Better Elevation

Matt Buchanan at Gizmodo, citing a single Tweet from Craig Hockenberry as their motivation, talks a bit about Apple’s recent note that apps using geolocation to provide targeted advertising will be rejected.

So it’s not too much of a stretch to see Apple’s ad platform in the future being the best way to deliver ads in apps, which might offer perks like, say, location-based targeted advertising, or more dynamic ads than you can do now on an iPhone. It’s also not crazy to think Apple’s way is going to be the only way to get some of those features, like location-based ads.

The point is easy to miss, so I’ll spell it out a bit. Apple’s plan isn’t to remove anyone’s ability to use location data for ads. What Buchanan is suggesting — and the conclusion I came to myself — is that Apple wants to provide those ads themselves.

Rather than pulling ads from any of the countless mobile ad providers, it would be more suited to Apple’s interests for you to get your ads through a framework. Core Advertising, if you will. Developers include a few lines of code and get ad supported lite versions of their apps which conveniently pay out through the same system that cuts the checks for App Store revenue. A single point of payment.

The Gizmodo article also points out Apple’s use of the word primarily. If the only reason you’re using Core Location is to serve ads, you will be rejected. Why? Simple, Apple recognizes the danger of allowing app developers to control overall user experience. Right now, a modal alert pops up when you launch a location-enabled app for the first time. As a user, I see this alert as a layer of privacy protection. My iPhone correctly assumes that I don’t want to share this information with just anyone, and cautions me on a per-app basis.

Now imagine this alert pops for every app.

What Apple doesn’t want is for users to be conditioned to hit OK without consideration, and even less so for users to be inundated with alerts (shades of Windows).

By providing advertising functionality by way of a developer framework, Apple can take a cut of the money, make the process of creating ad-supported apps easier for developers, and distill the user experience down to a single “allow advertising based on your current location” option within settings.

So long as ads not based on location can still be pulled freely from third-parties like Fusion and The Deck, I would view this as a fair compromise.

Steven Sande has some nice things to say about Typewar for the iPhone.

This is a blog dedicated to anecdotes of design clients asking stupid questions or saying stupid things.

I’ve always been a user advocate; what professionals consider to be “stupid” is really just a demonstration that not everyone knows what you know. If you make a living doing design work, you should be glad that people aren’t, by default, as knowledgeable as you. Their ignorance pays your bills. And don’t blindly assume that you would be good that their job.

That said, some of these are pretty stupid.

(Via Nick Harris)

After requesting one on his show, it looks like Colbert got what he wanted.

Justin de Vesine shares more or less the same complain that I have about the iPad:

No, I’m not trying to run Linux on the thing. It runs a perfectly acceptable *NIX operating system already, and in fact has a fantastic GUI (for almost every purpose) and software installation procedure (for almost every case) already. I just want to run my instant messenger /and/ Pages.

Craig Hockenberry offers an alternative philosophy:

What I find most interesting is the inclusion of the iWork applications. I suspect that we’ll all benefit from working in Pages, Numbers and Keynote without the distractions of the web, Twitter or chat. And in the long run, we’ll prefer it.

I think that the extreme focus of a single application is a pleasant side-effect of single-tasking, not an intended feature.

Complainers live to complain, and it seems never more so than during and following an Apple keynote. Today is no exception. Still, one complaint stood out to me above the rest.

No camera.

This seemed like a strange omission at first glance, but really, what good would the camera be? The point of having a camera on the iPhone was to enable the user to take pictures quickly on-the-go. The iPad isn’t the same kind of device. I’ve heard the rumors about video conferencing, with some even claiming that the tablet would have two cameras, one in the front and one in the back. Assuming that wouldn’t be confusing, expensive, or harmful to industrial design, video conferencing on the iPad would still suck.

When we imagine iChat or other traditional web conferencing solutions, we imagine seeing a video window with the smiling face of a loved one. Now put the camera on a tablet.

I love my friends, but I don’t want to stare up their noses.

The alternative is uncomfortably holding the damned thing in front of you. Nothing about this experience sounds pleasant to me.

I’m reminded of copy/paste on the iPhone. It was considered to be a near-unforgivable sin that it wasn’t included in the first release. Yet the iPhone sold well into the millions without it. When 3.0 was announced, there was a collective cry of “finally” from the technical community, but neglected was the fact that it was — and still is — the single best implementation of copy and paste on a mobile device. Do you think this happened at the last minute? That Apple’s designers and engineers were sitting on their asses playing Trism for two years, then haphazardly stumbled upon a best-of-breed solution completely by accident?

I suspect that Apple had the exact same idea for video conferencing. After all, they did file for a patent on technology that would allow them to place a camera behind the screen of a device. But if a nice-to-have feature doesn’t work perfectly, you throw it away and ship without it.

Brent Simmons on the iPad:

My concern, though, is that people may think that Mac apps should include every possible feature and preference. The reasoning would be like this: “It’s not an iPad or iPhone. It’s a computer. Therefore it’s for power users. Therefore it should be totally customizable and have every feature anybody might want.”

That would be a big mistake.

My hope, instead, is that Mac users and developers (all developers are users too, by the way) learn even better the virtues of focused, opinionated software that pays attention to experience more than to long feature lists and heavy preference windows. I hope we see even better Mac software.

Brent his this ineffable ability to be opinionated, strong-willed, and forceful without being even the least bit offensive.

To the surprise of absolutely no one, Apple announced their new iPad tablet today.

InfoWorld’s Randall C. Kennedy trolls for hits:

Assuming a third-quarter ship date, this fruity new wonder could prove to be the hottest item under the Christmas tree. And that means that, come January 2011, IT shops will be inundated with idiot users lobbying to hook their iPads/iSlates/iTablets (iBricks?) into the corporate network.

Using the phrase “idiot users” just threw away what little credibility you had left. It has long been the folly of greasy, surly, under-sexed IT guys to think that the users owed you something. You are there to provide a service. The user is your customer. If you don’t like it, go find another job. The IT guy is not some desirable rock star. You are a commodity, easily replaceable. IT is a cost center, and you aren’t getting paid to be a dick to people.

And those idiot users? There’s a good chance that they’re the ones making the company money.

Who didn’t see this coming?

Puppy Tweets is a plastic tag with a sound and motion sensor that you attach to your pet’s dog collar and connect its USB receiver to your computer. Then you create a Twitter account for your dog and enjoy updates all day from Sparky or whatever its name is on your computer or smartphone.

Bill Dudney is taking on the role of Application Framework Evangelist at Apple. I’m sad that he’ll be leaving Colorado, but this makes every bit of sense. Bill knows his frameworks, to say the least, and his time as a teacher and as an indie developer make him uniquely suited to the job.

Congratulations, Bill.

Jeremy Harrington provides us with a first look at the upcoming Apple Tablet from 1998.

James Tauber posted a piece back in August about corporate culture, linking to a popular presentation from Netflix about their internal policies and culture. It is very much worth a read, but I would add this one point:

If the economy means you’re afraid to give your employer an honest evaluation based on this presentation, you’re not a rock star.

It’s a bit selfish and unfair, linking to a review of my own app. But when you design a game for a mobile phone, there’s really no better compliment than this:

I sure thought it was right up mine when I first spotted it last night. The game’s description warned me that it is ‘insanely addictive’. Really? An addictive game all about fonts?

Hell yes it is. Or at least that’s how I felt after roughly four hours of almost continuous play last night.

We might print this one out and frame it.

Brad Ellis has posted a wallpaper-sized version of the logo he made for our upcoming talk at 360|iDev in April. If you’d like to come check it out, use code “BetterElevation” to get 20% off registration.