Year: 2013

I’ve had the same computer bag for 6 years.

It’s made of a canvas-like material, faded green, with leather zipper pull tabs and the name “n*rich” in brown and pastel-blue on the flap. It was given to me by a colleague who felt it didn’t match her style. Due to its lack of padding, I use a laptop sleeve to ensure the safety of my MacBook Air. Its design is generic; a simple messenger bag with a few pockets of various sizes.

I don’t love this bag. Though one might assume after such a long relationship, I may bear some feelings of attachment to it. But, I don’t. In fact, it’s not uncommon for me to spend a few extra minutes poking through the accessories section of the local Apple store, hoping perhaps to find the holy grail of computer bags.

***

I bought my first iPhone from an Internet friend. It was a black 3GS with a bit of wear in its plastic, but overall in fantastic condition. As I expected, owning such a piece of hardware made me feel cool, but I couldn’t have anticipated the level of intimacy I felt with this slate of glass.

This 135g technical marvel became privy to my secrets, my dreams, my work and personal life. Since that time, I’ve worn my way through several iterations of this device, yet my feeling for “it” grows stronger as the months and years go by.

***

There’s been discussion of late surrounding the idea that Apple needs to do something new with the user interface of their mobile operating system. “We want to be wowed!” bemoan the pundits, waving their iPhone-clenched fists in the air demanding to be heard. The clamouring hit an all-time peak when Sir Jony Ive was handed the reigns to Apple’s entire design effort.

And it’s hard to argue against “synergizing” the beautiful minimalism of Ive’s hardware designs and Apple’s software design. No more linen! Down with Corinthian leather! Begone, bookshelves!

The geek in me wants all these things and more. Get rid of the fake shadows, gradients, and highlights. Away with superfluous textures. Rip out the stitching!

But the user in me is afraid. I love my iPhone. Not only because of its sleek shape and comfortable feel — though those are certainly important — but because of my intimacy with the user interface.

I don’t think I want iOS to radically change. Not because I wouldn’t enjoy it, but because of the familiarity I have with how it is. Would flattening the interface reduce that level of intimacy I have with it?

Of course, things must change, adapt, grow. My precious 44×44px icons may not be the way of the future. I’ll get used to whatever’s next.

At least I’ll still have my computer bag.

[Shawn Blanc, reviewing the excellent Origami Workstation for iPad][1]:

> Another great benefit of the Workstation is that it’s device agnostic and future proof. It works perfectly with an iPad 1, 2, 3, 4, iPad mini, or even an iPhone

I concur with Shawn, I bought mine close to the same time as him and love it. I don’t use it everyday, I don’t use it every time I travel, but when I do want to use it there is no fuss. It uses the keyboard that I love, that I type with daily, and it doesn’t require any attachment to my iPad.

The mark of a great tool is something that sits waiting to be used and requires minimal effort to get it ready to be used. The Origami workstation is a great tool. Like my cordless drill, it’s just a quick step away from being useful and the rest of the time it is completely out of the way.

[1]: http://shawnblanc.net/2013/04/review-the-origami-workstation-for-ipad/

[Joe Cieplinski on Apple’s current state][1]:

> Behind every one of these products is a brilliant idea. This is not a Ping situation, where Apple saw it had made a mistake and quickly cut it loose. Every one of these and many more could easily become world-changing, competition-killing features with the right amount of polish and some proselytizing. But Apple can’t do that if it starts to adopt a more Google-like “throw it all up against the wall and see what sticks” attitude.

You should take the time to read Cieplinski’s entire article as it is well stated. Yesterday when I [argued][2] for “new and shiny” my argument wasn’t for right now. I think many people construed what I said, as saying Apple needs to take immediate action (and for the record Cieplinski’s post doesn’t appear to have any relation to mine).

What I was truly saying is more nuanced: now is the time to start *thinking* about what is next.

That doesn’t mean stop improving what you have, but start targeting something new. Cieplinski’s right that Apple really does need to refine what it has — every company should always be doing that right up and until the day that product dies — but there is also a need to keep your eyes on the future. That’s why the OS X team is working on OS X and R&D is working on the future. There’s a need for both.

I would argue that right now Apple needs a few people thinking about grand visions, while the legion focuses on making what they have work better.

All consumers will see is the boring iteration stuff, but that’s what makes the grand visions so grand.

[1]: http://www.joecieplinski.com/blog/2013/03/30/hey-apple-wheres-the-fire/
[2]: https://brooksreview.net/2013/04/new-shiny-ooo-ahh/

Each time I hear about Apple’s stock price taking another hit, or being undervalued, I can’t help but shake my head. Wall Street seems hell bent on tanking share prices for Apple over the notion that, though the company is not currently sinking, they are mere moments from striking the proverbial iceberg.

You’ve heard the arguments before: iPhone is boring, iOS is boring, iPad is boring, there’s nothing *NEW*. The counter arguments from more rational folk are strong: $100+ billion cash in the bank, profit leaders in handsets and tablets, growing computer sales amid a shrinking market, no need to change, and so on.

The problem is that both camps are wrong. Yes, Apple products are a bit boring, but they are boring because they just work as expected, not because they are bad products. Apple products are boring by design, and it just so happens that boring in this case is actually good. It’s also true that Apple is banking a lot of cash everyday, but even if Apple can run the company for years off its cash stockpile without selling a single damned thing, well that doesn’t mean that everything is OK — it’s just a *thing* that Apple could do.

Either way you look at it, both the ‘Apple is fine’ and ‘Apple is doomed’ camps are looking at the wrong things and drawing the wrong conclusions.

Apple does need excitement or they *will* eventually have to start dipping into that hoard of cash. This is not to say that Apple *needs* to make a watch or a TV set, but that Apple needs to get back out front, and be the leader that everyone else is chasing.

Because, news flash, Android and Windows Phone 8 *are* damned good. Because Samsung *is* making compelling phones. And it’s only a matter of time before there is a tablet that can rival the iPad lineup.

There’s no more time for Apple to rest on its laurels, yet that’s what it seems Apple is doing.

You can preach all you want that Apple only does things when they are good and ready to do them, but that doesn’t work in today’s world. You can’t sit back and watch your competitor release a new and exciting (for someone), phone every quarter and say to yourself “pshhaw, iPhone”. That doesn’t work. It doesn’t work for Wall Street, for tech journalists, for tech consumers, and most importantly for share holders.

Each of those groups wants just one thing: new and shiny.

Samsung is full of new and shiny, but Apple really isn’t right now. Apple’s modus operandi has been: new and shiny only when making a huge splash (e.g. iPhone, iPod, iPad), the rest of the time Apple just milks the product for everything it is worth. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great strategy provided you know when the milk is about to run out.

I think this explains the stock price conundrum: The deflated stock price has nothing to do with innovation or anything else, it’s about new and shiny — and Apple is lacking in that field — so investors are worried that Apple doesn’t know when the cow is about to dry up.

Laptops and desktops are old and boring no matter what you do to them. Tablets and smart phones are hot items, and Apple has yet to make a change to their lineup that screams “new and shiny”.

Right or wrong, this is how the world works now.

This also explains the iPad mini craze. The iPad mini sold like hot cakes — to the tune of people not being able to buy them fast enough. They sold like crazy not because they were better, but because every person could instantly tell that your iPad mini was/is, “new and shiny”. That’s not *just* another iPad, it’s *the* **new** iPad.

That’s powerful stuff.

At first glance you can’t tell an iPad 2 from 4. You can’t tell an iPhone 4 from 4S, and many can’t tell you have an iPhone 5 until they are holding it. That’s problematic when consumers are eager to show off their forward-thinking, money-wasting, ways.

Apple can survive for years staying the course they are on — truly they can. But then they become Microsoft, and my how Microsoft is struggling these days. Office has no new and shiny, and the new Windows 8 doesn’t seem to matter.

The key for Apple is going to be recognizing how long they can stay in the churning-amazing-profits-era and when they have to move back to new and shiny disruption era. I don’t think Apple is there yet, but by the same token it certainly feels like we are getting close.

***

My litmus test for “new and shiny” is what I call the stranger effect. That is, if you take your latest Apple gear into a public place and use it — do any strangers stop and ask you about it?

The Powerbook G4 had that effect when I first got one, same with: iPod, iPhone, iPad, iPad mini. But when I switched to the iPhone 5, no one noticed. When I upgraded from the iPad to the iPad 2 and then to the iPad 3 — no one noticed.

When people stop asking, stop noticing, that’s when the new and shiny is gone. It’s not a sign that you need to drop everything for a new product, but I do believe it is the sign that you need to start thinking about what is next.

There’s a couple of new backpacks that have come out that I feel are worth mentioning to fellow backpack nerds.

The first is the [Synapse 25][1] from Tom Bihn. This is a larger version of the current [Synapse 19][2], meant to be of equivalent size as my [beloved][3] ((See part [II][4],[III][5],[IV][6] of my Smart Alec reviews.)) [Smart Alec][7]. The key difference seems to be that the Synapse 25 is a more pocket friendly bag.

While the Smart Alec is basically one large cavern, the Synapse seems better for those that like more pockets. I would also note that the Synapse is designed for the Cache style laptop sleeves, which are not as protective as the Brain Cell style that the Smart Alec uses. That in no way is a deal breaker, but should be noted if you want maximum protection. The Synapse is a bit heavier, but I would guess that both bags weigh close to the same when they are loaded with laptop sleeves and such.

Next up is the [Goruck SK26][8], this is essentially the GR1 (which is a great bag) without all the military detailing on the outside of the bag. Molle straps and velcro are gone, and the bag looks fantastic.

The GR1 is a very odd backpack. [I love it][9], but I prefer the Smart Alec in almost every situation. Having said that, if I could, I would trade in my GR1 for this bag right away. It looks better, and I would feel far more comfortable traveling with it overseas instead of the GR1 (due to its less aggressive looks).

*** ***
Overall two very nice new bags, it’s going to be hard resisting the new Goruck. As for the Synapse, I have no doubt many will prefer it to the Smart Alec, but I’m not so sure I will be one who would prefer it.

[1]: http://www.tombihn.com/PROD/TB0111.html
[2]: http://www.tombihn.com/briefcases/TB0110.html
[3]: https://brooksreview.net/2011/12/backpacks-my-bff/
[4]: https://brooksreview.net/2011/12/sa-pt-ii/
[5]: https://brooksreview.net/2012/02/sa-pt-iii/
[6]: https://brooksreview.net/2012/05/diaper-bag/
[7]: http://www.tombihn.com/PROD/TB0103.html
[8]: https://www.goruck.com/Gear/Details/SK26-black
[9]: https://brooksreview.net/2012/12/gr1/

[Nate Anderson, reporting an CMA (a local ISP)][1]:

> “Wow, this is really wrong and crazy,” Henkel told me, since it suggested that companies felt free to operate as a “man in the middle,” one free to inject code of their own choosing into webpage requests that were—so users believed—simply between themselves and the websites they were trying to reach.

Basically the ISP was re-routing traffic to append some scripts to each website so that ads, *their* ads, would be shown on *every* webpage. Incredible.

This smells like a lawsuit waiting to happen:

> And it turned out that the R66T code didn’t just add banner ads to sites that had none; it even overwrote its own ads onto high profile sites like the Huffington Post, which had plenty of ads of their own.

Now, R66T, also has a great “feature” that they market:

> One of their product pitches, for instance, describes a hotel Wi-Fi system that creates an “ever-present toolbar or frame around the page that can display relevant content and information” and can handle “insertion of property related ads and promotional messages, as well as blacklisting competitors’ ads throughout the entire Web session.” A further item says that property managers can “feel secure in knowing that your competitors are not able to poach your customers while they are at your property.”

Both companies have been vague in responding to this, but CMA seems to have stopped using R66T to inject ads. However both companies seem to have updated policies in an ass-covering move that likely won’t cover their ass.

When an ISP pulls shit like this, they should be shut down — plain and simple.

[1]: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/how-a-banner-ad-for-hs-ok/?utm_source=feedburner