Google vs. Apple, this could get messy…
Posted by Andrew | Filed under Mac Media, iPhone
It was Steve Jobs who pointed out during his excellent D8 discussion this year that it was Google who decided to enter the phone market and compete with Apple. They of course made this decision after Eric Schmidt became a member of Apple’s board in 2006 only to resign after issues concerning conflict of interest last year. And now, Wall Street Journal reports that Google wants to enter the online music industry. Not a lot of real information yet, but they say that it will launch at some point with in the next year.
In other news, people in Palo Alto, California have reported what seems to be rampant screaming of various obscenities. Well, clearly he saw this coming, right? Google is the largest online services company in the world I think, and it is only natural that after Apple and Amazon have entered the online music industry that Google would follow. Especially since they do have Android, and their is money to made in music and ringtone sales on mobile phones as has been already proved.
But does Apple really have to worry about Google and their dinky music store? It’s not like they have to worry about their dinky phone operating system, or at least not yet. Nielsen’s recent reports indicate that Apple has 28% of the smartphone market compared to Android’s 9, which is also still less than Microsoft’s and RIM’s (which is still the dominate).
And look at iTunes, it has over a quarter market share of the U.S. music industry. That’s not a quarter of digital downloads, that’s overall against bog box retailers like Best Buy and Wal-Mart. They hold a vast majority of the digital market which is already crowded with the likes of Amazon, Real Networks, and some other meaningless companies that don’t matter anymore like MySpace and Microsoft.
And frankly, Apple should be happy that Google wants to enter the digital music market and potentially hook it into the Android OS. It will take some of the heat off from the investigation that the Department of Justice is conducting of Apple and iTunes.
Why Flash is not Important
Posted by Andrew | Filed under iPad, iPhone
When Apple originally introduced the iPhone at MacWorld in 2007, many people were unhappy about it’s initial lack of support for Flash. Many though it would be added by launch later that year, and then again with the introductions of the iPhone 3G and 3GS. So far, it hasn’t come and with the introduction of the iPad, another device with no Flash support, it doesn’t look like Flash is coming to the Apple mobile platform. And that is a good thing.
I watch a lot of video on my MacBook Pro. H.264 files run without issue as do XVid or any other codec I run through VLC. Even Silverlight, a competitor to Flash made by Microsoft, has no problem running on my machine (NetFlix streaming in the browser uses Silverlight). And yet, every time I wish to watch any show or video on either YouTube or hulu, it always sounds like there is a jet taking off of my desk. Why on earth does Flash need so many CPU cycles?
Now that HTML 5 is finally starting to come into the spotlight and may actually become certified within the next year, Flash is dead anyway. Dave Hyatt is one of the lead developers of HTML 5 and the person responsible for such things as the Safari web browser, found on Macs, iPhones, and the iPad. The new standard will allow videos to be played within the web browser without the need for additional plug-ins. Finally, it won’t feel like we’re surfing the web in 1997 anymore.
Flash would add a whole level of complication to the iPhone and iPad that just isn’t necessary anymore. With the new HTML standard, and things like H.264 streaming video like what the YouTube application on the iPhone currently uses, Flash is just a big bloated memory hog that will crash your phone and cause problems. How many times has your browser, whether it be IE or Firefox or even Safari crashed when you were trying to use a website with Flash? And doesn’t Flash encourage bad habits like annoying background music and unnecessary website intro videos?
And don’t get me started on entire web sites built in Flash. At some point, the people depending on Flash for the functionality of their sites will have to give in to the heavy hand of Apple and move to more elegant and simple solutions for their web sites. And hopefully, that will mean that HTML 5 can be put on the fast track to certification.
iPhone vs. iPod touch
Posted by Andrew | Filed under iPhone, iPod
We Apple fanboys now have an interesting choice on our hands. We now have the greatest iPod ever created in two different formats. We can get the iPhone which includes the iPod, the PDA functionality, the Safari web browser, and of course, the cell phone. With the $200 price drop of the 8GB version of the iPhone, there is now only one problem with it, and that would be the signing your soul to AT&T for two years.
Then there’s the iPod touch. The iPod touch is everything the iPhone is along with twice as much flash storage at that $399 price point. Except for the phone, and that is really it’s only down point. It is much more convenient to have the phone built into the device so you don’t have to carry a cell phone in addition.
But, that’s all very obvious and you must be wondering why I’m even bothering to bring this up. I want to know what you personally think about this. Is the iPhone worth it’s two sentencing or is the idea of continuing to carry a cell phone and an iPod so barbaric that your willing to put up with AT&T’s customer service?
In my humble opinion, the iPod touch is the best choice because I would rather carry two devices for two simple reasons. Number one, I prefer T-Mobile to AT&T and plan on moving to T-Mobile when I can end this sorry excuse for a service contract with Unicel. And two, chicks dig guys who are tech savvy, and what’s more tech savvy then carrying numerous electronic devices?