Final Cut Pro X = iOS

Apple released the new version of their professional video editing software Final Cut Pro. The older version is Final Cut Pro 7, the new version is a huge step forward...X. Within hours of the release, the critics came out in droves. They have been not only negative, but they've also used this to pass judgment on Apple as a company and the decisions they've chosen to make.

I need to make a few things clear before I move on:

• I do not own Final Cut Pro X (I don't have the extra income to make a $300 purchase, especially for software I don't use on a regular basis)
• I have read extensively on the new product (when Apple releases a "dud," it is always intriguing) and have considerable experience with Final Cut Pro 7 (though I am in now way, form, or fashion, a "professional" at Final Cut Pro).
• Apple is a 90-90 company. Apple makes decisions based off of what 90% of the people want/need to do 90% of the time (I didn't come up with this myself, I stole it from Alex Lindsay, founder of the Pixel Corp).

Because of these things above, I've come to one basic conclusion: most who are criticizing the product (no matter their prestige in the video editing world) do not understand Apple as a company.  After all, Apple makes some seemingly-crazy decisions on a regular basis. They seem, under Steve's leadership, to be doing ok.

It is my goal here to draw comparisons between Final Cut Pro X and iOS, as Apple has made strategic decisions with both of the products.  I do, in fact, think that iOS is indicative of the direction and market Apple is pursuing. I think these decisions parallel, in many ways, the decision that Apple has made with Final Cut Pro.  It's not a clean analogy by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it has some ring of truth to it.

It's hard to remember the first iPhone now. But, not too hard.  There were no direct competitors.  Today is the four year anniversary of the launch of the original iPhone. Let's compare some features that we take for granted now, shall we?

The original iPhone had:

• no multitasking (this is true of the original iPad as well, when it first released)
• no third-party applications
• no home screen backgrounds
• no Microsoft Exchange support
• no front-facing camera (the original iPad didn't have any cameras)
• no 3G support or coverage
• an audio jack that required an adapter for a regular headphone set
• no intelligent way to deal with notifications
• no push notifications
• no user-replaceable battery (still true today)

Slowly, thanks to adequate competition from Android, Apple has added a majority of these over the past four years. Slowly, but surely, Apple has redesigned some of the most basic features in Mac OS X to work in ways that are best suited for the mobile environment.  Many argue whether these are the best strategies or not, but no one argues whether or not they are working...they are.

Because here is what happened with iOS: Apple wanted to make a mobile phone (Steve has discussed on stage that this actually started with the pursuit of a tablet device). It was important that this device be radically different than anything within the market.  Because the original idea came from a tablet form factor, a big candy-bar shaped piece of glass seemed like the best idea. If they could implement a worthwhile digital keyboard (and they did), then the full glass front would prove to be a great solution.  Apple had a leg up on the competition for two reasons:

• they saw a new phone not as a mobile phone, but rather as a mobile computer.
• they already had a phenomenal proprietary operating system.

The enabled them to start the iPhone OS with a strong foundation: Mac OS X.  This was, in fact, one of the points in Steve's original keynote when he introduced the iPhone. Here was the problem though: no one was going to use a mouse to navigate the iPhone's screen. Because Apple makes decisions often based on minimalism or simplicity, they also threw out the idea of using a stylus. Steve has said it before: When you throw out the stylus, you have to use your finger. Mac OS X was built so that someone could have the precision of the tip of a cursor.  Without a stylus, you don't have that precision. You have a finger tip, which is much, much cruder.

Apple, taking the foundational elements of Mac OS X, designed a completely new interface to the iPhone's operating system. It is important to understand this distinction. When Windows 7 went "touch-enabled" Microsoft did little more than make it a bit easier for a hardware manufacturer to add a touch screen. A touch experience on Windows 7 today is more than painful (try it and you'll see). Apple took a different approach. The rewrote EVERYTHING so that it would work with the point of a finger. iOS (originally called, iPhone OS) required Apple to, more or less, start over.

And start over they did.  If you look at the history of iOS, it becomes obvious that people at Apple sat down in a room and said, "If we were going to reinvent computing, what would we do different?"  You can imagine that they thought of things like malware, spam, viruses, ease of writing, finding, and downloading apps, battery life, the file system, price, etc. Little by little, with their own unique approach, Apple has fought each of these things. If there are features that people want/desire on an iPad or iPhone that their computer has, Apple slowly implements those features in a way that suits the device that they're running on.  It hasn't been perfect, but it is hard to argue that it hasn't worked.

So, how does this relate to Final Cut Pro?

Final Cut Pro 7 (the older version, just replaced with FCPX) was a 32-bit application. Apple has migrated most of their apps to 64-bit over time. Final Cut Pro was one of the last. And Final Cut Pro was on old product. Somewhere along the line, I imagine that it was decided that to take FCP to 64-bit, a significant amount of re-coding was going to need to have been done. Here is a big change, and it needs to be re-written to work well (sound familiar?).

One must imagine that at some point someone working on this re-coding said, "If we're going to re-write this anyway, why don't we just start over?" as if to say, "If we were going to reinvent movie editing, what would we do differently?"

And so they did. They did this a while back with iMovie. Now it was time for Final Cut Pro. So, they re-wrote it, from the ground up.

We can make a strong argument that Apple is willing to enrage 5,000 high-end professional users in order to satisfy 2 million new users.  That argument would be valid.  We can argue that they lowered the price to entice new users to come.  That argument would be valid.  We can argue that most of Hollywood is already using AVID and is unlikely to switch (editors get very quick and comfortable with editing environments that they know and love).  That argument would be valid.

But my argument is that they're starting over.

There are a lot of things that they've done well this time:

• Distribution and licensing is much easier as it is handled through the App Store.
• Stepping up from iMovie is much, much easier with the new FCPX.
• Many of the extra features that used to exist in stand-alone applications are now well-integrated into the Final Cut Pro experience.
• Magnetic timelines have made it so that non-educated or non-experienced users can easily perform tasks that used to be a burden.
• The user interface resembles iMovie so that all of their products have a seamless workflow to them.
• Rendering is done in the background so that the editor doesn't have to worry with telling the computer to re-render every video edit.
• Final Cut Pro works works much better with Motion (so much so that using Motion to create FCP Title templates is much, much easier) than it ever did.
• Everything is 64-bit.
• Final Cut Pro renders footage more useful now that it has facial recognition built into its logging of clips.
• Many, many more new features.

The two biggest complaints from the high-end professional world have been:

• The interface is too foreign (unchangeable and too much like iMovie Pro)
• It doesn't import old timelines and projects.

Apple has said that the second one is simply impossible. Many might ask, why would Apple go forward with a project that wasn't compatible with the old one? The answer is easy: when there is something better in the future (and for Apple, this is much better) a few sacrifices sometimes need to be made. Remember when the iMac released without a floppy disk drive? Yeah, that didn't work for them at all...

iOS was a complete re-write, leaving out key features until they could add them in a way that made sense.  Final Cut Pro X is a complete re-write, until they can add the features users want in a way that makes sense.  It's a compromise that Apple made to please tons and tons of amateur video editors at a low cost, knowing good and well that the high-high end market may react because it is...different.

It's almost like asking a computer programmer to write an app on the original iPhone.  They'd probably laugh.  When you asked why they were laughing, they'd say, "It doesn't have the right tools."  To which you would reply, "yet."

Does this hurt their growth in the high-end professional market? Probably.

Does it help their growth in the low-end amateur market?  Without a doubt.

The high-end market is tiny.  The low-end market is huge.

Can you really blame a company for making any different of a decision?

People really seem to like their iPhones and iPads.

-B

The History of Duke in the NBA Draft

Another great montage by the good folks at Blue Devil Nation. Great stats, great players, great history.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOwFOZTA9wU&]

I've been criticized before for not understanding what it is like to go to a big college or university. I've been accused of not knowing what it's like to see people in the cafeteria that go on to play for millions in professional sports. On Thursday, that all went out the window. I saw Nolan on a regular basis in the Divinity School and Kyrie and Kyle on numerous occasions around school too. Kyrie was the number one draft pick and probably one of the best players we've seen in awhile. Yeah, I think I qualify now.

I never have paid much attention to the NBA before. I think that's all about to change.

-B

Conan on Final Cut Pro X

Apple released their new professional grade Final Cut Pro X. Problem is, it isn't professional grade. They've received some...negative press from the professional editing world about it. Conan, though, had the best take on it.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxKYuF9pENQ&]

In reality, the fact that they could make this video actually speaks highly of the product. It's nice work.

Apple doesn't have many business disasters. This might be their first in a while. Here's to hoping that they can figure out some way to please those with the loudest voices.

-B

When a Woman Loves a Woman

Well, the trial is over. Because of the lack of updates on Amy DeLong's own website and the slow moving articles from UMC.org, I found out about the trial verdicts in the same way that most of you did. In the same way I found out about Michael Jackson's death. And in the same way most of the world found out that the criminal mastermind who hired people to fly planes into our buildings had been killed: Twitter.

So, though the UMC has posted pictures of the trial, the important worship services before and throughout the trials and sentencing, it is important to note that I, nor many who read this, have any clue about how this all shook out exactly. Some tweeters were there, and helped us along the way but taking their word for it. But trying to understand and really "get" what happened in that church without being there is like...well, a little reading the Bible in English. You mostly get the idea (and even exact quotes) but so, so much is lost. 140 characters just doesn't quite do it.

If you're looking for more "reporting" than Twitter can give you, just check out UMC.org and various other sites for as much info as you can find.

Story, as I hear it, is that she was acquitted 12-1 that she was a "self-avowed practicing homosexual". From what we all hear, she refused to answer some of the questions regarding this, citing that they were being asked in an accusatory manner. I see her point. But I also think that true "evidence" exists that is published by Rev. DeLong that submits that she is "guilty". I'm happy for Rev. DeLong because this verdict means that the person she loves hasn't held her back from pursuing her calling.

She was, though, guilty on the other charge...as we all expected. I think I made it clear last time, Amy broke the rules.

The punishment was a bit of a slap on the wrist but anyone who might have either expected or hoped for something more substantial probably wasn't being realistic. She was assigned to a 20-day suspension (seems to me like a "think-about-what-you-did" scenario) and to write a document for some sort of presentation at General Conference 2012. I really like the second penalty. I think it'll take her passion and put it into a position where it can actually make a difference, and possibly...a change. That's great.

I've received quite a bit of negative feedback in regards to my first post, as many who sit clearly on the side of Rev. DeLong have seen my post as a means of arguing against homosexuality. I wasn't. I was only saying that Rev. DeLong broke the rules. Even in my remarks regarding her baptism, I wished to point out that the movements against her have simply been to maintain fairness.

I have heard many "unjust rules were meant to be broken" ala MLK Jr arguments. Politically, I actually agree. I have made it quite clear that I think that God loves all of God's children. What I neglected to make as clear is that I see, as I think you should, a difference here in the political argument as opposed to the religious argument. The United States says that all are equal. So, all should be equal. Rosa Parks, MLK, Malcolm, X, and many many others fought for this cause. They were jailed for their efforts as well. And they were in the right. The laws of the USA were acting in opposition to some of the founding documents of this country. Many of them cleverly snuck in religious references to their arguments, but that argument was a social argument regarding a matter of US policy and law. It was against the rights of the African Americans to treat them in the way they were bing treated. All men are created equal.

What's perhaps most confusing about the homosexuality "issue" in today's society is that it is once again a political issue on the state side with a lot of religious rhetoric thrown back and forth. Who decides the rules for the country and states? The founding documents and then instances of precedents and bills passed in Congress. Who decides the rules for the church? The church, in whatever way each church chooses to rule itself.

The UMC has a way of going about this. Prayerfully, spiritually, and Biblically: the Book of Discipline is decided on. It's decided on by a vote. Which means that a MAJORITY of the people in the UMC elected delegates who decided to keep the current BOD language regarding homosexuality that existed prior. To break these rules, knowingly, is more than just to say "you are wrong", it is to say "your interpretation of the Biblical scriptures doesn't count because progress must be made." I personally believe that God's grace is available for ALL. The difference is: I don't see where this instance changes that that much.

Then there is the part about Amy's agreement with the UMC. Rosa Parks didn't make any agreement with the US. Because the whole situation of Civil Rights was born out of oppression at the start, it's not even fair to say that agreement was based on taxes and public services rendered. But Amy did agree to something. And the church agreed to something. The fact that Amy was a homosexual was something she knew about. And she broke the rules.

Which is why I think that the slap on the wrist of 20 days does nothing more than show others that they can do the same thing, if they're willing to take the penalty. This opens up a whole new world of interest. Had it been a stronger penalty, two things might have worked better (for all involved): the Discipline (and the inherent Bible-based decisions that have to come from that) might have been put to the use that it exists for, and the Biblical interpretations of all involved would actually have been dealt with in a way that made all feel like their voices were heard. What this might encourage (and to note, may or may not be good or bad...history gets defined by the "winners") is a whole bunch of pastors who believe so strongly in one idea that they're willing to break the covenant they made with the church. To me, that's a big idea. Biblically, breaking covenants is looked down upon. I must be clear: I think is is very, very different than Rosa Parks.

The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence are very clear in (most of) their language. The Bible really isn't. It was written by many many people over a long period of years; many of which seem to, at times, have different ideas about discipleship, salvation, grace, and faith. To make it worse, church history is even more messed up than the US's history is. It is because of this that we are at this juncture today.

One thing is clear to me, though: in this church trial, no one really wins.

-B

Incompatible with Christian Teaching

A note regarding this post: I am and have been close with several self-avowed homosexual people within my lifetime. It is my personal belief that God loves all of God's children and calls upon all of us to act and behave in the same way as God has demonstrated through Jesus' life here on earth. I do not claim to understand the homosexual lifestyle (as it simply does not describe me) and choose not to judge the lifestyle because of my extreme lack of knowledge regarding the topic. I do, however, think that our culture is on the verge of a gender and sexual orientation crisis that has been snowballing for years. I think that if the Church does not handle such a crisis with grace, mercy, and love, we will not only have disobeyed God's will for us, but we will have lost (please define "lost" however you'd like, it will still be true). My opinions listed below are indicative of my own observations of the said situation at the given time, with as much information as I felt like I could find. I would hope that they do not anger any readers, as I have attempted to choose the words carefully so as to be inclusive, yet honest, with describing and arguing a very difficult situation that no one quite knows the "right" answer to. I have attempted to be mindful of those that I know and love while writing this post, because if at the end of the day I have angered people close to me, I have lost. If at any point you disagree or wish to point out my own ill-thinking, please express this to me in a way that embodies the grace, mercy, and love referenced above. Rev. Amy DeLong of Wisconsin is on trial in the United Methodist Church for "chargeable offenses" according to Paragraph 2702 in the United Methodist Book of Discipline. The Book of Discipline is edited, morphed, and revoted on every four years by delegates from each of the Annual Conferences within the United Methodist Church. For those uninterested in church procedure and polity, it reads a lot like a phone book (do they even still have those anymore?).

The story of Amy goes something like this: she fell in love with the United Methodist Church around the time she was in college. She began to feel a call to pursue ordained ministry. By the time she had affirmed that call and applied to seminary, she fell in love with her partner, Val. You can read Amy's account of her story here.

Then, in 2009, "Amy officiated at a Holy Union for a same-gender loving couple."(Link) She then reported about it in the annual required report that pastors must submit. She was called in to meet with the Bishop and she explained what she had done and described to the Bishop her on-going relationship with her partner, Val. The link at the top of the paragraph has the rest of the story's timeline. Given what you've read so far, you can put the pieces together.

What are the offenses against Amy? The Book of Discipline (remember, decided on by United Methodists worldwide) says you can't do that.

The Book of Discipline lists the word "homosexual" 17 times. It lists "gay" seven times. It lists "lesbian" three times. In regards to homosexuality in general, the Book of Discipline says this:

The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God's grace is available to all. we will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons. (Paragraph 161, F)

Basically, the UMC implores individual churches to love and care for homosexual people, but still considers the practice of homosexuality "incompatible with Christian teaching."

Rev. DeLong, though, at this point isn't guilty of anything. She's cited as guilty of charges under PP 2702.1b. Paragraph 2702 refers explicitly to reasons that a bishop, clergy member, local pastor, clergy on honorable location, or diaconal minister may be tried. Here's what it lists:

• immorality including but not limited to not being celibate in singleness or not faithful in a heterosexual marriage.
• practices declared by the UMC to be incompatible with Christian teaching, including but not limited to: being a self avowed practicing homosexual; or conducting ceremonies which celebrate homosexual union; or performing same-sex wedding ceremonies.
• crime.
• failure to perform the work of the ministry.
• disobedience to the order and discipline of the UMC.
• many others including sexual abuse, sexual misconduct, harassment, and racial or gender discrimination.

Short and sweet: Rev. DeLong broke the rules.

So, according to the Book of Discipline, she is being charged with breaking the rules. Sounds fair, right? When she was ordained as a pastor, she agreed to hold to the rules. She didn't.

Obviously Rev. DeLong didn't take nicely to this. She has employed help and a defense system including the recently popular www.loveontrial.org.

Here's what I don't understand: why is she angry? Obviously, she is on the verge of losing her job (one that she loves and feels called to). I guess that makes sense. But, we musn't forget: she knowingly did something that she was consciously aware was against the teachings and rules of the church. When you have a private job (remember, churches are private institutions) and you break the rules of that job, your employer has the right (and the responsibility) to remove you from your position at their own discretion. This issue is often compared to the Civil Right's issues in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. I don't personally think this is a fair comparison in this instance because Amy has a private job. Martin Luther King went to jail. Amy will not. The government has no rules about her own ordination. If she loses this trial, she is not going to go to jail. The best argument that she has is that the UMC shouldn't legally be able to ask you whether or not you are gay in order to be employed. (It is worth noting that I noticed this during my recent investigations into the ordination process of the UMC. The church does background checks--expected--but also financial checks, health checks, marriage checks, etc...things that other businesses in the private sector are not legally allowed to base employment choices off of.)

However, the reality remains the same: she agreed to hold to a value and behavioral system. In exchange for her agreement (and hard work), the church agreed to give her a job, insurance, and a house for the rest of her employable life. Setting aside any spiritual aspect of the role of the pastor (of which there is obviously much of), she didn't hold to her side of the deal.

If you read her material on www.loveontrial.org, you'll notice that she is a talented speaker. She has a gift for writing sermons and has a real heart for ministry. I feel for Amy. She's in a tough situation. There's not a great way out at this point, except to gain a following and leave the UMC in a big way. If she can gain followers, perhaps she can make a difference in the future. I personally wonder, that if this is where she is, why is she still so "called" to the UMC? If I felt as if a church body wasn't including me, I'd look somewhere else.

(Irony, noted)

There is one more thing, though. In a sermon Rev. DeLong gave the other night, she said this:

You see, they don't want my ordination back, they want my baptism back. They don't want me included. They don't want me to feel beloved. They don't want the Holy Spirit to be poured out on me and they certainly don't want God saying, "Amy, in you I am well-pleased." They aren't after my ordination. They're after my baptism. They're saying God's grace isn't sufficient. (Link)

I see that Amy is in the midst of perhaps the most emotional time in her life. I get that she is using the argument that the UMC is being a legalist and she is being "spiritual." I see why she says what she says. I don't always agree, but I can see where she is coming from.

But, in the quote above...I think she is wrong. The Book of Discipline explicitly states that homosexual people ARE to be welcomed. Remember the "implore" line above? They do want her ordination back, not because they have a political stance, but because the General Church agreed that that was what was required. To let her keep her job after what she is done is not being fair to her, it's being unfair to the rest of the church.

They do not, in any way, want her baptism back. I can see why she might feel that way, but to explicitly state that the church is unable to keep her from being a Christian is not only a misrepresentation of the situation but it is also extremely out of line.

My only hope is that somehow some sort of reconciliation can come out of this. I'm not sure the church is completely right. I'm not sure that Amy is completely right. Somehow, the Church is going to have to learn how to deal with the changes in culture in order to continue to be effective witnesses for Christ in the world.

Here's to hoping that actually happens.

-B

ADDITION: I don't like the "incompatible with Christian teaching" language. Not because I don't think it's true (who defines "Christian teaching" anyway?), but because I think it is only used to call out the homosexual lifestyle explicitly. I personally think that divorce is incompatible with Christian teaching, (and in a strict sense, MUCH more than homosexuality) and yet the UMC ordains divorcees every year. I go to school with several. If the UMC were to not allow self-avowed divorcees to be ordained, hell might break loose. There are many many options and times when divorce is the right situation. When divorce is the only way out of an abusive or unhealthy situation. I do not choose to judge those times. I simply wish to point out that the "incompatible" language does not include all things, as it should.

Samsung Steals. Over and Over.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7nbqSp9T30&] Innovation?

-B

To be fair, they dropped the "i" and just called it "Books". By the way, Samsung, Google had that name first.

Everything is a Remix: Progress and Innovation

This is the third installment in the "Everything is a Remix" series by a guy named Kirby. These are VERY well done and if innovation, progress, and the future of creation are of any interest to you, you ought to sit back and watch this for 11 minutes.  Make sure you stay until the end, after the credits. [vodpod id=Video.11432879&w=425&h=350&fv=]

It is, without a doubt, an interesting take on the world and the progress within it. It is true that Apple did not outright invent Graphical User Interfaces (most people ought to be aware that it was a visit to the Xerox campus that changed Steve Jobs.  He has been quoted as saying, "They showed us three things that day but I didn't see the other two.  I was so caught up with the first thing that I missed the rest of the presentation.") Apple did, however, innovate in many ways.  As the video points out, they made things easier, they made things make more sense.  Those are innovations. They innovated in price, too, which made it more acceptable to the commercial market.

I don't think anyone doubts that one company or person has created things that were simply unheard of before. Some do, however, have better methods of creation and presentation that truly allows something to become...new. Apple has done this in computers since the late 70's.  Disney has done this in animation and theme parks since well before that.

This quote from Henry Ford can be found at the end of the video:

I invented nothing new.

I simply assembled the discoveries of other men behind whom were centuries of work. Had I worked fifty or ten or even five years before, I would have failed.

So it is with every new thing.  Progress happens when all the factors that make for it are ready, and then it is inevitable.

To teach that a comparatively few men are responsible for the greatest forward steps of mankind is the worst sort of nonsense.

-Henry Ford

-B

John Gruber says Kirby "nailed it."  I think I agree.

"I'm a Comedian First"

[vodpod id=Video.11387818&w=425&h=350&fv=] Jon Stewart on Fox News Sunday.

I'm surprised he did this. Because he did though, we have many great quotes.

"I'm not denying that there is liberal bias in the media, but you're suggesting that there is an equivalence between Fox News and ABC and I thinks that's absolutely...silly."

-B

I'm On The Edge...of Stupid.

Gaga's got a new video. It's brilliant. So deep.  So inspiring. So well-written. So perfectly executed. [vodpod id=Video.11139720&w=425&h=350&fv=]

She's received quite a bit of negative press for this one(But that's not that different for her, is it?).

In all honesty, she can do whatever she wants.  If she chooses to write a song while taking shots with her dad on the piano after her grandfather died, then tell everyone that the song is about her grandfather (ought to be sentimental, right?), then dress in scant leather and basically have sex with poles and brick walls for the video; she has the right to.

But here's what I think happened:

• Someone offered her some kind of drug.
• She took it.
• She thought, "I'm GaGa; I can do anything and get away with it"
• Then she looked at a friend next to her and said, "what if I just dance without planning anything and we make it into a music video and then I sell it and get huge publicity for it."
• Then her friend said, "Stephanie, I think that's a terrible idea."
• Then GaGa said, "Great, let's do it; I'll do it naked."
• Then her friend said, "But that song's about your Grandfather!"
• To which GaGa replied, "He'd be proud."
• They filmed it ten minutes later (no need for elaborate set design).
• The next day, the drugs wore off.
• GaGa realized how bad it was.
• So she decided that if she blamed it on a creative director, people would think it was brilliant.
• So she did.
• But he had Twitter.  And he corrected the whole world.

Thus, ladies and gentlemen, we get the current product displayed above.

I never knew Elton in his crazy days. I came to really appreciate his work later in life. I liked his eccentricity, but I liked his music more.  I wonder if the same thing will happen with artists like GaGa to my kids.

God, I hope not.

Oh, GaGa.

-B

Honorary Ohioans: The Dallas Mavericks

The Governor of Ohio has declared the Dallas Mavericks honorary Ohioans for the day of June 14th for "loyalty, integrity, and teamwork":

Best line, though:

Whereas the proud city of Cleveland and the entire state of Ohio share in the excitement of Dallas Mavericks fans everywhere.

Bold, beautiful, and hilarious.

-B

Disney's Magical Innovations

John Gruber posted this video earlier on Daring Fireball today. Believe me, it is worth your precious time. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdHTlUGN1zw]

I am constantly amazed by the incredible amounts of ingenuity and time that go into animation. I am more amazed day by day by how much Disney has led the animation industry with technological innovations since its inception. I suppose that Gruber's comment sums it up the best:

Using technology to tell better stories, and make better movies. He’d have loved Pixar.

The amount of technology that Walt Disney had employed in his company since the beginning to make the products (both the films and theme parks) better had passed many many others. There are not many companies in the world that have such artistic and technological approaches woven together to create not only great products that sell, but also pieces of art.

The only other company that I think compares to the Walt Disney company in these regards is Apple. They have lots of things in common with each other: a different outlook on how the current marketplace could be changed by innovation, company held secrets (they wouldn't have been able to afford the land for Walt Disney World any other way), expensive prices, well thought-out market strategies and plans, very few huge mistakes (Michael Eisner had to be one of the biggest), and well-intentioned and marvelous leadership.

There is one more thing though: Magic.

All of the technological innovations that each company employ go to one thing: to make the way that the user interacts with the content magical.  With Disney it was making a seemingly 2D artistic rendering come alive by seeming...real. When Disney set out to create their theme parks, they wanted the guests to feel as if they were ACTUALLY IN some sort of fantasy land. It work so well that others copied it.

With Apple it is making communicating, interacting, and accomplishing work with a seemingly difficult computer as easy as possible. They introduced an entire new way of computing so that the personal computer could change the way people interacted with everyday life. They did it again with the iPhone. And again with the iPad. This, also, worked so well that others copied it.

There's a bit of magic inside of both of these companies.

My only concern is that Disney's outline since Walt's departure may be foreshadowing the outline of Apple after Steve's departure. We all know how Walt left his company. We all know what happened next to Disney.  I don't want that to be the way that Steve leaves Apple.

-B

Apple's Secrets

From joyoftech.com

Funny.

-B

The New Apple Campus

Yesterday, the day after his WWDC presentation in San Francisco, Steve Jobs went before the city council in Cupertino to present the plans for their new campus, not too far from the current one. The whole presentation is below. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtuz5OmOh_M&]

The council only asked for two things, really: Free wifi and an Apple Store.

Steve had two responses: "We pay taxes, and the city should provide free wifi" and "We're not sure the traffic is here for an Apple store."

Steve knows his stuff, has his opinions, and isn't afraid to speak the truth.

But how about the campus? Awesome, right?

-B

How do I get iOS 5?

I should have never opened my mouth. All day today, I've received text after message after email about wanting me to give people iOS 5 for their iPhone or iPad. Technically, I broke the NDA that Apple developers have to agree to in the first place. If you were one of these people, don't be offended, but I can't get it to you.

First, I'm not technically a developer.  I've been using a friend's account.  One that he graciously let me log in to.  But it costs $99 a year to do it and he, not having produced any apps, finally saw that it didn't seem to be worth the money.

I've considered paying the fee to be a developer, but I no longer live in a situation where I can be the only one making financial decisions, and it doesn't make sense for me to pay for the account at this point in my life.

So, I'd like to fill you in on what it takes to get a beta iOS release onto your phone:

• You must be a registered iOS developer. $99 a year.
• You must download the ipsw file from Apple's servers.
• Then, in Xcode, you must update your phone.  This is a clean wipe and you'll want to make sure that you backup all of your contents in iTunes first. You'll be able to re-download apps (and now, music) that you didn't back up and bought from iTunes, but it's safe to back up anyway. You must register with not only the UDID of the device, but also with account's credentials inside of Xcode 4.
• If it works anything like iOS4 did in beta, you'll have to reorganize everything.  Generally, you'll need an updated iTunes (10.5 for this one) for iTunes even to be able to recognize an iOs5 device connected to it.
• Apple generally works off of a two week beta cycle, meaning that in two weeks, you'll have to do this all again.
• It's worth noting that this MIGHT change this year as Apple has switched to Delta (meaning, change) updates that update over the air (much like Android). You might not have to do a clean install on your device for the second beta, but we won't know until the release happens.

Thanks to the generosity of a friend of mine, I tried this last year on my 3GS for iOS 4.  Let me explain my issues last year:

• I had to do a clean wipe every time.  That doesn't sound like a huge deal, but iOS4 introduced folders. iTunes didn't (at the time) recognize folders. So, every clean install also required new folder alignments, etc. That can literally be hours of work for them to be well organized.  Then, in two weeks, the jig is up and you have to do it again.
• Again, this may be cleaner this year,
• Every two weeks, when the new beta is released, the old one is not longer functional. A timer is set and you must renew it before time runs out.  Fun.
• Some apps don't work.  Literally, my TomTom app was useless because iOS4 changed the way that the apps read the iPhone location data.
• PROOF: Marco Arment (creator of tumblr and Instapaper) tweeted this today:
• "Developers: there's a VERY good chance your app needs tweaks to work properly on iOS 5. Not fully backwards compatible. Test like crazy."
• Some general apps didn't work.  We didn't know it at the time, but Apple was definitely testing some features with the camera app.  For the first two betas, the camera didn't work.
• There's way more.

All in all, I learned a few lessons: don't update on a device that is "mission critical." Apple says explicitly in their documentation that this is for testing purposes only, and that it should not be used on a phone that someone relies on to get around with. Hence, I put iOS5 on my 3GS last night and spent the day playing with it.  It's not bad, but it's slow and iTunes doesn't back up to it well enough yet,  iCloud (really, the functioning part of what we'd like to use it with) is not fully up and running yet and so playing with the new features isn't fully ready. If I were you, I would wait.  It'll save you money, and think about how good it will feel when you finally get hold of it!

If, though, you still want it, you have a few options:

• Become a registered developer ($99)
• Buy a name and password from some dude on eBay ($5-$10) and hope he doesn't take your money and run.
• Watch all the videos that go up on YouTube by all the people who break their agreements with Apple.
• Jailbreak your current phone and get some of the features (given, not as well employed) and try them out that way.
• Search for the ipsw file online, download it, try to install it in iTunes (option-click the restore button) and hope for the best.

Sorry I can't be of any more assistance.  I've decided against putting it on my iPhone 4 or iPad (even though I've been very tempted).

-B

iOS 5 and iCloud: It's About Time

If you were under a rock today, you missed a few key stories:

• Anthony Weiner actually did tweet that picture.
• Microsoft added live TV support to the XBox.
• Apple announced a ton of stuff.

Mac OS X Lion has been available in beta for quite some time now. They made all of the features official today.  If you own a Mac (and you should at least be thinking about it), you should check out the details here. The big news: it'll be available ONLY through the Mac App Store for $29 and can be installed on up to 5 machines. The Home Premium 3-pack of Windows 7 for families sell on Amazon for $124.99 (and yes, it took me at least 10 minutes to figure out which "version" of Windows 7 to choose).

Put bluntly, Apple is taking a big step by doing a few things:

• Showing the world that the Mac is a serious competitor to Windows.
• Showing the world that it shouldn't cost much to upgrade to the newest Operating System.
• Showing the world that it should not be difficult or confusing to update.

Apple = Winner, here. Not only is it better software, it's cheaper. (Apple is cheaper? Holy cow, Call Rev. Camping)

iOS5 was the next big update from Apple. It will release in the Fall, most likely right along with the new iPhone.

In the case of iOS5, they're catching up to a lot of features that Android (and yes, even Blackberry) handsets have had for awhile.

Among them:

• Revamped notifications with an easy way to access them anywhere inside of the OS. (Thank the Lord)
• iMessage: a direct iDevice to iDevice messaging system (and competitor to the popular Blackberry Messenger).
• Deep Twitter integration into the OS. (Given, Android doesn't handle the Twitter integration in the same way that the new iOS will, but the effect will be the somewhat the same for the end user)
• A hardware button for triggering the shutter button on the camera app. (I hear there is an inside joke in the Apple world that goes like this: You can tell which apps and processes in the Apple ecosystem that Steve uses and which ones he doesn't. The ones he uses on a daily basis are perfect and complete in every way.  The other ones sometimes seem to be convoluted and...missing something. I think it has been abundantly clear from the beginning of the iPhone days that Steve never took a lot of pictures of himself, or he would have found searching for that little digital camera button to be the worst experience in the world.)
• Photo editing in the camera and photos app (this should have been shipped with the original iPhone).
• And perhaps the biggest one, a true post-PC device. (Android has had the advantage since the T-Mobile G1) Also, see this article to experience what it is like to set up your new phone for the first time (if you've already had an account, etc).

In each and every case, Apple was behind the curve in its software offerings.  Though I haven't used the new iOS (I currently have it installed on my iPhone 3GS but no longer have a normal sized SIM card, thus it can't be activated or used...another change in iOS.  It used to be possible to use old iPhones as iPod touches, without activating them with a SIM card. Doesn't appear possible anymore, whether tethered to iTunes or not.), these updates seem to have been produced and designed well and will be welcome additions to the new OS. I have a feeling too, that there're reasons that Apple had not incorporated these features into the OS thus far. Therefore, I expect that these features will be all around better experiences than on most Android handsets.

Apple = Probable winner, here.

The BIG news: iCloud.

Many expected iCloud to be another music service, much like Amazon and Google have both released recently. If it works well, it's going to be much, much more than that. John Gruber says to think of it as the new iTunes.

It's a better version of iDisk (the current file sharing platform of MobileMe.)  It saves documents without the user even thinking about it. It updates them across devices. It saves contacts, calendars, etc across all devices. It updates them across devices. It saves your music that you've purchased through iTunes. It allows it all to be accessed across all devices. It saves every photo you take or import to every device. It syncs them and makes them available across all devices. If you ripped (or stole, I guess) music and iTunes carries those titles, you can let iTunes match the songs and albums you have.  Thus, they will be available for free download from iTunes on any Apple device. This costs $25 a year and appears to be limitless.  It requires no uploading of your library to a cloud, it requires no data cap, AND it gives you a higher encoded (better quality) version of the song. This, my friends, is the jackpot.

But I've got a few questions still, since it seems a bit strange to me:

• In regards to music, it is essentially doing what it had been doing with Apps for awhile. If you bought a song, you can get it anywhere (even if you delete it) at any time.
• This seems great, but it would be even better if it was integrated into the iPod app. This way, you could stream over the internet without having to download to a local device just to play. Though, I'll take this set up any day over the current situation.
• When you log into an account with a new device, you can set it up with your Apple ID and password and it will download your backup of your device and sync all of your data, apps, contacts, email.  Essentially, you could lose your device, go to the store and buy a new one, log in, and your device would be exactly how you left it the night before when it backed up.
• This is great.  EXCEPT, my wife and I are trying to use the same account. That way, when I buy an app, she can also download it for free (without having to pay for it). So can we both use the same iCloud account? Would that mean that any picture I take show up on her device too? Does that mean any song I buy will show up directly on her device too? Does that mean that any app she downloads show up on my device?  You can turn these features on and off, but I'd like the music I download to go to my iPad.  But I don't necessarily want it to go straight to hers. If we split accounts again (not that big of a deal), can she still log out of hers and log in to mine to get the app I just bought? Does the app then transfer to her iCloud account? It isn't clear, and seems unlikely.  With a $.99 app it doesn't matter, but with a $50 app it would.

This is a new look at the iTunes ecosystem and how we will all interact with it henceforth.  There is surely going to be some confusion, etc. Android had the backing of Google's widely used contacts, calendars and mail, but has not yet been able to fully integrate Google Docs and Picasa in a way as well done as iCloud is about to.

(It is important to realize that Google puts all of their eggs into the cloud idea.  NOTHING is stored locally, except for apps and small pieces of data...that if technically could be stored in the cloud alone, Google would choose to. Google's word processor: Google Docs. Google Docs is nice, but when you compare it to the new ecosystem that Apple's Pages will have with iCloud integration, it doesn't even compare. It will be interesting to see how Apple attempts to conquer Google Docs with multi-person/site file editing, the one thing Google Docs has on apps like Pages and Word.)

Apple = Winner, as long as it works.

We shall surely see.  I for one think it is a welcome upgrade.  None of it is as revolutionary as the iPad, but will make all of us iOS and Mac users much happier in accomplishing day to day tasks.

I can't wait.

-B

Just a Reminder...

 

As if you really needed one.

-B

The Padfone is Magical

I thought about posting this last week but decided against it because most of my commentary wasn't, as they say, "appropriate". Asus unveiled their new Padfone. And when I say unveil, I mean...unveil.

You HAVE to watch to understand.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=sqjoRMHyYQc]

Jobs gets laughed at for calling the iPad "magical". This takes that to a whole new level.

All in all, the Padfone is an interesting idea (although I'm not sure Asus is the only one who has thought of this, ever heard of the Motorola Atrix?) but I doubt I'd really be interested.  We shall see whether it sells or not.

-B

Love Your Neighbor

I think, perhaps, this could have been the kind of work Jesus was talking about. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXf18-3p2Sg&]

Joplin needs the Church. Thank God the Church is there for Joplin.

-B

Inkling Textbooks

I remember hearing about these guys a few months ago. Inkling is the first company to work with all the major textbook companies to redefine what a textbook is, and how it can be used (and paid for) more efficiently on a tablet device. Take a look at the video below to get a feel for what a textbook looks like in this environment.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxthBN3Pb88&]

The head guy of Inkling presented the product at The Wall Street Journal's D9 conference last week. If you have the time and this sort of stuff interests you, it'd be worth your effort to check out his presentation and explanation. You can do so at the bottom of the page here.

They have an interesting business approach and seem to have the right strategic partners. But, it takes them 12 weeks to produce one huge textbook. They need a bigger staff.

You can count me in for being the first to forego carrying giant books to school. I wonder, though, how this might work in the public schools where the textbooks are provided by the school free of charge to the students. I can't see the public school system handing each child an iPad and allowing them to take it home with them, but when prices drop, the world may be open. I suppose someone once said that about the current textbooks, "we are going to let kids take these $300 books home?!?!"

I do, though, think it'd be great to buy my child an iPad instead of forcing them to carry these books. I swear my back still hurts some days from those days in school.

My favorite part of the guy's presentation though was his attention toward the iPad. He said something like, "We think Android and web development is very interesting, but as long as the iPad has 90% of the market, I think we are going to focus our efforts there."

A they say in NBA jam, BOOMshakalaka.

-B

I Broke My iPhone

I was clapping at a baseball game.iPhone was in one hand. Wedding ring was in the other. Here are the results: (Lighting in my apartment makes it nearly impossible to fully capture the horror in any sort of focused way)

God forgives mistakes. Apple does too, if you pay them to.

iFixit charges $149.99 for a new front screen replacement and the job is not easy. Ubreakifix charges $139.99 but you have to send in the phone. Apple charges $199.99. Screen still functions, it just looks bad.

I think I'm stuck with the ramifications of my actions. It's a tough life that I lead.

-B