My pal Glenn Fleishman from TidBITS has some interesting comments on this podcast.
For example he is asked whether the Amazon Kindle and the iPad are really in the same market. At first I disagreed with his statement that the iPad is not really an ebook-reader replacement, because it did replace the Kindle for me. But then he explained, and I agree: the iPad is basically too heavy to be really practical, and for some people, it is needlessly complex and expensive, if they only want a book replacement. If the Kindle had a better and faster screen, I'd probably still use it. (I'd like to see comparison photos of the old Kindle DX and the new one, to see how big that asserted contrast improvement is.)
I don't care too much to read with a book on a table. Or in any position where I have to bend my neck to look down at it. Not comfortable for long periods. I prefer to be very much leaned back, half lying down, and have the "book" above/in front of me. The iPad is too heavy to do this for long. I can use it as much as I do partly due to a solution which is to big and clumsy for most people: a book holder, simple a big floor-stand which holds a book or ebook reader for you.
That being said, though, if they could make an iPad at half the weight I would not have any want at all for another e-reader. (I don't like sitting in the sun, so the screen visibility is no issue.)
And I'll bet the Kindle has not inspired as many nice cases as the iPad already has. (This is just one of several companies' products I've seen this week. There are also this and this.) (Man, get a load of the video on the Targus page! Talk about perky and enthusiastic! Like she just can hardly contain her pleasure at this lovely product! Well done.) (Almost overdone. I think I would mock her if she didn't turn me on so much.)
Glenn also wrote this article about using software to block distractions on the computer, something I touched on once. I think I even found the "Isolator" app that he used while writing this article.
Saturday, July 03, 2010
How does Twitter pay the bills?
I've googled around a bit trying to find out how Twitter pay their bills, and how they intend to become profitable in the future (seeing as I can't imagine they are so now). But I haven't found anything except many other people asking the same question. Has anybody seen anything solid? It must be amazingly expensive to run such a super-popular service.
This is something I find highly amusing: on the wiki page for Twitter, it says:
Only in the Internet age is an income considered optional for a business! Too friggin' funny. This is like saying: "Joe Blow's long-term health outlook is limited by his refusal to eat or drink anything".
The Financial Dictionary says: "When evaluating stocks, revenue growth serves as an indication of a company's health."
But in the Internet age, it's apparently entirely incidental to the stock value! Nut city.
TTL sez:
How they plan to become profitable? By displaying ads, or rather sponsored tweets.
Mind you, this is all over the net. It was covered by pretty much every newspaper when it was announced in April.
Aha. After 40-something years, it finally bites me in the ass that I don't read news. Thanks, dude.
-
This is something I find highly amusing: on the wiki page for Twitter, it says:
"The Industry Standard has remarked that Twitter's long-term viability is limited by a lack of revenue..."
Only in the Internet age is an income considered optional for a business! Too friggin' funny. This is like saying: "Joe Blow's long-term health outlook is limited by his refusal to eat or drink anything".
The Financial Dictionary says: "When evaluating stocks, revenue growth serves as an indication of a company's health."
But in the Internet age, it's apparently entirely incidental to the stock value! Nut city.
TTL sez:
How they plan to become profitable? By displaying ads, or rather sponsored tweets.
Mind you, this is all over the net. It was covered by pretty much every newspaper when it was announced in April.
Aha. After 40-something years, it finally bites me in the ass that I don't read news. Thanks, dude.
-
Feedback noise
Here's a delightfully weird little thing:
On my new Windows computer, I played around with Dragon NaturallySpeaking (dictation software), and with Win7's built-in dictation feature.
At some point, the computer started making a sound-feedback, and an infernally loud screech developed within seconds. In desperation I plugged in a headset to stop it.
And now I can't unplug the headset without the feedback screech developing again! This is despite the speech recognition now being turned off, and the machine having been rebooted...
Any tips?
Update: Robb said:
You have an open microphone somewhere that's feeding back into the Dragon software. Kill (mute) the microphone and the feedback will disappear.
eolake said...
But Dragon is off. And the only mike is the one built into the iMac.
(I used a USB mic when testing Dragon, but that's unplugged.)
But you could be right though I don't understand it: I just now went and made a search for 'microphone' and found an "audio device" control panel. There were two active microphones in the panel, which I guess must be software items, not real things. I "deactivated" the one which seemed related to Dragon, and the problem is now gone. Thanks.
On my new Windows computer, I played around with Dragon NaturallySpeaking (dictation software), and with Win7's built-in dictation feature.
At some point, the computer started making a sound-feedback, and an infernally loud screech developed within seconds. In desperation I plugged in a headset to stop it.
And now I can't unplug the headset without the feedback screech developing again! This is despite the speech recognition now being turned off, and the machine having been rebooted...
Any tips?
Update: Robb said:
You have an open microphone somewhere that's feeding back into the Dragon software. Kill (mute) the microphone and the feedback will disappear.
eolake said...
But Dragon is off. And the only mike is the one built into the iMac.
(I used a USB mic when testing Dragon, but that's unplugged.)
But you could be right though I don't understand it: I just now went and made a search for 'microphone' and found an "audio device" control panel. There were two active microphones in the panel, which I guess must be software items, not real things. I "deactivated" the one which seemed related to Dragon, and the problem is now gone. Thanks.
Contest reminder
Just to remind: "Children in Color" photo contest, deadline July 15. Early entries are few yet, but good, so get cracking!
[Updated] Jakob Nielsen Tests iPad and Kindle Reading Speeds
Jakob Nielsen Tests iPad and Kindle Reading Speeds, article.
Thanks to TidBITS, which comments:
Update: Ganesha Games says:
This is so odd to me. Since I have the kindle, and then the iPad, my reading speed has increased by roughly 25%, with better comprehension (I read in English, which is a second language to me, so the in-built dictionaries and word search functions are a bliss).
The extreme portability of both devices also means I can read a lot when on trains, at the dentist's, in line at the post office or bank, and so on, and the availability of cheap or free reading materials have vastly increased the quantity of my reading.
But I've always been a heavy reader so maybe I'm out of the norm (a novel a week, plus a non-fiction book spread over maybe three weeks if it's heavy, plus rulebooks for games and reference materials/blogs/websites on a daily basis, and 7-8 comics a week are an average for me).
Eolake:
When I was a kid and teen, my father drove us to the library every Monday when it was open in the evening. And I remember that every week I would borrow and fully read about five to six books. Per week! Plus school reading. Of course, each book was not War And Peace, but still, now it seems rather extraordinary. 'Smatteroffact it must have been extraordinary, because I hardly remember seeing anybody but me and my father there in those evening hours.
I am probably also faster reading on the iPad, I haven't tried to measure it, but at least I now prefer it over reading on paper.
Thanks to TidBITS, which comments:
Do you read faster or slower on a device like an iPad or Kindle, in comparison with a physical book? The overall answer, according to usability expert Jakob Nielsen, is about 5% to 10% slower (with the same comprehension of what was read). That's statistically significant, though not all that much slower. (We suspect it may have to do with years of familiarity with the form factor of the book.) More interesting was that on a 1 to 7 scale, users rated their satisfaction at 5.8 for the iPad, 5.7 for the Kindle, and 5.6 for the physical book, with the traditional PC trailing behind at only 3.6.
Update: Ganesha Games says:
This is so odd to me. Since I have the kindle, and then the iPad, my reading speed has increased by roughly 25%, with better comprehension (I read in English, which is a second language to me, so the in-built dictionaries and word search functions are a bliss).
The extreme portability of both devices also means I can read a lot when on trains, at the dentist's, in line at the post office or bank, and so on, and the availability of cheap or free reading materials have vastly increased the quantity of my reading.
But I've always been a heavy reader so maybe I'm out of the norm (a novel a week, plus a non-fiction book spread over maybe three weeks if it's heavy, plus rulebooks for games and reference materials/blogs/websites on a daily basis, and 7-8 comics a week are an average for me).
Eolake:
When I was a kid and teen, my father drove us to the library every Monday when it was open in the evening. And I remember that every week I would borrow and fully read about five to six books. Per week! Plus school reading. Of course, each book was not War And Peace, but still, now it seems rather extraordinary. 'Smatteroffact it must have been extraordinary, because I hardly remember seeing anybody but me and my father there in those evening hours.
I am probably also faster reading on the iPad, I haven't tried to measure it, but at least I now prefer it over reading on paper.
"Vortex" screensaver
Back in in my nineties day job using Windows '95, one of my favorite things of the OS was a screensaver, I think it was called Vortex, but I'm not sure. It froze an image of whatever you had on your screen, windows and all, and then it animated it with a sort of vortex which swirled around on the screen. It was beautiful, and I think it's amazing it could be done with a friggin' 486 computer.
I liked particularly to run it with the Gogh Starry Night painting, because the vortices fit well with those in the sky. Below is a screenshot (well, looks like several combined) of the screensaver running, which I made back then.
Hmm, I can see the screenshot is actually taken on my Mac back then, so this means it might be from 2000, and that I had managed to find a Mac OS 8 equivalent.
Anyway, I'd be grateful if anybody can find such a screensaver for me, either for Mac OS X (Snow Leopard) or Windows (Win7).
I liked particularly to run it with the Gogh Starry Night painting, because the vortices fit well with those in the sky. Below is a screenshot (well, looks like several combined) of the screensaver running, which I made back then.
Hmm, I can see the screenshot is actually taken on my Mac back then, so this means it might be from 2000, and that I had managed to find a Mac OS 8 equivalent.
Anyway, I'd be grateful if anybody can find such a screensaver for me, either for Mac OS X (Snow Leopard) or Windows (Win7).
Topless woman uses bare breasts to stop ATV noise feud
[Thanks to Louis]
Topless woman uses bare breasts to stop ATV noise feud, article. Good for her.
People who will continually let their children be that noisy in public deserver all the gymnophobia they can scrape together.
Friday, July 02, 2010
Apple and the problematic signal bars
New Apple press release about the problematic mood-swinging signal bars in the iPhone 4. They actually say:
Formula? Formula!? How complex can it be? It's not like the strength of a signal is a multi-dimensional thing, it's a straightforward two-dimensional scale.
I think Apple will hear for this one for a while.
Update: top shelf tech journalist (stauch Apple supporter through decades) tweets: "Is it just me or does this Apple statement sound like an Onion article?" Yeah.
Update Bruce pointed to John the Fireball translating Apple's letter.
"Daring Fireball"? That's a site title so lame that it has to be "ironic". Yes, I'm putting quotes around "ironic" because I mean it ironically. Meaning I think it's one of those cases where the author claims irony to those who can see the lameness, while at the same time appeal without irony to those who think it's kewl.
"Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong."
Formula? Formula!? How complex can it be? It's not like the strength of a signal is a multi-dimensional thing, it's a straightforward two-dimensional scale.
I think Apple will hear for this one for a while.
Update: top shelf tech journalist (stauch Apple supporter through decades) tweets: "Is it just me or does this Apple statement sound like an Onion article?" Yeah.
Update Bruce pointed to John the Fireball translating Apple's letter.
"Daring Fireball"? That's a site title so lame that it has to be "ironic". Yes, I'm putting quotes around "ironic" because I mean it ironically. Meaning I think it's one of those cases where the author claims irony to those who can see the lameness, while at the same time appeal without irony to those who think it's kewl.
More Mac/Win questions/comments
I'm used to, on the Mac, being able to "hide" an app, so all its windows disappear from the screen until you call it forth again. In Windows it seems you have to minimize or close every window manually, is this so?
---
Comment: MobileMe sucks. I have been paying for this (once called Mac.com) for ten years now, but gawd knows why!! I keep hoping that in the next year I am paying for, it will develop some useful features. And I started using the email address when it was free, so I sorta wanted to keep it when they started to charge money for it (is that even legal?).
Seriously, WTF? The free Dropbox service is way more useful than iDisk. Syncing has always been, and is still, confusing and buggy, and you risk deleting things on your computer instead of exporting them, and... what else is there? Practically fok-all, is what. I don't use the web hosting, and I don't like the comments from those who do.
This has cost me a grand now, I'm a total sucker. This is not one of the products Apple should be proud of.
Update: KC Aussie said...
I appreciate the Mobile Me may not be worth it to you Eolake, though for me it is worth the $99 per year.
I have been using MM since the beginning when it was .mac and free, just like you. I have an iMac, iPad, and iPhone, and what is invaluable to me is to be able to keep all my calendars in sync ... I see many clients every week ... sometimes I take an appt in front of my iMac, other times I am in my front hall (where my iPad lives during the day) rebooking a client, and other times I am out on the road and talking an appt on my iPhone. To have a single calendar on multiple devices which automagically syncs itself is to me, so amazing and so worth it.
Syncing of other things like Safari bookmarks and notes (with iOS 4) is helpful. Just which I could change that hard to read Markerfelt font in the notes.
I don't use the iDisk feature ... it seems clumsy and slow. I do use the mail feature and find my iPhone feature. I do use MM to host my website (which is really simple and integrated with iWeb).
I realize I could probably achieve much of the above for free using Google but I prefer to not share any data with them; I simply do not trust Google's privacy policies. So, a $99 private sync service is worth it to me.
---
Comment: MobileMe sucks. I have been paying for this (once called Mac.com) for ten years now, but gawd knows why!! I keep hoping that in the next year I am paying for, it will develop some useful features. And I started using the email address when it was free, so I sorta wanted to keep it when they started to charge money for it (is that even legal?).
Seriously, WTF? The free Dropbox service is way more useful than iDisk. Syncing has always been, and is still, confusing and buggy, and you risk deleting things on your computer instead of exporting them, and... what else is there? Practically fok-all, is what. I don't use the web hosting, and I don't like the comments from those who do.
This has cost me a grand now, I'm a total sucker. This is not one of the products Apple should be proud of.
Update: KC Aussie said...
I appreciate the Mobile Me may not be worth it to you Eolake, though for me it is worth the $99 per year.
I have been using MM since the beginning when it was .mac and free, just like you. I have an iMac, iPad, and iPhone, and what is invaluable to me is to be able to keep all my calendars in sync ... I see many clients every week ... sometimes I take an appt in front of my iMac, other times I am in my front hall (where my iPad lives during the day) rebooking a client, and other times I am out on the road and talking an appt on my iPhone. To have a single calendar on multiple devices which automagically syncs itself is to me, so amazing and so worth it.
Syncing of other things like Safari bookmarks and notes (with iOS 4) is helpful. Just which I could change that hard to read Markerfelt font in the notes.
I don't use the iDisk feature ... it seems clumsy and slow. I do use the mail feature and find my iPhone feature. I do use MM to host my website (which is really simple and integrated with iWeb).
I realize I could probably achieve much of the above for free using Google but I prefer to not share any data with them; I simply do not trust Google's privacy policies. So, a $99 private sync service is worth it to me.
Phone debate
Warning: lots of swear words in the video. Faintly amusing. Sort of.
It seems to me that this salesman, apart from being rude, can't distinguish between quantity of features and quality of features. For example, what matters it if a phone can do video chat over 3G if you can't get it to work most of the time and the quality is awful?
Actually I think that's the basic split between Apple lovers and Apple haters: the latter can't perceive differences in quality, they can only perceive differences in numbers.
It seems to me that this salesman, apart from being rude, can't distinguish between quantity of features and quality of features. For example, what matters it if a phone can do video chat over 3G if you can't get it to work most of the time and the quality is awful?
Actually I think that's the basic split between Apple lovers and Apple haters: the latter can't perceive differences in quality, they can only perceive differences in numbers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)