This is a COMPUTER

I think what strikes me about using the iPad was when I was playing with it and my dad called it a computer. I had an Oh my god, this is a COMPUTER moment.

Define the Problem

The creative-style invitations recently sent out by Apple imply some sort of creative device (e.g. drawing tablet). And now there are rumors that the tablet will be a general purpose device. Compared to the iPhone and iPod launches, attempting a general purpose device is uncharacteristic of Apple; they tend to define a problem, invent a device to solve it, and have that device solve only that problem and solve it really well. Of course, the only exception is in their general purpose computers, which do a lot of things very well. I've predicted possible tablet application approaches before, but I now think that the tablet will be simultaneously released with iLife '10, which will have a painting program. I predict a combination device (remember the phone, iPod, internet communcator?): Web Reader, Sketchpad, Game System.

Gamechanger

So, is the iPhone 4G coming to Verizon?. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't; we can't know until next week. Here's what's not going to happen:

“The phone will be carried on Verizon and hence will operate on the CDMA network,” he asserts, adding, “however, it will also support European GSM and HSPA standards. An updated 4GS version that will support LTE is anticipated to arrive in June 2011.”

Umm... no. Apple's not going to bend over backwards to put more chips in its phone and make it even thicker and more power hungry. Compare the thickness of an iPhone to that of an iPod touch. That's mostly the cellular chip.

The iPhone is a worldwide device by virtue of supporting the only worldwide standard. I think that the iPhone LTE will come out on Verizon. I just don't think that before that it will be worth it to manufacture a version with a different wireless chipset just for the US or China. It's in Apple's best interest to push the carriers to move to LTE as quickly as possible, giving it an easy way to switch carriers without any hardware change if need be, and thus an easy way out of a poorer carrier. The iPhone LTE will be a kingmaker in the LTE market, not only because of its success at attracting customers from other carriers, but also because it will force carriers to rapidly support LTE infrastructure.

The tablet isn't about the iPhone at all

It has been proposed several times that the supposed upcoming apple tablet will run iPhone OS at a higher resolution. It's not going to. It's not in apple's style to adopt a one size fits all strategy in anything. However, I have a two theories about what the tablet may be (in order of likeliness):

• A device running iPhone OS X with UIKit interface and frameworks: This may sound like it would run iPhone apps, but it will not. Instead, it adopts frameworks more similar to the iPhone's UIKit than Mac OS X's AppKit. And if it does this, OpenGL ES, not OpenGL, will be the 3D provider of choice.
• A device running full OS X: Full OS X is not a one size fits all strategy in this case... if the tablet's form factor is large enough. The MacBook Air, supposedly the "apple netbook", has a 13" display, and runs OS X perfectly well. The limiting factor on the Air is the full-size keyboard, but if Apple loses the keyboard and goes for handwriting recognition or thumb-typing, the display could likely be a high-DPI ten inch display. If the tablet ends up being as popular as the iPhone, this may serve to push the iPhone halo effect over the edge and get all of those iPhone developers developing for the mac.

Google Wave

Google Wave + some other online social network / wave list is going to replace facebook. They've already got the apps.

Open Ecosystem

Running linux is a feature for many smartphone platforms. Why does it seem that none of them make use of linux's killer feature for installing applications, package managers? Stuff like this is just insane.

A case for integrated web applications

I never knew until quite recently that the web inspector in WebKit browsers was actually an HTML/Javascript appliction (with obvious binding to communicate with the underlying stuff). If that's not a pervasive web app, I don't know what is.

My Thoughts on Package Managers

I recently held my breath and reinstalled the Windows 7 Beta after Windows 7 killed itself a few months ago. I have also been installing a few games, namely Warcraft III, WoW, Portal, and Half-Life 2. And I haven't needed the CD to install any of them.

Steam allows you to re-download games in case of a situation just like mine - the system you play the game on kills itself and you want to play the game again, albeit with a different GUID on your partition. This got me thinking as to exactly how easy it was - I don't have to bother with any installers in Steam and the Blizzard installers just download themselves and zip along. This is the same magic as a Linux package manager, but as a store. The magic part of the commerce in the download service is that games are still bound to a key, which is bound to my account, which I use to play the games. As game downloads move further and game companies such as Valve build out their online services, the CD key may no longer be necessary, and games will only bind to the account. The concept of binding to an account is not an alien one, evidenced by iTunes. However, IDENTITY as an ownership model is beginning to replace a slip of paper on the inside of the box.

My guesses for the apple announcement

Wireless sync?

Who wants to dock their phone?

Microsoft has filed a patent for a docking station for a phone that allows it to have computer peripherals connected to it. First of all, with the ubiquity of BlueTooth on mobile phones now, why aren't the keyboard and mouse wireless. Secondly, who actually wants to dock their phone instead of having a laptop? There seem to have been a few attempts to scale Windows Mobile up to full size: Redfly immediately comes to mind. Yet, with the emerging market for netbooks, why not just get a netbook and use that for portable work? The selling point for things like this is "It is too hard to use your phone as it is for anything besides making calls." This is like compensating for bad floor tile design by putting a tried and true method into place: carpet. It does not address the actual problem with most windows mobile devices: they have a high barrier to entry.

While technology such as this may sound like shenanigans now, there are a few ways that Microsoft could make this work that play to their strengths.

• Use the high speed data connection on the phone to provide a thin-client to the monitor / input devices. Microsoft's RDP server is surprisingly nice. As wireless and cell connections get faster, Microsoft can cater to its most reliable customers: enterprises. A great deal of enterprises provide RDP logins for their employees for one reason or another. Why not combine the roles of netbook and blackberry, creating an email / phone device for employees on the road and a desktop for them when they sit down at their desk and drop their phone into its cradle? Microsoft has the chance to lock enterprises into Windows Server, Windows Mobile, and RDP all at the same time, albeit at the expense of its windows desktop monopoly. However, as handsets rapidly approach the power of full-fledged computers, is this a lock in Microsoft can afford to pass up?
• Integrate and sync seamlessly into Windows. What excuse do Microsoft smartphones have to not seamlessly integrate with Microsoft's operating system? Microsoft needs to realize that product integration is a key part of developing an ecosystem: the products are both under the umbrella of Windows, so they should work better when used together. Instead of providing a patchwork of windows devices, automatically lock a windows desktop when the user's cell phone leaves bluetooth range; sync contacts seamlessly with bluetooth or wirelessly; provide a combination charger / syncher so that phones are reliably synched and updated.
• Provide a better overall experience as a phone. Microsoft phones have not yet rivaled even the iPhone or the blackberry. Why? The iPhone is greater than the sum of its parts: it is held together by the app store and a unique user experience. While many windows mobile phones may have touchscreens in the near future, few will have the software support that the iPhone does, especially with unique features that integrate well with the hardware. Microsoft needs to wake up and notice that the model that worked for windows will not work here, and instead execute a careful counter-strategy to combat the iPhone on its key points: Feel-good user experience, ease-of-use, and applications.

I wonder how Cuil is doing right now?

Still cooling their heels? They shouldn't be, because the /rc/etc blog still doesn't show up! Pages pages everywhere and not the one you want. Atrocious.

Pretty Much...

Pretty much all of the problems with Windows' application installation and launching model are listed in this reddit post. System tray - Annoying. Bubbles that don't go away - very annoying. Every app implementing a different UI - very very annoying.

While some of these problems (File Extension Associations) are caused by other parts of windows, this list barely touches on the other parts of windows and their problems: the registry (a case where individual app settings would have been preferable), managed code (I'd rather write in C), and a really poor UI model (There are around five different ways of writing code to the screen on Windows Vista.)

Squandering a touch screen

It is sad when such a good idea goes to waste. According to David Pogue's scathing review of the Blackberry Storm and my experiences with the Android G1, both phones fail for different reasons. The Storm is completely right to include expandable memory and an 8GB memory card in the box. Yet, it does not include a fast enough processor, making it seem slow. Insufficient hardware support and poor interface design, according to Pogue, are the Storm's main failings. In a touchscreen device, it is very important to have large targets, and to have the interface designed to act like everyday objects, not like a computer screen. However, the insufficient hardware of the Storm makes a touchscreen not feasable, due to the fact that it does not have the animation capability to make the flick-scrolling lists.

The G1 suffers from the touchscreen not being the main feature, contrary to the Storm which eschews the iconic Blackberry keyboard. The plastic touchscreen on the G1 is not as smooth as the glass on my iPhone; I found myself reverting to using the scroll wheel at the bottom. Including a scroll wheel and keyboard show that HTC, T-Mobile, and Google are not willing to commit to a complete touchscreen experience, and the touch screen probably was not the main feature of testing. Both phones also suffer from poor hardware support; I don't think that the G1 can top the iPhone's 11MB of video RAM, and with five second delays, the Storm sure can't.

All touchscreen phones need to have some perspective on what makes the iPhone great: It is not only the touchscreen, but the touchscreen as the only input source, and the brilliant animation support, and the intuitive interface, and the responsiveness. If I was to predict the iPhone killer, I would predict a touchscreen-only phone with excellent hardware running a stripped-down Linux OS with compositing for animations. And it definitely would not be written in Java, even in compiled Java (way too slow for mobile devices; try a more static language.) Oh, and it will probably cost somewhere around $500.

What's stemming the adoption of 64-bit?

Adobe is going to provide the flash plugin for 64 bit Linux, before it provides it to 64 bit Windows or Mac OS X. Now, Microsoft says that a lack of 64 bit flash is preventing users from wholeheartedly adopting 64 bit, and a great number of macs are running 64 bit just fine (with 32 bit flash, because web applications should never need more than 4 GB of memory.) Now, if they just make the proprietary version easier to install under linux.

On Penguins and Netbooks

Microsoft is expected to start courting users of netbooks soon. A lot of netbooks, including the iconic EEE PC, currently are running a modified version of Linux. Other notebooks are doing a clever dual boot by default: they are running a stripped down version of linux that boots very quickly and are also running a full-blown operating system (most likely Windows). That way, users can run their Windows applications, but are also able to use their computer to quickly accomplish the most common tasks. Microsoft will have a hard time asserting dominance here because the stripped down version of Linux accomplishes all of the simple operating system tasks: IM, email, and web browsing. With the influx of web applications available, a lot can be done in the browser included in the lightweight Linux environment. Thus, Microsoft will need to shorten boot times and provide a compelling reason to boot into a full OS, and they will maintain that reason, as open source can adapt very quickly. Microsoft is no longer the borg. Its speed of adaption is much slower than the myriad of open source apps out there. And when there really is no more need for anything but web applications, Microsoft will need to succeed in a market that they are already in and are not doing well in.

Disclosure: I do not believe that the day will come when we will survive on only web applications and desktop games.

Windows! It's over 9000!

With Windows Seven demoed yesterday, I feel the need to say something profound. Something that really caters to windows users like Joe Six Pack. You see, Joe Six Pack has a little bit of a hard time with computers in general. He's finally gotten used to Windows XP, and is reacclimating to Vista. Then, boom! It's a brand new paradigm. And a brand new metaphor. Microsoft is trying to adapt Windows' document-centric window management to be more like Mac OS X's application-centric window management. And it isn't doing well. The result? Windows is becoming more of a power user OS and less of an OS for Joe Six Pack or Joe the Plumber. The concept of Document Libraries is incredibly weird, because people will treat them like folders. "There are too many documents in this folder. I'll just organize them. No, I can't." Naturally, Microsoft will add wizards and popup balloons that explain everything that around fifteen people will look at. The rest of the users will muddle along, saying that it is too complicated and as a result switching to Linux and Mac OS X. Linux already works with more hardware out of the box than windows, but I never thought I would see the day that it would do it more simply than Windows as well.

Full Disclosure: This post was written off of an Ubuntu LiveCD while playing with Compiz's wobbly windows.

Supply and Use

The problem with OpenID is that everyone (Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, et cetera) provides OpenIDs while very few sites actually accept OpenIDs. Distinct branding of your website's login is lost when OpenID is used, and that is the problem; such companies want to encourage users to stay with their product.

Powering all of these androids...

It's like the plot of a science fiction movie. Androids invade earth, need power, and either plug themselves into the nearest outlet, set up solar panels, or start using humans as batteries.

In all seriousness, one feature that the iPhone has over Android is the fact that it syncs through iTunes. Android provides sync services, but those sync services do not lead into one central "Android Control Center". In addition, I would bet against HTC/T-Mobile including a USB-to-special-phone-connector cable in the Android box. So most likely there will be a hodgepodge of sync services for android phones, which will differ based on what applications are installed. Sync your music with Amarok, your photos with who knows what, your movies with something else… It's all very confusing.

Then again, Google may have decided to skip the rigamarole of desktop syncing and may go straight to syncing pictures with picassa, your email with GMail, and later possibly a deal with Amazon for music over the air. YouTube is the obvious choice for videos, and everything else is small enough to be synced over the air. While users may not be able to set up their android phones in a desktop program, I am sure they will be happy to wait in a carrier's store for the carrier to do it for them.

Probably the only thing that the Android phone lacks in this regard is syncing TV shows and Movies, which, based on the open model of the Android phone, could be done, though studios and distributors may receive pressure from carriers to not back this service, as it uses a lot of bandwidth. Of course, there is always wireless syncing of movies from MythTV and TiVo over WiFi.

Although wireless sync is a lot slower than wired sync, it will probably be fine for most people. For a few months after she got her iPhone, my mother didn't really want to plug it into a computer, and instead used the adapter. Wireless sync simply adds complexity, due to the fact that no software can make it more clear that your phone is being synced wirelessly than the simple statement that a cable can make.

The Sad Mac is Reincarnated

In the form of a folder in the Google Chrome browser, of course.

Cappuccino

Cappuccino was released today. What a day it's been. I have to say that it really is brilliantly thought out. Probably the part that is most interesting is the concept of toll-free bridging. In my experience, javascript has been somewhat lacking in back-end; a need that can be easily filled by a framework such as jquery or json. Objective-J extends normal javascript types: var array = [[CPArray alloc] init]; and var array = new Array(); are exactly the same. Simply amazing.

Objective-J was obviously designed for web applications, not web sites. You don't touch the DOM or CSS; Objective-J does that for you with a lot of absolute positioning. Plus, who wants to wait for each page of a web site to load? Although Objective-J code can be compiled into Javascript, it still has a fair bit of loading time, and a separate HTTP connection has to be opened for each source file. Objective-J is very obviously oriented towards rich internet applications.

Object oriented, Model-View-Controller web frameworks are the way of the future in web application design. People can do amazing things with Javascript. These frameworks make it easy to stand on the shoulders of giants.