Thomas Verschoren, responding to yours truly:
> So even when the iPhone is seen as a luxury item, people still oppose to paying for apps.
Verschoren offers some anecdotal evidence that in Belgium iPhones *are* expensive, and even still people balk at paying for apps.
Alyson Shontell writing for tech-blog equivalent of TMZ:
>Facebook’s billionaire founder bought four homes surrounding his current home near Palo Alto, Mercury News reports. The houses cost him more than $30 million, including one 2,600 square-foot home that cost $14 million. (His own home is twice as large at 5,000 square-feet and cost half as much.)
He bought those home so he could have privacy. NO, really.
Bruce Schneier’s advice on setting up an Air Gap:
>Air gaps might be conceptually simple, but they’re hard to maintain in practice. The truth is that nobody wants a computer that never receives files from the Internet and never sends files out into the Internet. What they want is a computer that’s not directly connected to the Internet, albeit with some secure way of moving files on and off.
In case you are wondering, no I do not have an air gap setup. I wouldn’t mind it, but no, I don’t.
Dan Frommer with the bad news:
>The biggest roadblock, for me, is data speed. T-Mobile’s free international roaming is only for 2G data service, which you probably haven’t used day-to-day since the first iPhone. After getting used to LTE speeds at home, it will seem unusably — or at least uncomfortably — slow.
YIKES. When I roamed in Canada a year ago I was bumped down to 3G speeds and I thought the world had ended. I’d expect my wireless carrier to pay *me* for using 2G, not the other way around.
Claire Cain Miller and Vindu Goel writing about a sleazy marketing company:
>If a user follows a bakery on Google Plus or gives an album four stars on the Google Play music service, for instance, that person’s name, photo and endorsement could show up in ads for that bakery or album.
>Google said it would give users the chance to opt out of being included in the new endorsements, and people under the age of 18 will automatically be excluded.
[John Gruber, in an excellent article about Apple naysayers, points out][1]:
> The point is to show that Apple’s customers are demographically different. The Mac today has roughly 10 percent of the PC market, but it’s not just any randomly distributed 10 percent of the market. Quite the opposite — Apple’s 10 percent of the market is entirely comprised of the high end of the market. Mac users are discriminating, willing to pay more for a product they deem superior.
With Macs and iPads, I think Gruber is correct. However, with each passing quarter this is a harder argument to make for iPhone users. A large and loyal segment will always be willing to pay more, but as the market size of the iPhone grows the customer base will be more diluted and thus, become more “cheap” and less high-end.
That’s the shift I think we are seeing with app sales right now in the App Store. The largest group of potential buyers are cheap asses that don’t want, or won’t ever, pay for an app. The lure to iOS used to be “there’s an app for that”. Now I fear the lure being sold (not by Apple mind you) is “there’s a *free* app for that”.
The common refrain I hear when people are recommending apps to each other is: “Is it free?” “No. It’s $0.99.” “I bet I can find a free version.”
Judging by the crappy ad laden apps that sit in the top rankings of the App Store, it seems that consumers with iPhones are willing to endure these ads if that means no money out of pocket. And you know what company is better at making free, but ad-laden products? *Google*.
I highly doubt that iPhone users will jump ship en masse to Android, but you have to stay open to the possibility that sexy Android phones with a lot of free apps is potentially a far bigger draw to the general market than anything the iPhone can offer on any front.
Hell, it *might* even be better for the iPhone long-term to get these users over to Android.
[1]: http://daringfireball.net/2013/10/design_quality_as_a_sustainable_advantage?utm_medium=App.net&utm_source=PourOver
G.K. Chesterton (via Jason Kottke):
> It is perfectly obvious that in any decent occupation (such as bricklaying or writing books) there are only two ways (in any special sense) of succeeding. One is by doing very good work, the other is by cheating.
Kottke (as always) has chosen some great excerpts from this 1915 book — worth your time today.
New backpack from Goruck:
> GR0 is exactly proportionate to GR1, only 5 liters smaller. Fitwise, if you’re under 6’ tall, GR0. Over 6’ tall, GR1. GR0 has all the same features as GR1, including 3 rows of MOLLE webbing and compatibility with the GR1 Field Pocket.
Sounds like a great option for smaller people.
*Side note: I am currently testing the SK26 to confirm my [“bags” conclusion](https://brooksreview.net/2013/09/bags-again/).*
[Garrett Murray][1]:
> Completely agree with all of this. In daily use, Touch ID fails for me about 25% of the time, often three or four times in a row. I’ve removed and rescanned my fingerprints several times but it doesn’t appear to make a difference.
Ditto. My hands were dry one evening (like lacking natural moisture) and I couldn’t unlock my iPhone. My hands were wet one afternoon from rainy weather, and I couldn’t unlock my iPhone. I found that if you add your thumbs when they are dry, you get a better success rate, but that is lame.
I really love Touch ID, but when it doesn’t work it is maddening. Like Murray, that’s about 20% of the time for me. But of that 20% that it doesn’t work, it means spending a long time trying to get into my iPhone.
Again, *maddening*.
Don’t even get me started on that “renew Touch ID purchases” dialog — I want to punch whomever made that decision in the face.
[1]: http://log.maniacalrage.net/post/63505022839/michael-tsai-iphone-5s-first-impressions
[Christina Warren on app store price sensitivity][1]:
> It’s no longer enough for developers to make the top 10 the first week of release. Now they need to stay in the top 10 for weeks on end if they want to make the same amount of revenue. As a result, developers of paid apps are going to have to look at freemium and other IAP models to supplement their costs.
I’m fairly skeptical that IAP and freemium, hell even outright paid, models are the right answer for making any money in the app store. [I think Marco Arment is closer to what makes for actual success][2]: something not just better, but a lot better, than the existing apps.
No matter what the business model of your app, if it is good and you can get the word out about the app, then rest assured you can make money. But making an app much better than the existing apps and getting the word out are not easy things — not even remotely easy.
There are, I have to believe, a lot of great apps hidden in the dungeon of the app store — apps that I would probably love. But how do you find out about them? If you can answer that, I think you can find success in the App Store.
[1]: http://mashable.com/2013/10/08/state-of-paid-apps/
[2]: http://www.marco.org/2013/10/08/sherlocking-myself
Dr. Drang:
>The most surprising thing to me was that battery capacity actually went down after the original iPhone and didn’t become substantially greater than that initial capacity until the 5s. The huge increase in processing capability over the past 6 years has come with only a 15% increase in battery capacity.
If you consider that iPhone battery performance has gotten better over that same time while the overall speed has improved significantly (and screen resolution), well it is hard not to be impressed. I’d love to see the same analysis done for an Android phone.
> Nothing but sales will come in the long run from you holding one of our cans of delicious AriZona Iced Tea like a big, hard cock and it is absolutely NOT in ANY way costing us anything for this advertising. Thank you for taking a picture with the label out so people can see that 99 cents for a tall can of iced tea is a great value (even for you) and then also the thing where you hold it like a thick boner and stick your tongue out. Just fantastic stuff all around.
[Marco Arment][1]:
> The Protect follows the apparent Nest mission of premium, “smart” updates to widely hated, “dumb” household devices, but I don’t think it’s providing a big enough benefit to a big enough problem for many people to upgrade. If your smoke detector has too many false alarms, moving it is going to be a far more effective upgrade.
Agreed. After the fiasco that came of my Nest, ((It stopped working and charging, even though I meet all the requirements. They shipped me out a “resistor” to be installed, but never had someone install it. I followed up 4 months later and they told me “Oh, we don’t have any technicians in your area, we would pay about $85 to any company you choose to install it.” Great, I can install it, just give me the wiring diagram. “We can’t do that sir.” Why? “You are not licensed.” Neither would any company not on your list be to work on this, it’s just a resistor. “Sorry.” Well, fuck you to Nest.)) not sure I am interested in these products any longer.
[1]: http://www.marco.org/2013/10/08/nest-smoke-detector?utm_medium=App.net&utm_source=PourOver
[Shawn Blanc on DSPTCH straps][1]:
> I’ve been using both of the DSPTCH straps for quite a while now and they are fantastic. The build quality and materials used are just great; they are comfortable; and DSPTCH uses interchangeable connectors to attach their straps to the camera’s lug mounts.
I love these straps. I have been using them for quite a while and it is awesome to be able to easily switch between the two strap types. My only complaint about the shoulder strap is that it is a bit slick — other than that I have no issues with the straps whatsoever.
[1]: http://shawnblanc.net/2013/10/dsptch-straps/
John Carey on the Fujifilm X-Pro1:
>What Fuji has done is stepped into a quickly changing and infamously finicky market space and laid into place the intention to keep alive the long standing essence of photography while still managing to maintain a clear strategy in keeping various levels of more casual shooters fulfilled as they work their way backwards from the flagship X-Pro1, a camera released over a year ago yet rather than haphazardly releasing a predecessor, has chosen to refine and improve on its existing tech through firmware updates and trying out ideas on the other cameras in the line as well as through a continuously expanding native lens selection.
Great read for anyone thinking about downsizing from a dSLR. I keep my 5D in my car, but rarely (if ever) use it. My iPhone and GX1, they get used *all* the time.
Bruce Schneier:
>It becomes increasingly difficult to attack their systems and defend our systems, because everything is using the same systems: Microsoft Windows, Cisco routers, HTML, TCP/IP, iPhones, Intel chips, and so on. Finding a vulnerability — or creating one — and keeping it secret to attack the bad guys necessarily leaves the good guys more vulnerable.
[The award goes to John Casasanta of taptaptap for the Camera+ release notes](http://taptaptap.com/blog/look-over-there-pal-its-camera-4-2/):
> And then we thought about jumping on the bandwagon where we put Camera+ out as a whole new app and let existing customers pay for it all over again. And of course there’d be the ensuing sh__storm where those customers felt cheated and we’d have to backpedal and reverse that shortsighted decision.
> So it was Clear that that would’ve been a knuckleheaded move, so instead we decided to treat our lovely customers fairly and make Camera+ 4.1 a free update as we’ve always done. But then we felt like it was all give and no take… so to make us feel better about giving-in too easily, we chose to call it version 4.2. That’ll teach you to mess with us.
*Really?*
[Randy Rieland, with a][1] honestly I don’t even know how to preface this, so here you go:
> In August, Google was awarded a patent to allow for the use of something known as “pay-per-gaze” advertising. In its application, the company noted that “a head-mounted tracking device”—in other words, Google Glass—could follow where the person wearing it was gazing, and be able to send images of what they saw to a server. Then, any billboards or other real-world ads the person had seen would be identified and Google could charge the advertiser. As noted in the New York Times’ Bits blog, the fee could be adapted based on how long the ad actually held the person’s gaze.
*Finally*.
[Claire Cain Miller on sleezy practices][2]:
> Google, the biggest online advertising company, is considering a new way to help advertisers track people across the Web and consolidate its power in the industry.
Cookies are *so* 2010. Won’t it be great when using Chrome means that Google will be tracking your every move on the web and reporting that back to the NSA, I mean Kellogs, or Viagra, or `___________`.
The best Google related news was this puff piece from Steven Max Patterson’s, now banned by TBR standards, article in Quartz, where he [presstitutes][3] for Google:
> Until now, Google hasn’t talked about malware on Android because it did not have the data or analytic platform to back its security claims. But that changed dramatically today when Google’s Android Security chief Adrian Ludwig reported data showing that less than an estimated 0.001% of app installations on Android are able to evade the system’s multi-layered defenses and cause harm to users.
[I’ll leave the Macalope to clean this one up][4]:
> What about apps that simply ask users to give them permission to harm them? Seems like those are the ones that are more of a problem.
I don’t know what the real malware problem on Android is, but I doubt that Google knows how big that issue is either — and that’s the problem.
[1]: http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/ideas/2013/10/will-google-glass-make-us-better-people-or-just-creepy/
[2]: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/google-is-exploring-an-alternative-to-cookies-for-ad-tracking/?_r=0
[3]: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=presstitute&defid=1621012
[4]: http://www.macworld.com/article/2052307/macalope-weekly-fairness-and-accuracy-in-the-media.html
[Nik Fletcher, writing about IAP and developers complaining about lack of sales, concludes with this bit][1]:
> The majority of customers, I’d argue, see the iPhone a bit like this: the iPhone is a device with little-to-no up-front cost, with payment made for the services that provide value. That sounds familiar…
He’s specifically refuting the “people with $800 phones are complaining about a $3 app” arguments. I’d agree with him on this too. Consumers simply don’t see their iPhone as an expensive thing — it’s not (in that sense) a luxury item.
A cellphone is seen as a necessity by a great many of these consumers, and it’s a necessity that must be replaced (for whatever reason) with regularity. So it’s not a matter of the cost of the phone, but the cost of the phone relative to the other phone choices (keep in mind the “free” iPhone is still in play here). For many, there is no other choice than the iPhone, or the choice is close enough in price for it not to matter.
I’ll admit, I don’t “get” these people, but I never will. What I can understand though is the logic of not thinking an iPhone is as “luxury” as it truly is. With that in mind, the lack of willingness to buy $3 apps makes a fraction more sense to me.
[1]: http://nikf.org/blog/offers-in-app-purchases