This Week's Sponsor:

PowerPhotos

The Ultimate Toolbox for Photos on the Mac

Posts in links

Apple’s First CEO: Jobs’ Attention To Detail Is Also His Weakness→

Apple’s First CEO: Jobs’ Attention To Detail Is Also His Weakness

Jay Yarow at Business Insider has posted a lengthy interview with Apple’s first CEO Michael Scott, who ran the company from February 1977 to March 1981. The interview is full of interesting details and tidbits that are worth saving in your Instapaper queue, but here’s one we particularly liked about how Scott – who was hired by Mike Markkula to be the CEO as both Jobs and Wozniak were seen as too young and unexperienced – viewed Steve Jobs’ proverbial attention to detail at the time:

I stayed out of it but for weeks, maybe almost six weeks, the original Apple II case, Jobs wanted a rounded edge on it so it didn’t have a hard feel. They spent weeks and weeks arguing exactly how rounded it would be. So that attention to detail is what Steve is known for, but it also is his weakness because he pays attention to the detail of the product, but not to the people.

To me, the biggest thing in growing a company is you need to grow the people, so it’s like being a farmer, you need to grow your staff and everybody else too as much as you can to enable the company to grow, just as much as you need to sell the product.

Check out the full interview by hitting the source link below.

Permalink

Analysis of Apple’s Letter To Lodsys→

Analysis of Apple’s Letter To Lodsys

Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents breaks down today’s letter from Apple to Lodsys CEO Mark Small, detailing a possible scenario iOS developers might soon find themselves into:

App developers have to understand that Lodsys can still sue them. Apple’s letter does not prevent Lodsys from doing that, and it would be a way for Lodsys to pursue its agenda. It wouldn’t make economic sense for Lodsys to sue a few little app developers based on the damage awards or settlements Lodsys might get out of such a lawsuit. However, for Lodsys it would still be worth it if this resulted in a lucrative settlement with Apple, or if it (alternatively) scared potentially thousands of app developers so much that they would pay. Lodsys would sue some app devs only to set an example, and for the ones to whom it happens, that would be an unpleasant situation.

As other bloggers have already written and tweeted, Apple’s letter might be heartwarming for developers, but the story is far from over. Apple is stepping up to defend its developers and that is great news for sure (see developers’ reactions here), but in case of Lodsys deciding to sue anyway to set a precedent, these indie developers would still have to deal with actual court duties, lawyers, and the fact that they’d need to directly ask Apple to back them up. Apple hasn’t explicitly stated they would pay for every legal expense in today’s letter (unless the emails sent to developers, and not Mark Small, have additional details we’re not aware of), though Mueller believes that sending a copy of the letter to Mark Small to developers is a good sign of the company taking things seriously and considering paying for any kind of expense if Lodsys sues.

Again, it’s not over yet, but the general consensus seems to be that this is a great first step to defend the App Store, Apple’s own ecosystem and in-app purchases, and independent developers.

Permalink

EFF Calls On Apple to Protect iOS Developers→

EFF Calls On Apple to Protect iOS Developers

This is a problem that lawyers call a misallocation of burden. The law generally works to ensure that the party in the best position to address an issue bears the responsibility of handling that issue. In the copyright context, for example, the default assumption is that the copyright owners are best positioned to identify potential infringement. This is because, among other reasons, copyright owners know what content they own and which of their works have been licensed. Here, absent protection from Apple, developers hoping to avoid a legal dispute must investigate each of the technologies that Apple provides to make sure none of them is patent-infringing. For many small developers, this requirement, combined with a 30 percent fee to Apple, is an unacceptable cost. Even careful developers who hire lawyers to do full-scale patent searches on potential apps surely would not expect to investigate the technology that Apple provides. Instead, they would expect (with good reason) that Apple wouldn’t provide technologies in its App Store that open its developers up to liability – and/or would at least agree to defend them when a troll like Lodsys comes along.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) thinks Apple should stand up for its developers and protect them from patent trolls like Lodsys, who are asking for licensing fees on a technology provided by Apple itself to developers through the SDK. We’ve been following the debate surrounding Lodsys for over a week now, and whilst The Guardian reported Apple would issue an official response this week, nothing has come out of Apple’s legal department yet – though Apple is well known for taking its time before addressing issues publicly. Several bloggers in the past days have suggested Apple may use the WWDC stage to speak directly to developers and explain the situation with in-app purchases, patents and Lodsys, even if the company previously announced that the WWDC would simply offer a preview of the future of iOS and OS X.

The EFF’s letter to Apple resonates with a common sentiment among developers and the tech press – Apple should defend developers and the iOS ecosystem from being threatened by trolls and patent infringement claims.

Permalink

Ars Investigates Recent Mac Malware→

Ars Investigates Recent Mac Malware

MAC Defender has changed everything,” one Apple Store Genius, who requested to remain anonymous (we’ll call him Lenny) told Ars. “We probably get 3 or 4 people with this per day. Most of them only got as far as installing the program and haven’t entered their credit card details.”

Lenny went on. “This always sparks a debate at the bar on whether antivirus software is necessary on the Mac. This is difficult, as the store sells several antivirus products implying that Apple supports the idea, but as many customers point out, the sales guys aren’t shy in making the claims for Mac OS X’s security. Internally, Apple’s [IT] department mandates the use of Norton Antivirus on company machines.

Following the controversy that sparkled after the large diffusion of MAC Defender (covered here) that rose (again) the inevitable question as to whether being scared of malware on a Mac is nothing but crying wolf, Ars Technica takes a step back and tries to analyze the situation interviewing Apple employees, Geniuses, and various representatives of antivirus / security companies. Whilst it’s kind of obvious that antivirus makers will always recommend their products because you have to keep your machine secure, the takeaway from support specialists is interesting: there’s no need to panic, but people are undoubtedly coming over asking for help with this recent malware.

Of course, the peculiar nature of Mac Defender (it’s a “scanning software” that asks for your credit card details, and it’s downloaded through a malicious script from certain websites and Google Image Search) raises another issue: users are installing the software by manually going through an installer and giving it their passwords – this shouldn’t happen. Anyone who’s a little skilled in computing should know that stuff you didn’t want to download shouldn’t be granted permission to run in the first place. And MAC Defender comes as a whole installer. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s really about crying wolf (though some people like to run overly sensationalistic headlines), as much as it’s about the fact that this malware ultimately exists. Fact.

Ars has an interesting read, and our friends at TUAW have a pretty handy guide detailing the removal of MAC Defender. The best tip, however, is still the same: don’t execute programs and documents you don’t know.

Permalink

Angry Birds Reaches 200 Million Downloads→

Angry Birds Reaches 200 Million Downloads

At the paidContent Mobile conference today in New York City, Rovio “Mighty Eagle” Peter Vesterbacka announced Angry Birds has reached a total of 200 million downloads on all platforms. This figure includes the Angry Birds, Angry Birds Seasons and Angry Birds Rio games available on the iPhone (free and $0.99 version), iPad (free and $4.99 version) and Android handsets (free, ad-supported). BusinessInsider also reports other announcements from Vesterbacka, which will possibly extend the popularity of Rovio’s brand even more:

On top of the app’s success, Vesterbacka says an Angry Birds book will launch this summer with distribution through Barnes & Noble, Amazon, and Google. Plus, the company is working with animators for its own Angry Birds movie.

And then there’s the merchandise. Rovio has deals with manufacturers in China for Angry Birds gear such as lunchboxes and toys.

The number is impressive and I’m pretty sure it makes Angry Birds the most downloaded mobile game of all time, or at least the most download App Store title ever. In the past months, Rovio reported other notable figures such as 10 million downloads for Rio in 10 days, or the 200 million minutes people spend playing Angry Birds every day.

Permalink

OS X 10.6.7 Changes Finder Sidebar Behavior→

OS X 10.6.7 Changes Finder Sidebar Behavior

Adam C. Engst at TidBITS:

With Mac OS X 10.6.7, Apple not only messed up (and then fixed) font handling (see “OpenType PostScript Fonts Troublesome in 10.6.7,” 27 March 2011, and “Apple Releases Snow Leopard Font Update,” 26 April 2011), they also changed the way you remove items from the sidebar. Now, instead of just dragging items out, you must either Command-drag them out or Control-click them and choose Remove from Sidebar.

I’ve noticed the change too: I was trying to drag a folder out of the “Places” tab, but it wasn’t working. At first I thought I had to restart my Finder for some reason, but that didn’t work either. So I realized maybe something had changed since the 10.6.7 software update, and tried to CMD-drag like I would for items in the menubar. Items in the Finder’s sidebar now share the same behavior of draggable items in the top menubar; Engst believes the change was made after some complaints about accidental removals happening too often, but, frankly, I never removed an item from the Places tab by accident.

Permalink

Lodsys Vs. iOS Developers Patent Claim FAQ→

Lodsys Vs. iOS Developers Patent Claim FAQ

FOSS Patents has posted a lengthy and interesting FAQ-style blog post detailing many of the implications behind Lodsys’ patent infringement claims against iOS developers:

8. How can an app dev be liable for just implementing Apple’s in-app purchase API?

Some developers have pointed out that basically they just implement Apple’s in-app purchase API. So they wonder whether this can expose them to liability for patent infringement or is actually something Apple needs to take care of.

The whole thing is a must read if you’re interested in knowing more about Lodsys, iOS developers, the implementation of in-app purchases, and Apple. Just to recap: Lodsys first sent a number of legal notices to some independent iOS developers claiming they were infringing a patent for in-app purchase buttons and upgrade links. After all the debates that quickly spread online, Lodsys explained why they are doing what they’re doing and how much they’re asking for licensing fees. This morning, more developers – including The Iconfactory – received Lodsys’ notices and The Guardian reported Apple’s legal department was looking into Lodsys’ claims.

Update: Nilay Patel at This Is My Next offers one of his usual breakdowns, this time outlining the history of Lodsys and original patent inventor Dan Abelow, detailing a possible outcome for Apple in this whole story:

So now you know almost everything you need to know about Lodsys, Dan Abelow, and ’078 — he’s a serial inventor with a number of patents, and he sets up shell companies to collect royalties on them. It’s legit on paper, but it’s definitely shady and disheartening to see Lodsys go after small developers for such tiny amounts of money. But it makes a certain kind of evil sense: Lodsys can’t engage Apple directly because of Cupertino’s existing ’078 license, so it’s going after app developers as a way to pressure Apple into re-working the agreement to cover apps. I would imagine that such an expansion will cost Apple a pretty penny, wouldn’t you?

In that context, the single most critical factor in this situation is the exact scope of Apple’s license to ’078. It’s entirely possible Apple’s license already covers app developers and Lodsys is just trying to double-dip, but we simply can’t know that without seeing the license and fully evaluating Lodsys’s patent claims against Apple’s code. I can only assume Apple’s lawyers are busily investigating that right now — and I’d imagine the various iOS developers that received letters from Lodsys are impatiently waiting to hear from them.

Permalink

iPhone and iPad Win “Display of the Year” Awards→

iPhone and iPad Win “Display of the Year” Awards

As noted by Jim Dalrymple at The Loop, Apple’s iPhone 4 and iPad have been awarded the Display of the Year prizes by the The Society for Information Display. Apple devices were mainly awarded for the usage of In-Plane Switching (IPS) technology, which provides greater viewing angles and brightness quality than other displays found on phones and tablets. The iPhone 4’s Retina Display, packing four times the pixels in the same old iPhone screen, was also mentioned for setting a new benchmark in mobile display solutions, as well as new standards in power consumption and image quality.

iPhone:

Utilizing Mobile IPS (in-plane switching) technology, the iPhone 4 Retina display achieves a viewing angle superior to conventional mobile LCDs, providing an enhanced viewing experience for the end user in virtually any application. The display features a host of technical advancements: customized LTPS TFT backplane with organic passivation and optimized pixel design; user-customizable, auto-adjustable brightness using ambient light sensing; advanced IPS compensation polarizer technology for high contrast (800:1) and color consistency regardless of viewing direction; 8-bit color depth; an ultra-thin, tiny-footprint driver IC; and patent-pending mechanical integration.

iPad:

The iPad display provides a superior viewing experience with a minimized gamma shift over viewing angles, enabling designers to create innovative apps that further enhance the viewing experience. The iPad’s fully customized design leverages the existing amorphous silicon thin-film transistor (a-Si TFT) infrastructure in an innovative, ultra-thin product with the unique LCD and an innovative power-management system that achieves maximum power efficiency – 10 hours of battery life for WiFi web surfing and 9 hours for 3G web surfing.

I’m no display expert, but in my experience with smartphones and tablets from other brands, I can say I haven’t found another screen that matches the quality of my iPhone 4 and iPad 2. The iPhone 4, despite being almost one year old, still manages to impress with its Retina Display.

Permalink

Steve Jobs: Get Rid of the Crappy Stuff→

Steve Jobs: Get Rid of the Crappy Stuff

Mark Parker talking to Steve Jobs over the phone, shortly after becoming CEO of Nike:

“Do you have any advice?” Parker asked Jobs. “Well, just one thing,” said Jobs. “Nike makes some of the best products in the world. Products that you lust after. But you also make a lot of crap. Just get rid of the crappy stuff and focus on the good stuff.” Parker said Jobs paused and Parker filled the quiet with a chuckle. But Jobs didn’t laugh. He was serious. “He was absolutely right,” said Parker. “We had to edit.”

Keeping focus is one of the most important things you can do for your brand. Sure you can sell twenty different models of the same thing over and over again, but when you really narrow down your product line to only the best available, the only things you have to sell are good products. It’s more desirable for both companies and consumers when effort is only expelled on the things that count.

“Can anyone innovate like Apple?”  The simple answer: While anyone can learn the principles that drive Apple’s innovation, few businesses have the courage to do so.  It takes courage to reduce the number of products a company offers from 350 to 10, as Jobs did in 1998.  It takes courage to remove a keyboard from the face of a smartphone and replace those buttons with a giant screen, as Jobs did with the iPhone.”\

Carmine Gallo couldn’t have said it any better. While all of what I’ve said might be true, it takes courage. I recommend reading the rest over at Forbes via the read-more link below.

Permalink