You're viewing all posts tagged with apple
“
Beginning early May, I will join Apple as global editorial games manager, App Store. In a nutshell, I will be leading the charge for games on the App Store, so whether you browse through iTunes, iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad, the games content you see will be handpicked and organized by me and my team. I couldn’t be happier.

Bye IGN, Hello Apple «  Mouth on Fire - Matt Casamassina, former editor at IGN of their N64, GameCube, Wii, and Wireless/iPhone channels. Hands-down my favorite gaming journalist in the business. Apple couldn’t have picked a better guy for this role.

Thanks to Gamasutra’s Twitter for the news and the story.

“We looked at a variety of methods to get our games onto the Mac and in the end decided to go with native versions rather than emulation,” said John Cook, Director of Steam Development. “The inclusion of WebKit into Steam, and of OpenGL into Source gives us a lot of flexibility in how we move these technologies forward. We are treating the Mac as a tier-1 platform so all of our future games will release simultaneously on Windows, Mac, and the Xbox 360. Valve to Deliver Steam & Steam on the Mac Thanks to John Gruber of Daring Fireball for the link to the Wired story that includes a great quote from Dan Connors of Telltale Games: “We have games that run on the Mac and we have games that run on Steam, so our goal is to be there,” Connors said. “We think they’re going to do a great job with getting the Steam client over there and we want to continue to be a part of it.” I imagine a lot of other game developers are saying the same thing. Click for high-res photo
“We looked at a variety of methods to get our games onto the Mac and in the end decided to go with native versions rather than emulation,” said John Cook, Director of Steam Development. “The inclusion of WebKit into Steam, and of OpenGL into Source gives us a lot of flexibility in how we move these technologies forward. We are treating the Mac as a tier-1 platform so all of our future games will release simultaneously on Windows, Mac, and the Xbox 360.

Valve to Deliver Steam & Steam on the Mac

Thanks to John Gruber of Daring Fireball for the link to the Wired story that includes a great quote from Dan Connors of Telltale Games:

“We have games that run on the Mac and we have games that run on Steam, so our goal is to be there,” Connors said. “We think they’re going to do a great job with getting the Steam client over there and we want to continue to be a part of it.”

I imagine a lot of other game developers are saying the same thing.

“

The only problem with these new Vista typefaces is that they’re only distributed with Vista. So, I have two simple requests:

  1. Microsoft, please distribute these new Vista typefaces for older versions of Windows, especially XP. Perhaps include them with the release of Internet Explorer 7 and future Office updates?
  2. Apple, please license this set of fonts from Microsoft and include them with Mac OS X.
Making good on these two simple requests would go an incredibly long way towards improving the state of typography on the web — and should cost each company next to nothing.
JeffCroft.com: An open letter to Apple and Microsoft - This letter is three and a half years old now, but it’s never too late to stop hoping Microsoft and Apple will arrange an agreement to provide Microsoft’s ClearType Font Collection to OS X users for free (similar to the Core fonts for the Web).

The Line Between Consumption and Production

This morning I wrote that Apple seems to be “drawing a distinct line between desktop computers and personal computers, where personal means “mobile.’” I want to elaborate a bit more on this distinction.

From 1984 to 2001, Apple basically had the Mac, a multipurpose personal computer that served as both a way to produce and consume content. In 2001, Apple introduced the iPod, a device designed and engineered expressly for the consumption of music. In 2003, they introduced the iTunes Store, a music distribution platform to feed new iPod owners with legally obtainable music. It would go on to become a comprehensive multimedia content platform just a few years later.

Now for a short digression: The 2000s were an age of increasingly vigorous information consumption. As more information and media became available to anyone with Internet access, two things happened: there became a greater demand than ever for access to that information and media; and computing technology had progressed to a point where “just-enough” computing was more than enough to consume this information anywhere.

This is just one reason why the release of the iPhone in 2007 was a bonafide technological revolution. Watching movies, listening to music, making phone calls, and surfing the web—all on one device. It was groundbreaking to see something its size do all those things at once, and not only do them, but with style as well.

But perhaps the most remarkable capability it had was you could write with it. Email and text messages proved to be only the beginning as one year later Apple would give third-party developers the ability to write applications for the iPhone and its phone-less companion, the iPod touch. It’s been a runaway success. But it is still primarily a device of consumption.

The iPad is the beginning of Apple bringing the iPhone platform back full-circle to the Mac, to be a platform of production as well as consumption. Apple is making iWork for it, and that means people will be creating documents, presentations, and spreadsheets with a touch screen tablet computer. That, I believe, is why Alan Kay made his now-famous remark: “Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world.”

It remains to be seen how the iPad will perform in the marketplace. And it remains to be seen if it will succeed. But this distinction of the personal, mobile computer from the old-fashioned desktop personal computer, and the seeds of its becoming a platform of production as well as consumption, is undoubtedly the reason Apple considers the iPad a revolutionary product.

Of Magic and Mirrors

Earlier today Apple announced the iPad, their “most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price.” Along with many others, my first impression was a little cynical; I tweeted, “Basically, Apple’s vision of the future of computing is a giant iPod touch.”

In all fairness, that’s exactly what the iPad is. But everything that has changed between the iPhone/iPod touch and the iPad, and everything that has stayed the same, are all reasons that make it an amazing product. So it’s a big iPod touch. That’s exactly how Apple designed it. One of the biggest problems the industry has had for years is how to acquaint consumers with the idea of using a tablet. Apple has pulled this off handily by making the iPad, from a user standpoint, a mere evolution of the iPhone. Its familiarity is a tremendous selling point, one which I don’t feel can be overstated.

The other brilliant move Apple has pulled is the price point. For the cost of an iPhone without a contract, Apple is offering you their latest creation that has access to all 140,000 iPhone apps and games. Combine this with an offer to get unlimited 3G data access for $30 a month and a new class of applications made possible by the device’s size and power, and you’ve got an amazing value proposition.

That’s the business-oriented perspective on it. The real question on everyone’s mind is, “how will people use it?” It’s an obvious question, but the implications of asking it are indicative of how important this product is. To ask it is to ask, what does the iPad mean for computer users? Which in this day and age means, what does it mean for the world of technology?

For starters, a couple things. The iPad is the first actual touch computer. It is Apple’s bet on not only the evolution of the iPhone platform, but on the future of personal computing as a whole. I don’t believe for a moment that it’s intended to replace desktop computers (my buddy Stevie doesn’t think so either), but I think it is drawing a distinct line between desktop computers and personal computers, where personal means “mobile.”

One of the first things Jobs spoke about onstage was that “Apple is the largest mobile devices company in the world.” As I see it, that was his way of saying that Apple has more experience, is better qualified, and more capable of being the personal computing company than any other company in the world. In John Gruber’s words,

…this is Apple’s way of asserting that they’re taking over the penthouse suite as the strongest and best company in the whole ones-and-zeroes racket.

It is important to note that Apple has not positioned the iPad as a replacement for anything. It is intended as a middle-class product between the iPhone and the Mac. In that regard they are playing it safe and sticking to their strengths.

That said, this product, this device, this thing is not an anomaly. It’s not an experiment, it’s not a sideshow. They’re not calling it magical because it’s a clever smoke and mirrors show; they’re calling the iPad magical because it’s going to change the way we use computers.

“

If a small startup can build the Litl, why couldn’t a big company like Dell or Sony? People today still love HP calculators made 30 or even 40 years ago. Has HP made anything this decade that anyone will remember fondly even five years from now? Inkjet printers?

These PC makers are lacking in neither financial resources nor opportunity. What they’re lacking is ambition, gumption, and passion for great software and new frontiers. They’re busy dying.

Daring Fireball: The OS Opportunity : Essays like this one are the reason why I read John Gruber’s Daring Fireball every day.

TidBITS Opinion: Why Snow Leopard Should Be (Almost) Free (link)

Adam Engst of TidBits on why Apple should make “Snow Leopard available for as little as is feasible.”

I generally agree with him, especially since it would keep the product in line with Apple’s promise that Snow Leopard would be “taking a break from adding new features.” But, if the rumors about a new, or at least updated interface are true, I imagine Apple has a lot more than under-the-hood improvements in store for Snow Leopard.

Will they sell it in retail boxes on a DVD? I think so, absolutely. Will they sell it for a much-reduced cost, “somewhere between $10 and $30”? I don’t know, but I certainly wouldn’t mind.

This is easily the best segment of the article, though:

The final reason I think it makes sense for Apple to move the Macintosh to a single coherent operating system platform is that it has already worked once. Just look at the iPhone and iPod touch, which have sold a combined 30 million units so far. With them, Apple has made major operating system upgrades either free or inexpensive (iPod touch users have had to pay small fees for upgrades). As a result, there’s a single target for developers, and a better experience for users. As far as I’m aware, almost no one has passed on the iPhone software updates.

The idea of a “single coherent” desktop platform seems a little pie in the sky to me, but what a lovely thing it is, and how wonderful it would be indeed for the Mac, developers, and Apple’s customers alike.