Particle Debris (week ending 2/19) The Buzz, The Flash, and the Desperate

| Particle Debris

Early this week, Google admitted that they screwed up with Google Buzz. Buzz product manager Todd Jackson noted that many users were upset and said Google was "very, very sorry." The details were posted at gigaom, "Google: We Screwed Up With Buzz, Stay Tuned."

Those of you who are enamored with a mathematical approach to the exact time when Apple will sell its 10 billionth song will find this analysis interesting. The currently predicted date, according to the algorithm provided, is February 24th, 2:44:59 PM. (No time zone provided, but looks like EST.) If you're after that US$10,000 iTunes gift card, you'll want to read this article.

Loose lips sink ships ... and Apple contracts. Midweek I saw this Reuters special report about Apple's dealings with parts suppliers and how confidentiality is maintained. We knew some of this, but the article has additional insights and background. We also covered it asTMO news.

Adobe has been taking some heat lately. Kara Swisher with All Things Digital visited Adobe's CTO, Kevin Lynch, and interviewed him. "For a man scorned, Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch looked awfully calm on my visit to the software company’s San Francisco HQ yesterday." The article has, what else? a Flash video of the interview.

Making news by talking about a difficult problem you'd like to deal with is, of course, not as good as actually dealing with it. But that's what has to pass muster these days in the talk coming out of the World Mobile Congress in Barcelona. Reuters reported: "Networks desperately seek data capacity." The problem is, desperation is more likely to be the name of the game than anything else in the near term. Sigh...

Speaking of the Mobile World Congress, if you missed the Keynote address from Googles CEO Eric Schmidt, here's a report on what he said: Mobile communication is "it." Perhaps Google should be building our nation's next Wireless network, not just an experimental ISP service.

If you'd like a glimpse of what some magazine publishers have in mind for the next generation digital magazine, check out this short article and (Flash) video by Adobe Digital Publishing. It all points to how the Apple iPad and other tablet devices are going to forever change the magazine publishing industry.

If you've been wondering about that monolith in 2001, A Space Odyssey and the sequel, wonder no more. Here's the real explanation. The ultimate Apple slate!

Finally, we've all been wondering about the, presumed, release of the next generation MacBook Pros. Here's a credible article at AppleInsider that explains some of the technical issues, behind the scenes, that may be affecting the release of that product. It's excellent background for every follower of Apple.

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

4 Comments

Chandra Coomar

Interesting if fatally cynical Wired video on Adobe turf.
I think it is amazing that Creative Director of Wired, Scott Dadich, says the following line when commenting on the design and construction of a typical Wired issue.

‘The advertising content is as important as the editorial material in Wired.’

I wonder if this doofus realises that, as a publisher, you are wholly reliant on the humble reader, not the advertiser. The reader is the cake. The ads merely the icing on the top. A publisher like Cond? Nast won’t know its readers personally, or meet with them by choice, but they are the ones who buy the magazines….with their discretionary spending money. They give a publication life and a commercial raison d’etre therefore. But publishers choose to forget about readers and give preference and greater import instead to the expectations of their advertisers, whom they do know well and meet with often.

But as publishers you conveniently forget that, while the advertisers may wine and dine you, and they may even bed you, they only want you for one thing. And no, it’s not that. They want you for your readers.

Advertisers never forget the reader. Magazine publishers like Wired, always do. That’s why the ads are as important as the editorial to Doofus Dadich and his kind of creative whore.

They are your readers and they will often remain loyal to you in hard times. You ignore them and rank them low in your priorities at your peril.

With a Creative Bozo in chief like Dadich on board, you just know that Wired is doomed. Not a moment too soon imo.

Chandra Coomar

And I forgot to add the punchline too, doh! It goes like this .....

Doh! of the Day Lesson to publishers: No cake. Definitely no icing.

PulSamsara

If any reader doesn’t understand the REAL reason Jobs doesn’t want flash on Apple mobile devices you’re either sophomoric, naive or just plain stupid.

Apple can’t control the distribution or sale of flash. Simple. Period. Done.

JulesLt

PulSamsara -If it was purely for the reasons you outlined, there would be no support for equivalent technologies (SVG, Canvas, CSS animations, HTML5 video) in WebKit / Safari, or for free ad-subsidised apps in the App Store ? and where, exactly, can developers sell Flash apps today??

My take on it runs like this ? iPhone-only apps sell the iPhone, while Flash apps would run on any phone, undermining Apple?s advantage. Apple isn?t going to voluntarily give away it?s advantage, until it?s hand is forced.

It will be interesting to see how Flash support on mobiles is received ? will people be disappointed by the reality ? that a lot of existing content will be unusable.

And there is no getting away from the fact that by its very nature, any cross-platform runtime (i.e. Flash or Java) has to be slower / take more resource than the native runtime it runs on top of ? it has to abstract the difference between operating systems, and run a simulated computer on top (preventing the operating system from being able to do things like idle the CPU). In fact, both Palm and Android have gone the other way, adding native development kits for games.

One reason for this ? most iPhone games, like console games, tend to be written in C++ and OpenGL. Even Obj-C and Apple?s frameworks like CoreAnimation, etc, are considered too slow by experienced games developers writing for iPhone. This is actually relatively portable, provided you offer native executable and OpenGL support.

Log-in to comment