OS X iPhone, Evolution at a Cost of Choice
Jan 31 2010 by Michael Biven
After years of arguments that Microsoft's bundling of IE reduced choice we now find that Apple is doing the same thing with OS X iPhone but only with more far reaching consequences.
When the Department of Justice brought civil action against Microsoft it was on the charge that Microsoft had abused its position in the PC market to bundle Internet Explorer with Windows. This was the result of Microsoft unfairly restricting the market for competing web browsers. A point argued by some that are now vocal in defending Apple's position of not making Flash available on OS X iPhone.
By not allowing a Flash player Apple prevents people from installing software written in Flash for OS X iPhone rather than their own development tools. This also allows them to maintain control by restricting how software is installed - only with their approval through the App Store. If the choice of not allowing Flash on the OS X iPhone was due to Flash crashing it why don't we see the same restrictions placed on any other application that crashes the OS? The issue isn't as much as preventing a user to be able to use Flash as much as it is a point of Apple controlling what can be installed on the OS X iPhone to protect their interests. No third party email clients, no third web browsers.
From the beginning OS X has shipped with the development tools unlike Windows and OS X benefited from this with innovation and competition among it's independent developers. Now you need to sign up for the iPhone Developer Program, agree to a Nondisclosure and Nonuse of Apple Confidential Information agreement, pay for your membership in the program before you can even submit an application to the App store. A bit different than when the Mac OS X was released.
If this is the beginning of a new era of computing the actions of Apple appear to put us on a path that will be more restrictive than Microsoft was even at the highest point of criticism of them bundling a web browser with their operating system.
So no Firefox, no Thunderbird, no Flash - no choice.
At the same time I do think a device like the iPad is a step in the right direction for combining the best from a few different mediums (print, television and radio) into a new mix. And I see it as an obvious evolution of a device like the Kindle, but that is only with the device. The restrictions placed on what can be installed and used on it is the same reduction in choice that we had with Microsoft bundling IE.
What We Have Been Waiting For
Jan 27 2010 by Michael Biven
After Apple revealed the iPad, their new tablet device it places their purchase of Quattro Wireless in slightly different light. Quattro Wireless is a mobile advertising company that Apple acquired after losing it's bid on AdMob to Google.
Apple now has a large share of the digital media (music, movies, televisions) distribution and the devices and programs used to access it. Add books, magazines and newspapers to that distribution mix and new opportunities are created for Apple and content creators with iPod touches, iPhones and iPads.
Opportunities to create living magazines and newspapers for people to purchase and for television / trailer quality ads to be displayed along with traditional print content. This isn't to say that only Apple along with Quattro Wireless would be capable of this, but only that it has helped create the possibilities that many have been waiting for quite some time.
Attention Falls
Jan 27 2010 by Michael Biven
"Attention Falls" - trips, spills and spins caused by looking at small portable devices like the iPhone and iPad instead of paying attention to where you are walking.