3.3.1

April 11, 2010

Ever since last week’s introduction of iPhone OS 4 by Apple, one section number has been swirling through the heads of developers around the world: 3.3.1. In Apple’s latest license agreement for software that runs on iPhones, iPods, and iPads, Apple has restricted any software originally built using any languages other than C, C++, and Objective-C.

Adobe (among many others) isn’t a fan of these new terms. One of the most anticipated features of their upcoming CS5 suite is the ability to use Adobe Flash and convert programs into apps that could be used on the iPhone platform — well, at least before the change in terms by Apple.

I’ve been reading through developer responses over the last few days. Some people support Apple. Some think the change is a ploy by the fruit company to lock devs into using Apple products and therefore drive more Mac sales.1 Some people seem to think that Apple just flat-out hates developers.2

Personally, I’m right in the middle. I think developers should be able to use whatever tools they want to build their apps, but I also understand Apple’s position. I think it’s pretty simple, actually.

The core of Apple

To understand why Apple made the change, you have to understand Apple. Sure, they want to make money and encourage people to stay on the iPhone platform, but I believe that Apple’s desire to uphold the user experience for users of their iPhone-class devices is just as important to them.

Yes, I’d prefer that Apple would accept non-C/C++/Obj-C apps and at least give them a shot at a review. I still wish there was a way for advanced users to hook apps into their phone without using the App Store, too. Apple would prefer an experience where everything has been tested for quality before it reaches users at all. Seems like Apple’s taking the “well, if you don’t like it, nobody says you have to write for our platform” approach with this one.

Apple’s all about the experience. They’ve published extensive interface guidelines for programmers that detail how every element — right down to submit buttons — should work. They’ve decided not to approve apps based on their inconsistencies with the “iPhone’s distinctive user experience.” And now (as John Gruber explains well) they’re limiting apps that most often don’t match the quality or user experience of those built specifically for the iPhone.

A common cry from developers opposed to the change is that Apple has placed the needs of developers second. That’s true. But Apple isn’t first, despite what opponents of the change would like you to believe. The user and his experience with the product comes first. And that’s how it should be.

1. I don’t agree with this point at all. Apple has encouraged – not limited – people to build web apps specifically tailored for the iPhone, and they can be made without any review or approval by Apple. iPhone web apps can do almost everything native apps can do (less any functions that depend on hardware, of course).

2. I don’t agree with this, either. There are over 140,000 iPhone apps in the App Store, and I’d bet that many of those were made by people who wouldn’t otherwise have that level of opportunity and exposure to make money with software development. In addition Apple’s development terms are, in many ways, much less restrictive than those of Nintendo or Microsoft.

Taste and technology

April 6, 2010

Back in 2003, I wrote a lengthy post about Illuminator, my first home-built computer. I analyzed every tech spec and was so proud of what a great experience it would allow me to have.

I’ve had an iPad since Saturday. I absolutely love it.

Look at how far we’ve come.

Same place, new face

April 1, 2010

As spring creeps in once again, I decided it was time to do a home page refresh. JustinRussell.com has a brand new look for April, and it’s my favorite version of my home page to date.

It’s tough to believe, but this is the tenth version of my home page. The first public version came online in July 1999, a small site mostly focused around calculator programs for the TI-83. The web was different then, and for the past few years I’ve struggled to create a place online that ties together who I am and what I do.

My relatively short-lived latest version of justinrussell.com did a great job at listing the stuff I wrote around the web. It had its drawbacks, though; this blog and my photography sites were sort of disjointed from my home page. With the new version, I’ve set out to create a home page that I can show to someone as a representation of who I am.

Fair warning: I hope to post more on this blog from now on, and I’m guessing the posts will be on the long side. If you prefer something a little shorter, head on over to twitter.com/justinrussell. (I’ve found that writing makes me happy. I think I should do whatever I can to be happy this year, don’t you?)

A conversation between IE9 and other browsers

March 17, 2010

Following the IE9 preview at MIX10 (the good stuff starts around 47:30), all the major browsers assembled for a rare meeting to discuss the state of CSS3. This is what they said.

IE9: Hey, guys! I’m IE9.

Other browsers: Oh, hey! We’ve been hearing a lot about you.

IE9: Yeah! And I’m really excited, because now I have CSS3!

Other browsers: Oooh, neat! So you have text-shadow, gradients, font-face, box-shadow, all that stuff we have? This is great!

IE9: Let’s look at border-radius. People love border-radius.

Other browsers: Um, ok.

IE9: Lemme give you a little demo. See, if you have a huge dotted border, you guys all suck. But look at me! There are actual dots!

Other browsers: Hm, yeah, looks like it. But how often do people use huge dotted–

IE9: How the heck can you call yourselves good CSS3 browsers when a huge dotted border is so frickin’ ugly? So what I’m going to do is publish some test suites so that you can fix the CSS3 stuff that you guys don’t do well.

Other browsers: Test suites? Oh, ok. Like Acid3?

IE9: Acid3 is “interesting” and we’ll work on it raising our score. But check out that border-radius thing! That’s just messed up.

Other browsers: I guess we’ll stick with the IE CSS hacks for now then.

IE9: So these test suites will help you guys can fix all this stuff you’re doing wrong with CSS3. Because we don’t want to reach a point where people have to massage code to work across different browsers.

Other browsers: Yeah, that would completely suck. By the way, how’re IE6 and IE7 doing anyway?

A new spin for Valentine’s

February 14, 2010

I’ve never cared for holidays that divide people. Let’s face it: every year, a lot of people feel sad, lonely, or uncomfortable when February 14th rolls around.

Let’s agree to tweak the aim of Valentine’s Day a bit. Take a few minutes today and remind at least two friends, family members, or associates how much you love or appreciate that they are a part of your life.

Let’s make today a holiday about love that’s accessible to everyone.

Five iPad apps I really want to see

February 3, 2010

iPad applicationsIt’s been a week since Apple announced the iPad, the product that will either be biggest flop in Apple’s history or the next wave of computing and the solution to all the world’s problems, depending on what you read. For a short time after the keynote I debated whether I’d buy one when they emerge in March… but that quickly changed to the question of which model I’d end up purchasing.

Over on Another New World, I wrote about why user interface will probably be the revolution in iPad development. I truly believe that we’ll see some amazing new concepts from developers. But why wait until the device comes out? Here are five apps I’d love to see available for the iPad.

1. A photo editor

In his keynote, Steve Jobs emphasized that this is a great device for viewing and sharing photos. But what about editing? I would love to be able to sit down on my bed or futon, control iPhoto-like sliders with my fingers, and go through a day’s photos without having to bother with a mouse. If the app seamlessly integrated with my iPhoto library, well, that’d be even better.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Apple launches a $10 iPad-based iPhoto with the next version of iLife. But it doesn’t need to be an Apple app – there’s a great niche for a company to become the Picnik of iPad.

2. An in-field photo viewer

Imagine you’re taking photos along the Maine coast. You take a great shot of Bass Harbor Head Light, but sadly the small LCD on the back of your camera doesn’t really allow you to check the quality of the shot. If only you had a larger screen…

But wait! You have your iPad with you. You plug in the Camera Connection Kit with your SD card (or maybe have a 30-pin to USB conversion cable) and browse the photos you’ve just taken.

Related: I’d actually buy Eye-Fi SD cards if there was an app to browse the photos on my camera without having to mess with cards and converters. That would be an awesome app.

3. Twitter and Google Reader

I’m grouping these two apps into one because honestly, it’s a given. I really can’t wait to see how app developers use the large touchscreen interface to navigate Twitter and Google Reader. Twitter on iPad, of course, leads to thoughts of TweetDeck and Seesmic Desktop; apps like NetNewsWire and Byline could similarly create new interfaces for Google Reader. I really hope developers are creative with this one.

4. Hulu

No description needed here. I can haz iPad Hulu?

5. Media streaming

The iPad will undoubtedly be a great media viewing experience. Unfortunately, a lot of people have more than 16, 32, or 64 gigs of media in their libraries. Could Apple take the concepts of the Remote app and use them to browse and consume media over Wi-Fi? Imagine having access to your entire desktop media library from anywhere in your home. Maybe Apple could even borrow the Apple TV interface and browse for media on network-connected hard drives.

Of course, there’s always the cloud, too. Maybe the iPad will be Lala‘s time to shine. (Conveniently, they’re an Apple company now.)

My tablet predictions

January 26, 2010

Apple’s launching a tablet. No big surprise there.

To be honest I’m more excited about this launch than anything in the past from Apple. They’ve been working on this one for so long, and Steve’s been really picky about it. I just want to see it.

Here are a few of my thoughts about what we might see tomorrow.

The name

The name of the product is one of its most widely debated aspects. Its name depends on how they are going to market the device; if it’s dubbed a new kind of notebook, I wouldn’t be surprised to see it called “Mac touch.” If it’s branded as more of a personal device, it’s a bit trickier. “iSlate” doesn’t sound like an Apple product name, but knowing Apple, there’s a good chance they’ll keep the i- prefix. I really don’t want it to be called “iPad;” in some accents, “iPad” and “iPod” sound almost exactly the same. Given that the iPhone started out as “Safari Pad” internally and that Apple has been courting an iPad trademark, though, I think “pad” might end up in the final name somehow. (I don’t think the trademark shuffle necessarily means the device will be called “iPad.” They might just be covering the fact that nobody seems to say product names correctly.)

If I were in charge of Apple, I’d call it Canvas. It’s such a perfect name.

The look

Apple historically has opted for simple designs that are consistent across product lines. I think it’ll look like a 10″ iPod touch. (The aspect ratio is the only real question.)

The price

Up until a couple of weeks ago, my gut feeling about the tablet’s price was $999. It seems like a very Apple-like price. I’m going to stick with that (if only so that I might be pleasantly surprised tomorrow). If the tablet is below $799, we’re looking at a new Apple. Keep in mind that the iPhone itself without AT&T subsidies goes for $499/$599/$699.

The features

I’m guessing that the tablet will have a camera, WiFi, optional 3G (please, please optional), e-reader support, and a whole bunch of sensors, just like the iPhone.

I’ll be honest, though: if I can edit my photos on this thing in iPhoto, I’ll be a very happy Apple user. I bet there will be a ton of killer apps with the device, but that’s my top wish for the moment.

Over time, it’ll be all about the apps. I’ll say it right here: if there’s app support on this device, I’ll be making some of my own.

The dealbreaker

Of course, every Apple product lately has had a dealbreaker for me. With the iPhone, it was the enormously expensive cell contract. With the new iPod touch, it was the lack of a camera. I’m still holding out hope that the tablet will be dealbreaker-free.

I guess we’ll see tomorrow!

Making Twitter a little more Delicious

December 9, 2009

As some of you know, I’ve used Delicious as a way to catalog my favorite links for (wow) almost 5 years now. Over that period of time, I’ve saved almost 2,200 bookmarks to the site. I’ve been torn about what to do when it comes to links and my @justinrussell Twitter account; should I post them to both accounts? Should I just leave it to Delicious?

Starting today, I’m trying something new. I registered @justlinked tonight, and it will quite simply be a (somewhat filtered) stream of links from my Delicious account. If you’re interested in what I’m saving but don’t want to check Delicious or subscribe to the RSS feed, it’s an easy way to see what I find. And of course, if you have a link you think I’d like, send me a message or mention either @justlinked or @justinrussell in a tweet.

Oh, and I’ll still be putting the very best links on @justinrussell. Some things I just have to share everywhere I can.

Let me know what you think!

Question 1: a week later

November 10, 2009

I originally had planned to write a pair of long blog posts about my personal views about last week’s veto to overturn Maine’s gay marriage law and the effects its results had on me personally, but quite frankly, I’ve just been in a volatile and emotional state over the last couple of weeks and couldn’t bring myself to write the post. The combination of the election results with the passing of my grandfather has left me in a state in which I have trouble arguing a point rationally, so I’m going to put my analysis off for a bit.

My hesitance doesn’t mean that I’ve lost my passion for the issue. Have I lost respect for some of my friends’ views over the issue? Yes. Was I disappointed by the lack of real discussion about the issue? Quite a bit. Was I ashamed to see the intolerance and ignorance voiced by so many about the issue of marriage and homosexuality in general? Definitely. Was I saddened to see the Bible used as a justification for a lot of those feelings? Absolutely. And did it infuriate me to see political literature on the pews at my grandfather’s funeral? You better believe it.

There’s no doubt that Question 1 led me to be more emotional than I’d ever been before about a political topic. I find that strange, considering that I wouldn’t personally be (directly) affected by the law in any way. Fortunately, that passion was put to good use; it inspired me to start a new project that I’m currently working to establish. I hope to share with you shortly. I also hope that we can find other ways to put our passion about this topic and others to good and productive use.

My four political positions

October 20, 2009

Lately you may have noticed that I’ve been somewhat vocal over on my Twitterstream regarding question #1 on next month’s Maine ballot. I understand that many people are turned off when people express their political views online, and frankly, I feel it often hurts more than it helps. On certain issues, though, I feel that it is important to speak about my beliefs in an effort to educate others why I believe in a particular cause.

I’ve found that I fall into one of four categories for almost every political topic.

  1. I don’t know enough information about the topic to make an informed decision.
  2. I don’t care about a topic enough to have an opinion either way.
  3. I have an opinion about a topic, but I can understand the opposition.
  4. I have an opinion about a topic, but I don’t understand why anyone could have a reasonable argument for support of the other side.

The first two positions are pretty self-explanatory. The healthcare debate is a great example of the first: the issues just seem to complex for me, and I feel it’s better left to those who know more about the topic. The second actually covers most legislation and, unfortunately, most local elections. (I’ve always wanted to do something about that.)

The last two options are a bit more complicated. Personally I like to think that I’m more politically tolerant of differing viewpoints than most people; sure, I have my own opinions about how things should be done, but I understand that not everyone will agree. Questions 3, 4, and 5 on this year’s ballot fit nicely into this category.

Question 1 falls into the final category. In short I haven’t heard a logical justification to support those who believe this law should not be in place. I’m still looking for someone to explain the other side to me in rational terms. (To his credit, gubernatorial candidate Matt Jacobson came close in an interview with Pine Tree Politics but ended up falling flat.)

I guess I’m vocal about political issues when I have trouble understanding why anyone could oppose the views I hold on an issue. If politics isn’t your cup of tea (or can of Moxie, in this case), sit tight. We’ll be back to regular programming soon.