apple needs to articulate how they’re going to grow. They snoozed on Facebook, Instagram and Netflix when they were younger. Those opportunities are proba[...]
Matthew Zeitlin, reporting for BuzzFeed:
Last week, Georgia Republican Sen. David Perdue introduced a resolution in Congress, alongside other Republicans including his fellow Georgian Johnny Isakson, to throw out a new package of rules for the prepaid debit card industry.
The rules, finalized by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in October, include limitations on overdraft fees, which have become a significant source of consumer complaints about the financial industry — and an important revenue stream for Georgia-based financial firm Total System Services, whose NetSpend unit is the country’s largest manager of prepaid cards, according to a 2015 financial filing.
The vast majority of prepaid debit cards don’t come with overdraft fees, but NetSpend’s do, and the fees accounted for 10-12% of its overall revenue in 2016, or $80-85 million, the company told investors in October. Its parent has spent big on lobbying and political donations in a bid to kill the rules: in the last three months of 2016 alone, it spent some $270,000 lobbying Congress.
Again, this should be absolutely bipartisan. The people who are hit by these usurious overcharge fees are Republicans and Democrats alike. There’s no liberal/conservative angle to this. It’s just wrong.
And look at the deal Total Shitbag Services gets out of this: they spend $270 thousand lobbying Congress in order to preserve nearly 100 million in fees.
Nora Ellingsen, who spent five years working as a counter-terrorism analyst for the FBI, looked at the numbers for federal terrorism cases to see if there’s anything to support Trump’s immigration ban for its stated purpose:
For those who don’t want to do this deep dive, here’s a quick two-sentence summary: Conway’s position is empirically indefensible. Absolutely nothing in the large body of data we have about real terrorist plots in the United States remotely supports either a focus on barring refugees or a focus on these particular seven countries.
But she did find this (emphasis added):
Since January 2015, the FBI has also arrested more anti-immigrant American citizens plotting violent attacks on Muslims within the U.S. than it has refugees, or former refugees, from any banned country. As we wrote about here, here and here, in October 2016, three white men from Kansas were charged with conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction. According to the graphic complaint, the anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant men planned to attack a mosque in the area. The men progressed quickly with their plot, amassing firearms and explosives. The targets were people from Somalia, who ironically, would now be covered by Trump’s order.
Cecilia Kang, reporting for The New York Times:
In his first days as President Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Communications Commission, Ajit Pai has aggressively moved to roll back consumer protection regulations created during the Obama presidency.
Mr. Pai took a first swipe at net neutrality rules designed to ensure equal access to content on the internet. He stopped nine companies from providing discounted high-speed internet service to low-income individuals. He withdrew an effort to keep prison phone rates down, and he scrapped a proposal to break open the cable box market. […]
“With these strong-arm tactics, Chairman Pai is showing his true stripes,” said Matt Wood, the policy director at the consumer group Free Press.
“The public wants an F.C.C. that helps people,” he added. “Instead, it got one that does favors for the powerful corporations that its chairman used to work for.”
High-speed internet for low-income people, lowering usurious phone rates, breaking open the cable box market — who could be against these things? These aren’t liberal/conservative issues. This is just doing the bidding of major corporations.
The rare case when a figurative garbage fire turns into a literal garbage fire.
Alex Heath, writing for Business Insider:
Facebook is closing around 200 of its 500 Oculus virtual reality demo stations at Best Buy locations across the US, Business Insider has learned.
The scaling back of Facebook’s first big retail push for VR comes after workers from multiple Best Buy pop-ups told BI that it was common for them to go days without giving a single demonstration. An internal memo seen by BI and sent to affected employees by a third-party contractor said the closings were because of “store performance.”
Oculus spokeswoman Andrea Schubert confirmed the closings and said they were due to “seasonal changes.”
Actual headline from Business Insider, one year ago: “Apple Is Completely Missing VR”.
John Schwartz, reporting for The New York Times:
A group of Republican elder statesmen is calling for a tax on carbon emissions to fight climate change.
The group, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, with former Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former secretary of the Treasury, says that taxing carbon pollution produced by burning fossil fuels is “a conservative climate solution” based on free-market principles. […]
In an interview, Mr. Baker said that the plan followed classic conservative principles of free-market solutions and small government. He suggested that even former President Ronald Reagan would have blessed the plan: “I’m not at all sure the Gipper wouldn’t have been very happy with this.” He said he had no idea how the proposal would be received by the current White House or Congress.
For those of you who erroneously claim I never link to stories about Republicans with approval, here you go: I love this. I hope they succeed. These are Republicans whose eyes are wide open to reality. (Maybe not the reality of today’s Republican party, but the reality of climate change.)
Mark Gurman, reporting for Bloomberg:
Apple Inc. has hired Timothy D. Twerdahl, the former head of Amazon.com Inc.’s Fire TV unit, as a vice president in charge of Apple TV product marketing and shifted the executive who previously held the job to a spot negotiating media content deals.
The moves suggest a renewed focus on the Apple TV and on providing more content for the device, an effort that has been stalled in the past by failed negotiations.
Twerdahl joined Apple this month, a spokesman for the iPhone maker said. He had been general manager and director of Amazon’s Fire TV business since 2013, according to his LinkedIn profile. At Apple, Twerdahl reports to Greg Joswiak, a vice president in charge of marketing for the iPhone, according to a person familiar with the matter.
It seems pretty clear that Joz is in charge of more than just the iPhone if the head of Apple TV reports to him. Sometimes Gurman’s stuff makes no sense to me.
Last night, during the Senate confirmation hearing of Senator Jefferson Beauregard “Jeff” Sessions III for Attorney General, Senator Elizabeth Warren attempted to read a letter that Coretta Scott King had written to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1986 opposing Sessions’ nomination for a federal judgeship (which he did not get).
Watch the video — it’s jarring.
I can’t help but feel this is backfiring on the Republicans. I’m seeing far more coverage of their preventing Warren from reading this letter — a letter from Martin Luther King Jr.’s widow! — than we would have seen if they’d simply allowed her to read it.
Every other Democratic senator should attempt to read King’s letter on Sessions. Make the Republicans own this.
From an October 2016 story for Bloomberg by Mark Gurman:
The new building features open floor plans and few traditional offices. While some of Apple’s senior vice presidents are expected to see their offices move over to the new campus — less than a five minute drive from the current headquarters — management must be at a vice president level or above to get a formal office, one of the people said. Previous plans included office space for senior directors, who report to vice presidents. Another person said that some employees below vice president will be eligible for offices.
The new campus will include bench seating, long work tables, and open cubicle spaces, potentially irking employees used to quiet office environments, two people briefed on the new campus’s plans said. Apple’s presentations to the city of Cupertino have indicated that the open floor plan designs are conducive to collaboration between teams.
The campus is something of an exception to the trend of radically open offices aimed at fostering collaboration, said Louise Mozingo, a professor and chair of the Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning at U.C. Berkeley.
So which is it? I can’t believe Apple would attempt to stick their employees at benches and long work tables, but if they did, that would certainly be a “radically open office”. I suspect Gurman blew this one.
Update: Listening to some little birdies chirp, it sounds like there’s some truth to all of the above.
Daniel Steinberg lamenting the lack of recent progress on iBooks Author:
iBooks Author could have been a trojan horse into the personal publishing business. It would have been classic Apple. Instead of small authors going to Amazon’s platform, they would have started with iBooks Author. Apple should have made it easy for them to push to Amazon as well. Why? Because these people wanted to publish on Amazon but they weren’t considering publishing with Apple. Thousands of authors would have come to Apple to create content and stayed with Apple after publishing content there.
iBooks Author is a perfect example of how the iPad is not self-sufficient. I wrote yesterday about how you can’t develop iPad apps on the iPad itself. But Xcode is very complex, and also has longstanding roots that tie it, as currently imagined, to MacOS. iBooks Author was announced in January 2012, when the iPad was two years old. The iPad itself, seemingly, would be a fine device for creating books with iBooks Author. But iBooks Author remains Mac-only.
New $10 sketchpad iPad app from The Iconfactory. I love this app. Conceptually it’s simple: at the root level you have projects, and each project can contain multiple sketches.
When sketching, colors are on the left; layers, grids, and pens are on the right. That’s it — and the controls stay out of your way. The Iconfactory describes it as aiming for the simplicity of a paper sketchbook, and I think they’ve nailed it.
Julia Love, writing for Reuters on Apple’s new campus, now nearing completion:
Signage required a delicate balancing act: Apple wanted all signs to reflect its sleek, minimalist aesthetic, but the fire department needed to ensure the building could be swiftly navigated in an emergency.
Dirk Mattern, a retired deputy fire chief who is representing the Santa Clara County Fire Department on the project, estimated he attended 15 meetings that touched on the topic.
“I’ve never spent so much time on signage,” he said.
The stuff about navigation and collaboration, I don’t get:
For all the time and money sunk into the project, some in the architecture community question whether Apple has focused on the right ends. The campus is something of an exception to the trend of radically open offices aimed at fostering collaboration, said Louise Mozingo, a professor and chair of the Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning at U.C. Berkeley.
I don’t know anyone who works at Apple who’d want to work at a desk in a room with a “radically open” floorplan. And I know several who would likely quit if forced to. People at Apple have work to do, work requires concentration, and concentration is easier to achieve when you have your own office.
Its central office building — a massive ring of glass frequently likened to a spaceship — could be a challenge just to navigate, she noted.
“It’s not about maximizing the productivity of the office space, it’s about creating a symbolic center for this global company,” she said. “They are creating an icon.”
Critics from the “architecture community” — starting all the way back in 2011, when the new campus was just a plan — seem to have no understanding of how Apple actually functions. Remember too, that Steve Jobs spearheaded the design of Pixar’s unique headquarters, about which I’ve heard nothing but praise from Pixar employees. (Pixar’s headquarters is different from Apple’s in many ways, but Pixar and Apple are, well, different in many ways.)
I think there’s a good chance that Apple knows what it’s doing here.
Patrick Seitz, Investors Business Daily:
Among six major vendors surveyed, four were profitable in smartphone sales in Q4, Canaccord analyst Michael Walkley said in the report. They were Apple, BlackBerry, Samsung and Sony.
Samsung accounted for 9 percent of smartphone industry profits in Q4, while Sony took 1 percent and BlackBerry less than 1 percent.
Interesting that Samsung did as well as they did given the Galaxy Note 7 fiasco. And how bad is it for all the other phone makers in the world that they finished in the red, but even BlackBerry eked out a small profit?
(It’s because everyone else lost money that the numbers for profit share add up to more than 100.)
As promised, Google is making a change to how it displays Accelerated Mobile Pages, so that users can easily view and share links that lead directly to publishers’ sites rather than to Google’s copy of the content.
A little easier, but I would argue that they shouldn’t be doing this in the first place, and the new UI they’ve exposed is deliberately obfuscated.
Now, the URL field of a browser will continue to show a Google URL. However, the AMP header area will display a link or chain icon, what it calls the “anchor” button. Clicking on this will make the publisher’s direct URL appear, so that it can be easily copied and pasted.
This new “anchor” icon is cryptic, and I think deliberately so. It looks like nothing I’ve ever seen before. I wouldn’t have guessed that it was a button to show the real URL, and I am a designer who studies iconography and a critic of AMP’s google.com silo. I’ve wanted this feature to exist ever since AMP debuted but I wouldn’t have guessed that this was it. Lord only knows how many regular people will figure it out. (And, bizarrely, the icon isn’t even retina resolution. It looks like a blurry smudge on the screen.)
For those who hold down on the anchor button, Google says it will trigger the native share feature of the browser being used. With Safari, that means easy access to things like Twitter or Facebook. With Chrome, it lacks native share, so nothing should happen.
Better than nothing (which is what we had before), but weak sauce nonetheless.
Dean Jackson, from Apple’s WebKit team:
Instead we need to evaluate and design a new web standard that provides a core set of required features, an API that can be implemented on a mix of platforms with different system graphics technologies, and the security and safety required to be exposed to the Web.
We also need to consider how GPUs can be used outside of the context of graphics and how the new standard can work in concert with other web technologies. The standard should expose the general-purpose computational functionality of modern GPUs. Its design should fit with established patterns of the Web, to make it easy for developers to adopt the technology. It needs to be able to work well with other critical emerging web standards like WebAssembly and WebVR. And most importantly, the standard should be developed in the open, allowing both industry experts and the broader web community to participate.
Exposing “the general-purpose computational functionality of modern GPUs” would be great for the web, because that’s where the Moore’s Law action is at these days. GPU performance is improving much faster than CPU performance.
Speaking of Merriam-Webster, they’ve announced the addition of over 1,000 new words:
Just as the English language constantly grows, so does the dictionary. More than one thousand new words have been added, including terms from recent advances in science, borrowings from foreign languages, and words from tech, medicine, pop culture, sports, and everything in between. This is a significant addition to our online dictionary, reflecting the breadth of English vocabulary and the speed with which we seek information. These new entries also highlight the old-fashioned skill of crafting useful and readable definitions that require the expertise and experience of our unique staff.
Familiar words combine to give us metaphors or imagery like train wreck, side-eye, and weak sauce. As for verbs, we can ride shotgun, walk back an opinion, throw shade, face-palm, and geek out with new dictionary entries.
David Mack, writing for BuzzFeed:
“A fact is a piece of information presented as having objective reality,” read a tweet from the staff at Merriam-Webster, linking to a dictionary article showing searches for the word “fact” had spiked after Conway’s interview. Simple yet full of shade, neutral yet undeniably pointed, it was the right tweet from the right account at just the right moment of public chaos.
“@KellyannePolls,” read one person’s reply that tagged Conway’s account, “when the dictionary is trolling you, you might want to reconsider everything in your life.”
That the tweet went viral was no coincidence. Its tone and timing were the product of more than a year of work by the Merriam-Webster staff in reimagining and overhauling their entire social media strategy — and, in doing so, their place in this new world of alternative facts.
Great example tweet from earlier today, replying to a question as to whether they ever take words out of the dictionary:
Yes — like snollygoster, “a shrewd and unprincipled person, especially an unprincipled politician.” Just added it back. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/whats-a-snollygoster
Worth noting: Merriam-Webster’s website has improved a thousandfold in recent years. It used to be a disaster, the sort of website put up by a dictionary that felt like they had to publish their dictionary on the web but didn’t want to. Now, it looks like a first-class peer to their print edition.
2017-02-07T23:16:52ZHere we are, six years later, and the Mac’s role in the iOS world is only slightly less essential now than it was then. Good piece by Dr. Drang, pondering why iPad owners seemingly are slow to upgrade older iPads for new ones: What’s surprising to me is how slow iPad software has advanced in the seven years since its introduction. I’ve always thought of the iPad as the apotheosis of Steve Jobs’s conception of what a computer should be, what the Mac would have been in 1984 if the hardware were available. But think of what the Mac could do when it was seven years old: You could write real Macintosh programs on it, both with third-party development software like THINK (née Lightspeed) C and Pascal and Apple’s Macintosh Programmer’s Workshop. You may not care about writing native apps, but the ability to do so brings with it a lot of other abilities you do care about, like the bringing together of documents from multiple sources. You had a mature multi-tasking environment in the MultiFinder that worked with essentially every application that ran on the Mac. You (and all your applications) had access to a real hierarchical file system. You had what many people still consider the best personal software development kit in HyperCard. Drang’s list is very much programming-centric, which is an area where the iPad is particularly weak compared to where the Mac was in 1991. It’s a good point — serious general-purpose personal computing platforms should be self-sufficient, by which I mean that you should be able to write software for the platform on the platform itself. In the very earliest years of the Mac, you needed to write Mac apps using a Lisa; MPW 1.0 shipped in 1986, when the Mac was only two years old. In other words, from 1984 to 1986, the Lisa was to the Mac as the Mac now is to the iPad. It makes sense that making the Mac self-sufficient would have been a higher priority for Apple in the 1980s than it is today for the iPad. The Lisa was a failed platform; requiring developers to buy one in order to create apps for the Mac was a multi-thousand-dollar shit sandwich. And, it was obvious that the Mac should be self-hosting. Conceptually, based on how the system worked and was designed, there was no question that there needed to be a way to write Mac software on the Mac itself. No one is arguing that there should be a way to develop Apple TV apps on an Apple TV, or even more preposterously, to develop Apple Watch apps on an Apple Watch. Those aren’t general-purpose personal computing platforms. Nor do I think there’s much reason to want Apple to enable the creation of iPhone apps from an iPhone. It is surely technically feasible, and conceptually iOS could handle it from a UI perspective. But as a practical matter, the displays are simply too small to make it worth the effort. The only imaginable scenario in which I can imagine a developer using an iPhone to create iPhone software is if the iPhone is the only computing device they own.1 The iPad, on the other hand, clearly could be a platform which would be perfectly suitable for developing iPad apps. I’m not so sure it should be, though. Or that it shoul[...]
New “superfamily” of typefaces from Hoefler & Co.:
Twenty years ago, our Knockout collection was designed to celebrate the beauty and diversity of nineteenth century sans serif wood types, one of America’s great contributions to type history. Picking up where this project left off is Ringside, a sans serif shaped by new challenges, new influences, and new ideas.
Where Knockout was designed for headlines, Ringside is made for text. Its proportions, fit, and details are designed to thrive at the smallest sizes, and each of its weights and widths includes that most essential quality of a dependable text face: a companion italic.
Feels like a sequel two decades in the making.
Jugal K. Patel, reporting for The New York Times:
A rapidly advancing crack in Antarctica’s fourth-largest ice shelf has scientists concerned that it is getting close to a full break. The rift has accelerated this year in an area already vulnerable to warming temperatures. Since December, the crack has grown by the length of about five football fields each day.
“The iceberg is likely to break free within the next few months,” said Adrian J. Luckman of Swansea University in Wales, who is a lead researcher for Project Midas. “The rift tip has moved from one region of likely softer ice to another, which explains its step-wise progress.”
Terrifically well illustrated.
The Federal Trade Commission:
Vizio, Inc., one of the world’s largest manufacturers and sellers of internet-connected “smart” televisions, has agreed to pay $2.2 million to settle charges by the Federal Trade Commission and the Office of the New Jersey Attorney General that it installed software on its TVs to collect viewing data on 11 million consumer TVs without consumers’ knowledge or consent. […]
According to the agencies’ complaint, starting in February 2014, Vizio, Inc. and an affiliated company have manufactured Vizio smart TVs that capture second-by-second information about video displayed on the smart TV, including video from consumer cable, broadband, set-top box, DVD, over-the-air broadcasts, and streaming devices.
The lack of respect for consumer privacy in this case is just appalling.
Kate Conger, reporting for TechCrunch:
Notably absent from the list of 97 companies are several who met with Trump prior to his inauguration: Amazon, Oracle, IBM, SpaceX and Tesla. Oracle CEO Safra Catz is serving as an advisor to the Trump transition team, while SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk has defended his decision to remain on an advisory council for Trump.
I’m not surprised by Oracle, IBM, or Elon Musk’s companies, but I am surprised by Amazon.
Update: Tesla and SpaceX have joined the brief, along with Adobe. Good for them.
Update: Looks like Amazon is officially opposed, but didn’t join this brief for legal reasons:
Amazon was one major company that didn’t join with the brief, which supported a case brought by Minnesota and the state of Washington opposing the ban on refugees and temporary ban on immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries.
That’s because Seattle-based Amazon had already filed a declaration in the same case explaining how the ban negatively affects the e-commerce giant. Washington’s attorney general advised Amazon not to join the amicus brief since it’s a witness in the original lawsuit, according to a source familiar with the matter.
It turns out that Microsoft, also absent from the amicus brief, filed a declaration in the original case brought by Washington, as well.
An almost book-length (seriously, over 25,000 words) analysis of Amazon’s end-run around antitrust regulation. It’s quite readable though. My summary would be that U.S. antitrust enforcement in recent decades is focused almost exclusively on consumer prices. If a monopoly isn’t price gouging customers, it’s not a problem. Khan makes a strong case that that mindset might make sense in the brick and mortar world, but it doesn’t make sense if the world of competitive online platforms.
And yes, the e-book price-fixing case against Apple is a perfect example. Khan writes:
In 2012, the DOJ sued the publishers and Apple for colluding to raise e-book prices. In response to claims that the DOJ was going after the wrong actor — given that it was Amazon’s predatory tactics that drove the publishers and Apple to join forces — the DOJ investigated Amazon’s pricing strategies and found “persuasive evidence lacking” to show that the company had engaged in predatory practices. According to the government, “from the time of its launch, Amazon’s e-book distribution business has been consistently profitable, even when substantially discounting some newly released and bestselling titles.”
Judge Cote, who presided over the district court trial, refrained from affirming the government’s conclusion. Still, the government’s argument illustrates the dominant framework that courts and enforcers use to analyze predation — and how it falls short. Specifically, the government erred by analyzing the profitability of Amazon’s e-book business in the aggregate and by characterizing the conduct as “loss leading” rather than potentially predatory pricing. These missteps suggest a failure to appreciate two critical aspects of Amazon’s practices: (1) how steep discounting by a firm on a platform-based product creates a higher risk that the firm will generate monopoly power than discounting on non-platform goods and (2) the multiple ways Amazon could recoup losses in ways other than raising the price of the same e-books that it discounted.
On the first point, the government argued that Amazon was not engaging in predation because in the aggregate,Amazon’s e-books business was profitable. This perspective overlooks how heavy losses on particular lines of e-books (bestsellers, for example, or new releases) may have thwarted competition, even if the e-books business as a whole was profitable.
(Via Philip Elmer-DeWitt, who has his own summary of Khan’s thesis.)
I’ve been watching pro football for as long as I can remember, and I’ve never seen anything like that comeback.
Brad Stone, reporting for Bloomberg:
In 2010, an advanced aircraft engineer at NASA’s Langley Research Center named Mark Moore published a white paper outlining the feasibility of electric aircrafts that could take off and land like helicopters but were smaller and quieter. The vehicles would be capable of providing a speedy alternative to the dreary morning commute.
Moore’s research (PDF) into so-called VTOL — short for vertical takeoff and landing, or more colloquially, flying cars — inspired at least one billionaire technologist. After reading the white paper, Google co-founder Larry Page secretly started and financed two Silicon Valley startups, Zee Aero and Kitty Hawk, to develop the technology, Bloomberg Businessweek reported last summer.
Now Moore is leaving the confines of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, where he has spent the last 30 years, to join one of Google’s rivals: Uber Technologies Inc.
I don’t think it’s right to call these things “flying cars”, but man, whatever we wind up calling them, what an audacious plan.
I want to thank MacPaw for sponsoring this week’s DF RSS feed to promote Setapp.
Setapp is an ambitious new subscription service for indie Mac software. It’s not a store, but more like Netflix for apps. You pay $9.99 per month, and you get access to over 60 high-quality Mac apps. There are no ads. There are no in-app purchases. There is no catch. You pay $9.99 per month, and you get access to the latest versions (including updates) for all these apps. And they just launched last month, so the number of apps may grow significantly over time.
Take a look at the list of apps — it’s a great lineup.
To top it all off, you can try Setapp for an entire month free of charge. Go ahead and sign up today.
A long, detailed, fascinating story involving Stanley Kubrick, Steve Jobs, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the Super Bowl? Yeah, pretty good odds I’d link to this.
Interesting post from Jeff Johnson:
Apple stated that Q1 FY2017 was an all-time record for quarterly revenue. The media dutifully and mostly uncritically spread this “great” news for Apple. But the headlines were fake news. Technically the claim is true, the revenue was an all-time record. True but misleading. Although Apple didn’t lie as such, you might say there was a sin of omission, and a definite spin of the facts. Most Apple fiscal quarters are 13 weeks long. Once in a while, however, they need a 14 week quarter. You might call it a “leap quarter”. There was a good explanation of this financial practice a few years ago in Slate. Apple’s Q1 2017 was a 14 week quarter, for the first time since Q1 2013.
Adjusted for the extra week, Apple actually had another down quarter. I’m surprised I didn’t hear more about this when results came out. I don’t think it’s quite right to ding the quarter by a full 8 percent — the entire last week started with Christmas day — but surely some sort of correction is necessary for year-over-year comparisons.
Update: Jason Snell on the “leap” week:
But, for better or for worse, the window we get into Apple’s finances is based on its financial statements — and that means the quarters as Apple defines it. This was a record quarter for Apple. But it’s also fair to point out that Apple’s definition gives it a one-time windfall, an extra week of sales that it won’t get again for another few years. And it’s a windfall that next year’s year-over-year holiday-quarter comparison will have to overcome in one fewer week.
Simply exceptional deep dive into the battery life of the new MacBook Pros. Must-read piece. Very fair, and very thorough.
Supertop’s Oisin Prendiville has an interesting proposal:
I believe that the notification pattern could improve the effectiveness of the rating feature.
- An app requests that the user be prompted.
- iOS decides based on policy whether it is appropriate to show a request.
- If iOS decides to show the request, the interface slides down from the top of the screen like a notification.
I’m on the fence about his idea. There’s no question that the current design in the 10.3 betas (the modal alert) is more intrusive. But developers get to decide when it appears. That means, if they’re hoping for positive reviews, it’s in their own interest to show it after the user has done something, not while they are doing it. I’d bet that Apple considered something pretty much exactly like what Prendiville is suggesting.
2017-01-26T03:07:52ZA limit of three prompts per year, and a system-wide switch to turn off all such prompts, go a long way toward fixing the problem from the user’s perspective. Jim Dalrymple, writing at The Loop: When you are prompted to leave a review, customers will stay inside the app, where the rating or review can be left for the developer. It’s easier for customers and the developers still get their reviews. Apple is also limiting the amount of times developers can ask customers for reviews. Developers will only be able to bring up the review dialog three times a year. If a customer has rated the app, they will not be prompted again. If a customer has dismissed the review prompt three times, they will not be asked to review the app for another year. Customers will also have a master switch that will turn off the notifications for app reviews from all developers, if they wish to do that. I spoke with Apple today about these features, too. A few questions I got answered: The replies that developers will be able to leave on App Store reviews will be attached to the user review to which they’re replying. It’s not a thread, per se, because users can only leave one review, and developers can only leave one response to each review, but they will be connected visually. Users can then edit their review, and developers can then edit their reply. Developers have been clamoring for something like this ever since the App Store opened in 2008. An individual app can prompt three times for a review per year, period. This counter does not get reset each time the developer updates their app. Good. The new APIs will eventually be the only sanctioned way for an iOS app to prompt for an App Store review, but Apple has no timeline for when they’ll start enforcing it. Existing apps won’t have to change their behavior or adopt these APIs right from the start. One reason developers prompt for reviews even after you’ve already reviewed a previous version of an app is that the average rating for an app gets reset with each update to the app — and a 4 or 5-star average rating can have a big effect on the number of downloads an app gets. From a developer’s perspective, it sucks when you replace a highly-rated version of your app with a minor bug-fix update and your average rating gets erased. It’s a tricky problem to solve, though — sometimes the latest update of an app really does deserve a new average rating, for better or for worse. I asked if this policy was changing, and Apple had nothing to announce — but they did acknowledge that they’re aware that the current policy is what led to the problem of apps badgering users too frequently for reviews. I’ve long been a critic of apps begging for reviews (OpenTable, I’m looking in your direction). Three years [...]
2017-01-24T23:26:00ZIn short, the best way not to lose them is to treat them as easily lost, valuable objects. Geoffrey Fowler on Twitter, linking to Joanna Stern’s piece on the new “Find My AirPods” feature in the first iOS 10.3 beta: This was a no-brainer: Apple’s now got a tool to help locate their tiny $160 wireless earbuds you’re destined to lose. I’ve seen this “destined to lose” argument in a lot of reviews of the AirPods. Like: “Pros: Good sound, great battery life, easy pairing. Cons: Expensive, easily lost.” And because they’re small, they certainly could be easily lost. But that’s true of all small things. You can easily lose a $100 casino chip. You can easily lose expensive jewelry. It happens. But it’s not that common, because you know these things are valuable. It’s human nature to be more careful with valuable items. If AirPods cost $29 and were included in the box with iPhones, they’d be lost more frequently than they are as a $159 standalone product. (Let alone a $159 product that is still backordered by six weeks.) I’ve been wearing AirPods almost daily since mid-September, and I’ve only ever had two close calls. Once, I went for a jog and stopped at the post office to pick up a package they were holding for me. I left the post office, walked to the corner, and as I was about to resume my jog, I realized I only had one AirPod in my ears. I went back into the post office and found the missing AirPod on the counter where I picked up (and signed for) the package. I had taken it out to pause playback and talk to the clerk. Because I didn’t have pockets, I had put it down on the counter. The second close call was a very cold night just a few weeks ago. I wore a hoodie to cover my head and ears while walking through the city. I pulled the hoodie off a few doors down from my destination, and when I did, it must have popped my right AirPod out. I didn’t notice at the moment, though, because I had already paused playback and my ears were so cold (despite the hoodie) that I didn’t feel it come out. I backtracked and spotted it on the sidewalk, about 20 feet away. The danger wasn’t really that I’d lose it, but that someone else would step on it before I got to it. The habit I’ve gotten into is taking my case with me everywhere I go wearing AirPods. Whenever I take one or both of them out, I put them into the case. I try never to set them down or put them loose into a pocket. The buds are either in the case, in my ears, or in my fingers. In short, the best way not to lose them is to treat them as easily lost, valuable objects. I’ve misplaced my AirPods in my house far more often than I’ve come close to actually losing them — so being able to ma[...]