Category: Articles

The iPad Air reviews are out, and they appear overwhelmingly positive. As for which you should buy, only [John Gruber tackled that question][1]. Here’s his wrap-up on how I suspect most readers here will be using the iPad (as a laptop companion):

> For me, personally, with my primary uses of the iPad being reading web pages, Twitter, email, and books,2 the larger display of the Air doesn’t have as much appeal. I think I’m going to hold out and buy a new iPad Mini for myself. But it’s a damn close call.

Impressive that it is that close of a call, leading me to believe it really is more of a personal call than a call that can be backed up with clear reasons why. Interestingly, Gruber notes that thumb-typing on the mini is very important to him:

> But for me, as an iPad thumb-typist, the Mini makes it easier to type.

He also notes that he doesn’t like thumb-typing on the Air, while [Jim Dalrymple on the other hand noted this about thumb typing on the Air][2]:

> This smaller size is great. If you have decent sized hands you can type with two thumbs on the iPad in portrait, something I wasn’t really able to do with the last generation iPad without a lot of stretching. Clearly a full-size iPad is not something you will be thumb typing with all the time1, but it does give you an idea of how much smaller the iPad Air is.

I still think iPad-thumb-typers are crazy, but it’s good to know the Air is making it possible for *some* people.

[Over at AnandTech they have a great photo][3] (hit the link to see it) of the new angle that the smart cover holds the iPad at when in “movie viewing” mode. It looks like it will be a much better angle for typing with a bluetooth keyboard too.

I will say the three-panel smart covers are crap compared to the four panel ones, but the omission of metal on the cover is, erm, *smart*. ((Apologies.))

I stand by my [assessment that the Air is the way to go][4].

[1]: http://daringfireball.net/2013/10/the_iPad_air
[2]: http://www.loopinsight.com/2013/10/29/review-iPad-air/
[3]: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7460/apple-iPad-air-review
[4]: https://brooksreview.net/2013/10/air-always-the-air/

[Conor Friedersdorf](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/someone-is-lying-about-nsa-surveillance-of-angela-merkel/280907/):

> If I had to bet, I’d put my money on Obama having known all along. But if he didn’t know, it’s absurd to insist that it would’ve been too impractical to tell him.

Which is worse: the President not knowing what his own spy agency is doing (either because that agency is lying to him, or he doesn’t want to know), or the President knowing about it all, approving it, and then lying to the rest of the world (including those that elected him)?

[Federico Viticci on why he likes the iPad mini better,][1] includes this bit in his article:

> You don’t hear people saying that, because of the size differences, the 13-inch MacBook Air is for consumption and the 15-inch MacBook Pro is for creation.

Viticci’s post is really solid, but this is a really odd point. It’s odd because the better analogy is the 11″ and 13″ MacBook Air. Those two really mirror the iPad (and the coming Air) and iPad mini situation better, where the smaller is (seemingly) a lot more popular, but for many the slightly larger 13″ screen is likely the better option.

My assumption is that most people aren’t going to buy both, and are likely to use the iPad *a lot*, and given that assumption I still think he Air will be the better option (just as I would recommend the 13″ MacBook Air). If you want a smaller screen for portability, the iPhone 5S *is* the best choice.

[1]: http://www.macstories.net/stories/iPad-mini-for-content-creation/

The iPad air: is the iPad that you should get, but allow me to explain.

I’ve been mulling over which iPad to get, as I suspect many are. Before the event I figured on getting the retina iPad mini, but the Air really changes that. Right now, and I suspect with the faster chip and retina display, the mini is (and will be) primarily fantastic for three reasons:

1. It’s easier to stash in a bag, or on your person.
2. It’s easier to hold when reading for long periods. (Especially in bed, where I expect many mini lovers are using it.)
3. It may be the best wifi hotspot you can buy.

Ok, so number three isn’t really something I would consider when deciding which iPad to purchase, but it is still a fact. What the mini is not better than a full-sized iPad for is:

1. Actually reading. Perhaps this changes with the retina screen, but I have a hard time getting the font sizing feeling ideal in any app, and the mini sucks for reading web pages when compared to the full sized iPad.
2. Typing. I’m typing this on my iPad, and I type posts often on my iPad, but I actively try to avoid typing on the iPad mini. I even prefer to type on my iPhone over the iPad mini. The mini keyboard isn’t bad, it’s just very awkward to use because of the size of the device.
3. Games. Yes a faster mini will help with this, but it’s almost always a lot better to play games on a bigger screen. (I can’t think of a reason a smaller screen is better, but I don’t feel like fielding emails about this, so we will stick with “almost always”.)
4. Watching video. If smaller was better, we would have never moved beyond the original video iPod.
5. Sharing the screen with someone (i.e. “here, look at this”) is a joke on the mini. You may think this doesn’t happen often, but it does for me at work and I can’t imagine I am alone. I often share the screen when viewing PDFs, and pictures.

So unless you plan to only use your iPad when reading in bed, or a hotspot, and you usually need to quickly be able to stash the iPad — well unless you need it for *just* that, you will likely enjoy the full sized iPad air much more.

The iPad mini will always feel awesome when you pick it up, but that quickly fades once you start using it and realize that you just wish your large iPad was lighter.

Now it is.

Having both, I can say that I love the way the mini feels, but I almost always *want* to use the full size iPad if I can. I suspect that, with the iPad Air, I will have little need *or* want for an iPad mini.

[James Ball][1]:

> The National Security Agency monitored the phone conversations of 35 world leaders after being given the numbers by an official in another US government department, according to a classified document provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Sorry, where’s the problem here? Is this not the NSA’s job?

I assume the story is that President Obama agreed not to monitor a leaders phone calls? I have to assume that because this seems an awful lot like *actual* best practices for national security to me.

[1]: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/nsa-surveillance-world-leaders-calls

[Charles Arthur for The Guardian][1]:

> Yet writing in December 2005, the then head of search and user experience Marissa Mayer insisted that following a tieup to provide search for AOL, that besides never providing “biased” results, “There will be no banner ads on the Google homepage or web search results pages. There will not be crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up all over the Google site. Ever.”
> Asked why Google had gone back on that clear promise, Google said in a statement that “We’re currently running a very limited, US-only test, in which advertisers can include an image as part of the search ads that show in response to certain branded queries.”

I love the response from Google, well the non-response. It’s the old “but *our* ads are different, and users (read: advertisers) will love them.”

[1]: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-breaks-promise-banner-ads-search-results

[GPGTools is now compatible with Mavericks][1]. For those of you that don’t know what GPGTools is, it is the easiest way to setup encrypted email on your Mac. It installs two things:
1. A Mail.app plugin that allows you to toggle signing and encryption on a per-email basis with a couple of nice and easy to use buttons.
2. It installs a GPG Key manager app that helps you create an encryption key, and optionally send it to a key server for others to search.

Once you get this installed it is pretty easy to start sending secured emails. You will be prompted to enter your password to read/send encrypted emails, but that’s just about the hardest part. (The most confusing part is that you have to do a key exchange first, before you can send and receive encrypted emails. That’s why many people, including me, post their public keys on contact pages.)

They have a [nice screencast for new users here][2], and good [instructions to get setup here][3].

[1]: https://gpgtools.org/
[2]: http://support.gpgtools.org/kb/how-to/watch-our-screencast
[3]: http://support.gpgtools.org/kb/how-to/first-steps-where-do-i-start-where-do-i-begin

[Clark Goble on the new iWork][1]:

> I could go on about how almost none of the problems I’ve been griping about for four years in Numbers have been fixed. But what’s the point. Apple has spoken. It wants the OSX iWork to basically be the same as the iOS version and designed purely for casual use. By making it free they kill the market for any competitors other than Office. So if you run a small office, even if you hate MS-Office, there’s really no alternative anymore.

Goble is right that Apple wants to make iWork for casual users, but that’s not new. That was the premise of iWork from the outset. Business users don’t want pre-made letterhead, brochures, and flyers. Business users pay someone to design custom ones for themselves — they don’t need Apple telling them how a budget spreadsheet should work.

From day one, iWork was for the normal person. Which was and is a huge win for everyone. Word and Excel are cumbersome, overwrought, tools for 90% of the people using them. iWork simply isn’t.

Goble is also wrong that Apple has killed the third-party market. Apple just split it wide open. Create a spreadsheet app that rivals Excel, but works with Applescript and works with your sanity — worth $99 in my book. It’s a large shoe to fill, but it exists right now (especially given how crappy Microsoft Office is on the Mac).

[1]: http://www.libertypages.com/clarktech/?p=6597

Yesterday Apple made an announcement that we will not likely know the ramifications of (fully) for some time. That announcement centered around their software: iWork, iLife, and OS X are now free (as is iOS iWork and iOS itself). For many this will be seen as a nice little gift from Apple. iLife is solid, OS X is excellent, and iWork is mostly better than Office for 90% of users (power users being the 10% exempted). ((My argument here is that if you are starting fresh to office suites, iWork is easier to learn and get value out of. Excel is really the only reason Office is better, but that’s only for in-depth data analysis, as the rest of the features are largely replicated in Numbers.))

With that single announcement Apple made their software a feature of their devices, and not the other way around.

Now when a buyer compares a Windows laptop to a Mac, they need to factor the cost of Office to it, because you essentially get that software free with your Mac. You also need to factor in Windows upgrade pricing (not that Windows users upgrade).

Your MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini spec sheet now includes a bullet point that reads: Office apps included.

While it is obvious to draw the attack Apple lobbed towards Microsoft, it is also very much a direct response to Google.

Google’s office suite is free, has better collaboration, and runs everywhere. (Even though I’ve never liked it, I am sure it is prevalent in schools.) There’s no way not to see the new iWork with iCloud integration for collaborating as anything but a response to Google’s offering.

Apple’s two largest competitors are Microsoft and Google. On the Microsoft front Apple wants to kill them with free software (as software is where Microsoft makes their money). On the Google front Apple wants to kill them with with *better* software (as Google needs quantity of users to make money).

It’s a smart plan. It may not work, but it’s a smart plan nonetheless.

It is likely that there are going to be a lot of reviews about Mavericks, including some ridiculously in-depth ones. I’ve been using it since the first beta, so here are my assorted thoughts on the first non-cat version of OS X.

## Calendar

The new calendar is much improved over the ones of years past. The biggest addition for me is the ability to list travel times. You can set a meeting from 1p-2p, and additionally specify that it will take you 1 hour to get to the meeting. The travel portion is then reflected on your calendar, as is the actual meeting time.

The down side to the feature is that it doesn’t sync with iOS, or account for travel time *after* your meeting. So while your calendar will show that it takes 2 hours to get there, the calendar will have no indication of how long it takes to get back.

I would love for a little more Apple magic in this space. Specifically why can’t I define places and have Apple tell me the travel time. So I could define my Office, client office A, client office B and the calendar then assumes I will always be at my office, unless otherwise specified. So if my day is: office, client A and then client B — the calendar shows the travel time from my office to client A office, then tells me if I have time to come back to the office, or if I should travel to client B office right away (and that time), then assumes I head back to my office afterwards. Sounds complicated written out, but I see no reason it would be complicated in practice once default locations are setup.

So Calendar is a net positive, but the travel time addition is rather half-assed.

## Contacts

I keep all my contacts in Apple’s Contacts app. Traditionally this app looked like a book and following that tradition I loathed the app. This version of the Contacts doesn’t look like a book, and actually looks worse.

Contacts is easily the worst app that ships with Mavericks and that statement takes into account the Calculator app — an app that probably has never been updated.

## Maps

This is actually a fantastic addition for someone who does’t use Google. With the added bonus of easily sending a route, or map view to my iPhone. I really love having Maps as a part of OS X.

This is going to be really handy for those moments when you need to run to a meeting, but you don’t know where you are going. It used to be: get directions on your phone while still on wifi, then go. Now you can use a real keyboard, grab the directions quickly, shoot them to your phone. Way better.

## iCloud Keychain

I used it, but didn’t like it. 1Password is a far superior choice.

## Get It

[Mavericks is free][1], so I see no reason to not install it if you Mac is supported.

[1]: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-mavericks/id675248567?mt=12

As a nerd, you typically watch popular TV shows and think: *come on*. Hey, CSI, you can’t take a low-resolution and blurry security camera image and create a high-definition sharp image of a license plate. And you certainly cannot do that with just a few keystrokes and no mouse movement at all.

*So unrealistic.*

It’s also fun to look back at old TV shows and movies and laugh at how the entire plot is moot if one or more characters had a cell phone or iPad. And for years nerds have *known* that you can’t just ‘hack’ into XYZ server in a few minutes time — even if you are Chloe.

But then we found out that maybe if you are the government you *can* hack into these places. Not because you are that good of a hacker, but because the NSA had already spent months hacking into the system in preparation for you needing access at a future crucial point in the plot.

Which now presents TV and movie writers with a really awkward problem: they know just how powerful the NSA is, and it is more powerful than they thought the public would find believable to begin with.

This all came to a head last night when I was watching the most recent episode of Homeland (warning: possible spoilers ahead). In this episode the main character, Carrie (former CIA), is trying to escape the watchful eye of the CIA. Now pre-Snowden this episode would have been fine, but post Snowden (and even logically) it had a lot of problems.

1. Carrie kept her cell phone with her. She called a CIA contact that had the CIA listening in on the call next to him on this phone. Yet the CIA couldn’t find her? Come on. First of all it was an Android phone and we should have every reason to suspect that not only could the NSA/CI,A working together, find her, but that they could tap the mic on her phone to listen in. Yet, the CIA, didn’t find her. Magic phone?
2. Carrie also went to an ATM and into the branch of the bank only to find her accounts frozen. In reality the NSA/CIA would have known about this about 1 second after it happened, and yet… nothing. Dumb luck?

Ok, it’s fair to say that (due to the “twist” ending) the CIA really didn’t want to find her, but even still wouldn’t a trained CIA person, well anyone at the CIA, still ditch their phone and stay away from banks and ATMs? That seems like “on the run” 101.

Even if you don’t buy that, then what do you make of the fact that the kids in the episode who went on the run ditched their cellphones saying “they can track the GPS in these”. Yeah… oops the the former-spook didn’t think to do that, but a couple if dumb-shit teens thought of it? *Come on.*

This is very likely to be an ongoing problem for TV and movies going forward. In order to make the show based somewhat in reality, writers now have to account for the fact that if the government is after you, you are likely screwed. And that is just going to cause all sorts of problems for future plots, as characters are going to have to go dark and no longer will there be that tense period of “the character doesn’t know the government is after them, but the character manages to luckily escape”.

Basically all future characters will have to use pretend encryption on everything, thus talking to no “normal person”, and/or go on the run *before* anyone is after them.

[David Pogue, announcing his leaving NYT for Yahoo][1]:

> It’s not easy leaving the Times, especially when you admire it as much as I do. No matter what happens to prose on paper, the Times itself, as a gatherer and curator of news, will always be necessary and important. The culture may be changing, and the readership may be shifting, but this paper steadfastly focuses on responsible journalism, ironclad ethics and superb writing. I’ll always be a loyal ally.

I don’t have any particular interest in this news, but what I find interesting is the overall trend. The trend of, shall we say, “big name” writers for publications leaving larger publications to start their own. We are seeing this right now with Pogue, Greenwald, Mossberg and Swisher, Lessin, et al.

How many of these sites can the web sustain? I ask that not because I think the web can only sustain a finite amount of web sites, but because the business models underlying the web seem to only sustain a finite amount. As ad dollars need to be spread around more, the overall ad rates drop will drop across the board. Paywalls will become harder to run, ((And that’s saying a lot.)) as the wallet share is being pulled in more directions.

Advertisers can’t afford to pay high ad rates for every sites, and publishers already struggle to get advertisers to pay enough (and get advertisers to begin with). Readers cannot afford to “subscribe” to every site, and many *won’t* pay to subscribe to even their favorite sites. This doesn’t seem like an industry setup for success to me.

I don’t like consolidation in general, but it seems to me that if every writer who reaches X level of fame leaves to start their own publication, then pretty soon these small publications will all have to merge, or face overall declining revenue and wages. Having an audience and traffic is only the smallest part of success. Getting someone, *anyone*, to pay is the hardest and most important part. [Trust me on this][2].

[1]: http://pogueman.tumblr.com/post/64682813641/goodbye-and-hello
[2]: https://brooksreview.net/members/

[Interesting turn of events for Apple][1]. The choice Apple now faces is how to enforce their patents. It seems HTC and Microsoft/Nokia are likely fine due to earlier patent licensing deals, but Samsung and Google aren’t looking to hot. However, I don’t think it is as dire as Jason Mick makes it out to be.

Apple was out for blood with Google/Samsung, but that seemed driven more by “hot heads” than by business motivations (i.e. it was personal). It seemed like it was pushed by Steve Jobs with perhaps Forstall encouraging it. The read I have on Tim Cook is that he is a lot more analytical in his operations.

The smartest move would be to make it *more* expensive to sell Android devices through licensing agreements with these companies. They could still be crafted, like Google does with Google Android apps, that would keep Android hardware companies “in line” but that would also make money for Apple with each handset sold.

This should be very interesting to watch. ((I’d love for Apple to be a little cheeky and line-item Android patent licensing income. “And this quarter we made $793 million dollars from Android device sales. Off of Android sales of XX million units, note that is not the activation number Google touts, but the real ‘sold’ figure, as calculated by our licensing partners.”))

[1]: http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Patent+on+Touch+Typing+Multitouch+Upheld+Allows+Ban+on+Most+Androids/article33580.htm?utm_medium=App.net&utm_source=PourOver

[This is a very interesting white paper][1] on the security built into iMessage. The outcome of which, [as summarized by Ars Technica][2], is that Apple theoretically *could* engineer iMessage in a way that it captures messages.

[Not surprisingly Apple has responded to AllThingsD][3]:

> “iMessage is not architected to allow Apple to read messages,” said Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller in a statement to **AllThingsD**. “The research discussed theoretical vulnerabilities that would require Apple to re-engineer the iMessage system to exploit it, and Apple has no plans or intentions to do so.”

Once again, this all comes down to trust of the company. Do you trust Apple to evade pressures from, say, the NSA for Apple to thwart this? For as big as Apple is, I trust them to do just that — flip off the NSA. Why? There’s lots of reasons I have, none of them particularly good, or worth sharing.

I do want to point out, that Apple’s argument sounds a lot like [Ladar Levison of Lavabits][4] argument. The “yeah, we *could* do that, but it ain’t gonna happen” argument.

[1]: http://blog.quarkslab.com/imessage-privacy.html
[2]: http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/10/contrary-to-public-claims-apple-can-read-your-imessages/
[3]: http://allthingsd.com/20131018/apple-no-we-cant-read-your-imessages/
[4]: https://rally.org/lavabit

[John Gruber][1]:

> I think the single biggest improvement Apple could (and really must) make to Siri is to make it faster. And that’s exactly the sort of thing Apple has never really shown the chops for.

I agree with the idea that Siri needs to be a lot faster, but it is the last sentence that I find odd. Because it seems to me that long-time Apple fans are incredibly skeptical that Apple will *ever* be able to have good “cloud” offerings (e.g. Siri, iCloud, sync, file storage, etc.) for the same reasons the Wall Street is skeptical of long-term Apple success.

These Apple-fans tend to point to past Apple failings as evidence of Apple will likely have future failings in cloud offerings — while at the same time these Apple-fans are mocking others that point to past Apple failings as indications of likely future failures in, well, anything. ((Notwithstanding the fact that I admit that .Mac and MobileMe were pretty crappy by general web standards.))

Seems a bit *off* to me.

[1]: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/10/17/siri-response-times

You are likely to hear a lot about a new weather app called [Weather Line][1] today. It’s making the rounds and a lot of people (rightfully) love it. I was one of the people that can brag that they got early access — though I think I may have been the last one added, doesn’t matter.

I’m personally still a bit undecided about the app. I like many things about it, but I have yet to have that moment where I feel the “yep, this is it”. That said here’s a few general thoughts on the app:

1. My sentiments are pretty closely reflected by what [Shawn Blanc said about the app][2]: “So, is Weather Line the best new general purpose weather app you can buy? I don’t think so (because of its lack of radar). But it is a fantastic app nonetheless.” (Great photo on his review too, if I do say so myself. And I do.)
2. Truly fantastic icon.
3. The more I use the app, the more annoying I find looking at other weather apps that don’t show hourly forecasts as pretty lines on a graph. That said, I am not sold on these pretty lines being the best way to display *current* weather conditions. When I want to check the weather right now, I just want to glance at the screen and that is hard to do with Weather Lines.

Overall, this is a solid weather app. I personally think it is more geared to weather nerds than, say, my parents.

[1]: http://weatherlineapp.com/
[2]: http://shawnblanc.net/2013/10/weather-line/