Recent Articles

Tom Hume on skeuomorphism:
>I also find this line of reasoning supportive of my emotional response to skeuomorphs: on the desktop I find the hardback feel of the address book tacky; on a touch-screen device I find an almost-identical interface absolutely fine:

That’s a good point — skeuomorphism makes sense when it is a thing you are physically interacting with (such as on a touch screen), but seems confusing (if not stupid) on a touch-less computer screen.

Jon Mitchell:

>If we have any data we should host ourselves, it’s our personal journals. I don’t care whether it’s digital or analog, paper or plastic, but journaling is important. It’s just as narcissistic on Path as it has always been; we occasionally need to reflect on ourselves to remember what has happened to us. But our journals could never “pivot” or “exit” before. Nor could they advertise to us.

Well said.

Looks like that last “pivot” for Color didn’t work. I wonder how much money they have left at this point…

Dan Frommer traded in his 32 GB wi-fi iPad for the 64 GB LTE model — I too have been seriously considering upping to a 64 GB model from my 32 GB. Why? Frommer states it pretty well:

>I wasn’t running out of space yet on the 32 GB version, but I can see how I might.

The Macalope:

>This screen size argument is just another instance of feature chasing. Saying “Other phones have it so Apple must ship one, too!” is just admitting “I have no idea how Apple designs products.”

Wait, I guess I am really out of touch, because I had no idea employers asked potential employees for their Facebook passwords. Moreover, who would want to take a job at a company that asks for that information? Not me.

Joshua Topolsky writing about Mike Daisey’s lies:

>Daisey’s lies inspired honest questions about the gadgets in our pockets. Did he betray the trust of the public and journalists by lying? The answer to this question is easy: Yes. But were the lies necessary?

Topolsky never comes out and clearly answers that last question, but he does say this near the end:

>Mike Daisey is not a hero, but I’m not sure he’s a villain either.
>He leaned into his lies to sell tickets to a show, to get on network TV, to make money and get famous. But along the way — either on purpose or by accident — he opened a lot of eyes.

So I can only assume that lying, in Topolsky’s eyes, can be justified if it is done so out of necessity. That’s a good reason not to read a single word Topolsky writes.

Adam Satariano:
>There was at least one group glad that Consumer Reports posted its review: headline writers.

I don’t really get the argument here. Clint Boulton is making the case that the new iPad can and will cause two problems for businesses:

1. Bandwidth issues.
2. Data plan prices.

He says that the LTE speed will clog networks — but those networks aren’t in the control of any corporation except those providing them. Then he talks about going over data plans by watching HD video and checking in on March Madness — yet data plans have always had caps.

The HD video argument is valid because now iPad users are probably seeking out that quality, but checking March Madness stats isn’t going to take any more data than it did on the older iPads. Websites don’t necessarily get larger just because a device has faster cellular internet, or a larger screen. I get where he is going, but the fact is that even though the iPad can display high resolution graphics, most website don’t serve those. Further just because a user can download things faster, doesn’t mean they will download *more* things.

More than all of that though, I don’t get why this argument doesn’t end with the simple solution of allowing iPads onto corporate WiFi networks. ((My guess is that is too non-confrontational and easy.)) That would eliminate all of the concerns. He almost gets there with the Hyatt example, but instead of using that as the new model it seems Boulton is looking for page views by criticizing a new Apple product. Lame.