The Mac Sucks!

The folks over at the Redmond Pie web site have compared the specifications of the upcoming Microsoft Zune HD to the Apple iPod Touch 2G. Follow that link if you want the full details, but here are the key differences between the two:

• The Zune has a 3.3″ OLED display with 480×272 resolution. The iPod Touch has a 3.5″ screen with 480×320 resolution. While this might give the iPod an initial “edge” since it’s slightly larger and higher resolution, the OLED technology in the Zune might provide more vibrant color.
• The Zune will reportedly feature a “special version” of Internet Explorer, reported elsewhere to be based on IE 6. The iPod’s is based on Apple’s Safari browser.
• The Zune will offer 720p video output via HDMI, while the iPod Touch only offers SD video out.
• The iPod Touch, when combined with a microphone, will serve as a voice recorder. The Zune will not have this built in.
• The Zune offers an HD radio receiver. The iPod does not.
• The Zune will offer a built-in “social service”, the Zune Social.
• The Zune will have its own built-in Zune Marketplace store, similar to the App Store and iTunes in the iPod Touch.
• The Zune will work with Windows PCs, while the iPod Touch works with both Windows and Macintosh.
• The Zune will include XBox Live integration, wireless synchronization, and wireless file sharing. The iPod Touch does not offer those options.
• The Zune features an Nvidia Tegra graphics processor, which may be superior to the graphics processor in the iPod Touch.

It’s also interesting to note some of the key features the two have in common. Both feature a multi-touch display, an accelerometer, WiFi, and games and applications. Since the Zune HD will be new to the marketplace, we can expect the iPod Touch to offer a significantly larger range of applications.

The site also shows a video of a user putting a Zune HD through some of its basic functions:

CNET has also posted a hands-on video of the Zune HD:

As I’ve mentioned before, I received an iPod Touch 2G as a Christmas gift last year. I have to admit that I like it a lot, and I can’t imagine dumping it for a Zune HD… at least not based on what I’ve seen so far.

On the other hand, and without my having gotten my hands on a Zune HD, I think Microsoft has gotten a LOT right with this device. They’ve hit a form factor that is smaller than the iPhone (though it could be larger than the iPod Touch). They have a comparable screen size and multi-touch technology. It has a built-in web browser and app support. It has an accelerometer, which is used in some of the more popular iPhone and iPod Touch applications. It’ll output HD video. The interface looks sharp and professional, though some will prefer the iPod Touch’s interface to that of the Zune (and probably others will prefer it the other way around). On the whole, I think it will be a worthy competitor to the iPod Touch provided that Microsoft prices it appropriately, allows third-party applications, and doesn’t follow Apple’s “app censorship” example. With the right catalog of third-party applications and a (compared to the iPod Touch) relatively low sticker price, Microsoft could put a dent in iPod Touch sales this fall… especially if Apple doesn’t update the Touch (which seems unlikely).

Engadget has posted a story with images of a supposed new Microsoft Zune model called the Zune HD. Very little is known about the device, other than that the images are being unofficially confirmed as real. What’s interesting about the Zune HD is that it appears to be a touch-screen device vaguely similar to the Apple iPod Touch. One can also guess by the name that it will probably have a high-definition screen. Not much more is known about it than this.

Interestingly, I read another article on CNET about how a survey of teenagers indicated that 100% of them planned to buy an Apple iPod in the future. That’s right, 100%. Before you start to take that statistic too seriously, realize that the survey only counts 600 students with an average age of 16.3 years. Moreover, this same group of students said that they wouldn’t pay more than $200 for an MP3 player. That leaves only the Nano and Shuffle as options in Apple’s product line. And, of course, the survey only asks what player they “want” to buy rather than what they “expect” to buy or may eventually actually buy. Still, it does show how successful Apple’s marketing efforts to teenagers have been.

While the above articles don’t paint a very rosy picture for Microsoft’s chances in the media player market, I wouldn’t be too quick to rule them out yet. The current Zune model has been receiving very favorable reviews compared with the iPod Classic (which is the most-similar product to it in the Apple line). While Microsoft is losing “mind share” because its players aren’t up to the “wow” factor of the iPod Touch, the Zune HD is evidence that Microsoft recognizes this deficiency and is taking steps to correct it. If their Microsoft Surface technology (and the “touch” technology included in Windows 7) is any indication, it’s clear that Microsoft recognizes the need to incorporate this kind of technology in their products. What remains to be seen is whether Microsoft can produce a touch-screen device that’s truly competitive with the iPod Touch. Because it’s good for competition and innovation, I hope so… but I’m not willing to bet on it yet.

The UK’s Register Hardware site reported in “iPod Touch torches tyke’s trousers” that a US district court judge has been asked to award a 15-year-old $225,000 because his iPod exploded in his pants. On December 4, 2008, the young boy was sitting in his class when he “heard a loud pop and immediately fent a burning sensation on his leg.” He realized then that his iPod had exploded and caught on fire in his pocket. He ran to the bathroom and removed his pants, to learn that the iPod had burned through his pocket and melted through his underwear, burning his leg. The lawsuit says that the boy suffered second-degree burns to his leg. The Register reports that what concerns them about the case, aside from fears about their own iPods exploding, “is the fact that Mrs. Antrobus is not only suing Apple, but also the staff of Cincinnati’s Kenwood Towne Center Apple Store” for representing the device as safe.

As someone who carries an iPod Touch around in his back pocket a lot, the story is naturally of concern to me as well. However, batteries that catch on fire and explode (which is what I suspect happened here) are not exclusively an Apple phenomenon. For example:

• In October 2008, there was a recall of Hewlett-Packard, Toshiba, and Dell laptop batteries made by Sony of Japan because they could overheat a pose a fire or burn hazard.
• In 2007, MacRumors.com reported a story about a MacBook owner’s battery catching fire.
• In October 2007, an Atlanta man’s iPod set his pants on fire.
• In 2006, Dell recalled 4 million laptop batteries because of a potential fire risk.

The situation is common enough that you can even find instructions on the web for dealing with a battery fire.

In his article “The Mac slides, but not as badly as the PC market“, CNET blogger Matt Asay makes a suggestion to Apple about the iPhone that seems so absurd to me that I can’t twist it in any direction that it makes sense to me:

The reality is that Apple already does have a “low end” Internet device to offer the market. It’s called the iPhone. No, it doesn’t offer a full computing experience, but then, neither do Netbooks.

The difference in the iPhone’s favor, however, is that it comes with a host of applications unavailable on Windows- or Linux-based Netbooks: the App Store. True, most of these applications rarely get used after customers kick the tires on them, as CNET reports, but that’s the magic: the applications are so cheap, they’re disposable.

The real question for me will be whether Apple ever condescends to market the iPhone as a Netbook-type device: a comparable price tag with a nearly limitless (and cheap) application potential. I don’t think that it will, and I don’t think that it should.

Since I own both a netbook and an “iPhone equivalent” (the iPod Touch), Asay’s suggestion that Apple should market the iPhone as an alternative to the netbook makes very little sense to me, but it does make a tiny bit of sense…

If all you use your netbook for is to browse the web, read email, and play an occasional game of solitaire, then the iPhone is a good alternative. It will handle web browsing well enough (though it’s useless for Flash and, it seems, certain photographs). It’s fine for reading email, but less suitable for responding to emails at length. And it’s got plenty of games to keep you entertained. It’s a lot easier to lug around than a netbook. But the iPhone is not a replacement for a netbook.

Here’s why:

• Typing: The iPhone/Touch on-screen keyboard is adequate for URLs and short emails. For blogging or lengthy email responses, it sucks. My netbook’s keyboard is nearly full size and I can type on it almost as quickly as I can on my desktop.
• Office Productivity: The iPhone/Touch doesn’t have an equivalent to Microsoft Office, so I can’t make a quick change to a Word document, adjust a cell in a spreadsheet, or show someone a PowerPoint presentation on it. I can do all that in OpenOffice on my netbook.
• Web Browsing: The iPhone/Touch’s built-in Safari browser is probably the finest mobile browser I’ve used. Having said that, it can’t display Flash content, and I work with several sites where that’s a problem. Its small screen isn’t great for some web apps and web content. While my netbook’s screen (10″) isn’t ideal either, it’s a hell of a lot better than the iPhone/Touch. Plus, I have the option of using Internet Explorer or Firefox in addition to Safari. Oh, and I can download things on the netbook. I can’t do that on the Touch.
• USB Ports: My netbook has several USB ports. I can transfer files between my desktop and netbook with ease, using a USB flash drive. There aren’t any USB ports on the Touch, nor is there a flash memory slot I could use to transfer data. In a pinch I could even charge my Touch with my netbook.
• Downloading: Mobile Safari is prevented from downloading MP3 files or other content Apple doesn’t want you downloading. I can download anything I want to download on my netbook.
• Applications: While it’s true that the horde of applications in the App Store generally doesn’t have an equivalent on the netbook, so what? Do I need my netbook to make fart noises or simulate a level? My netbook boots Linux, Windows XP Pro, and Windows 7. If I was willing to violate the EULA, I could probably get it to run OS X. Talk about software options! Those are real applications people don’t abandon after a couple of days.
• Wired Computing: If I’m traveling and there’s a wired Ethernet connection handy, but no WiFi, my netbook has an Ethernet port and connects right away. With the iPhone, you’re out of luck if there’s no coverage and no WiFi, even if there is a wired network port.

Having said this, the netbook isn’t a replacement for the iPhone/Touch, either. You can’t slip it into a pocket and take it wherever you go. You can’t make cellular phone calls with a netbook. And, without an external device, there’s no GPS. The Touch and the netbook do make good traveling companions, however. I often slip the Touch into my pocket and tuck the netbook under my arm when I go to lunch. I would imagine that if Apple ever allows tethering, an iPhone and netbook would be a great traveling combo.

Bottom line: I think it would be foolish of Apple to try and position the iPhone against netbooks. While neither of them is a “full computing experience” the netbook comes a great deal closer than the iPhone – it just can’t be easily tucked in a pocket.

I suspect Apple to offer “something” that competes with netbooks this year. I don’t know if it will be a smaller MacBook or a larger tablet-like iPhone, but I suspect they will make some entry into the space if they can put an “Apple spin” on it. I’m even curious to see what they come up with.

Apple has taken an awful beating for the iPhone applications it has refused to put in the App Store. We always hear about the apps they rejected that they probably shouldn’t have, but how about the hundreds of apps they refuse every day that really have no business on an iPhone or iPod Touch? We scoured through Apple’s dumpster to find the top 5 apps we’re glad Apple didn’t put in the App Store:

Microsoft Office for iPhone: Need to crank out a quick memo, presentation, or spreadsheet on the go? Turn to the world’s leading office suite, Microsoft Office – now on your iPhone. This 8GB download turns your iPhone into the ultimate business productivity tool. These apps make extensive use of the multi-touch “zoom” functionality. Note: Due to the design of the iPhone and iTunes software, documents created using Microsoft Office for iPhone can’t be synchronized with your desktop computer, sent as email attachments, copied to a flash card, printed, or posted to the web.

iPhone Boot Camp: Tired of the iPhone’s built-in OS? With iPhone Boot Camp, you can switch between all your your favorite mobile operating systems, such as Windows Mobile, RIM’s Blackberry OS, the Palm OS, and even the Newton OS. The entire world of handheld applications is now open to you.

Serial Killa Pro: The perfect all-in-one application for mass murderers. Provides a search feature to help identify potential victims, GPS-guided directions to corpse-disposal sites, on-line weapon ordering, an alibi generator, a scrapbook for memories of past victims, and an encrypted store of GPS coordinates to your victims’ bodies to use as a bargaining chip if you’re caught.

iLook at Me: This is the ultimate social networking tool. No part of your life will be off limits ever again! Randomly activates the iPhone’s camera and/or microphone to capture “candid” images of the iPhone owner’s life. Captured images are immediately uploaded to social networking sites like Facebook and emailed to all your contacts. Imagine the fun of sharing your illicit affairs, drunken stupors, secret conversations, and intimate moments with the entire world! iLook at Me even communicates with other nearby iPhones in your vicinity to obtain the best possible image and sound – as seen below. ( Warning: This app can’t be shut off or uninstalled once purchased.)

1. 
   (Image courtesy of Bistrosavage on Flickr.com)
   
   

Virtual iFriend: Once installed, this handy little app runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Every few minutes, it randomly simulates voice mails, phone calls, emails, and/or text messages from friends, giving you the appearance of an active social life. With Virtual iFriend, everyone around you will know you have an iPhone (and some of them may even think you have friends). Warning: Virtual iFriend may cause your real friends – as well as complete strangers – to develop a sudden urge to violently insert your iPhone into your anal cavity.

Perhaps you’ve seen a few apps you’re glad Apple kept out of the App Store? Tell us about them in the comments!

(None of the above apps are real. The preceding was an attempt at humor. Any similarity with actual iPhone or non-iPhone applications is accidental and unintentional, apart from elements used for parodic or satirical purposes.)

CNET carried an interesting article today entitled “Most iPhone applications gathering dust” in which they report:

“…just 30 percent of people who buy an iPhone application actually use it the day after it was purchased, according to Pinch Media, which analyzed over 30 million downloads from Apple’s App Store. And the numbers plunge from there: after 20 days, less than 5 percent of those who downloaded an application are actively using it. The drop-off is worse for free applications.”

This data has apparently been backed up by other studies done last year when the App Store was a month old. CNET speculates on the reasons why this might be the case. The Pinch Media folks think that it’s because Apple has made it so easy to get applications on the iPhone, and that most applications are so relatively inexpensive, that people often purchase applications that sound interesting (and cheap) and later move on if they don’t find them of value. CNET wonders if the iPhone app market is saturated.

Actually, I think they might both be saying the same thing. As an iPod Touch owner, I have access to the iPhone app market through my device (though not all applications work with the Touch that work with the phone). I’ve downloaded and installed many applications, nearly all of them free apps, and found many that just weren’t as good as I hoped they’d be. I’ve deleted those after a few half-hearted attempts to use them. There are a couple that I keep because they’re actually useful to me. A couple I’ve paid for because I liked the “free” version enough or was confident it would be useful… and so far I haven’t bought an app that I haven’t liked and used. Still, it’s a chore to wade through the App Store to find an app if you know what you’re looking for, and worse if you don’t. So I suspect that this saturated marketplace causes people to do just what Pinch Media says they’re doing… they spy an app that might be useful and “since it’s only 99 cents” they buy it and load it up. When it proves to be less interesting than they expected it to be, they move on without deleting it. So the market saturation CNET suspects is very likely the cause of the phenomenon Pinch Media describes.

Adam Fisher-Cox of AppleTell asks a very valid question, “Why no WiFi syncing on the iPhone?“. He points out that there are certain obvious glaring omissions in the iPhone design, such as a lack of copy and paste functionality, but it seems like a no-brainer that Apple would have included synchronization via WiFi in the iPhone and iPod Touch. Like the readers of his article, I can see several ways that this would be of benefit.

According to CNET, Apple has prevented the South Park creators from distributing a South Park themed application via the App Store. The South Park application would apparently stream video from the show to a user’s iPod Touch or iPhone. Apple explained that it banned the application because it could be deemed “offensive” by some customers. CNET makes a good point when it says: “Once again, Apple’s taste-making policies for the App Store leave it in a curious position. The company’s decision to ban a book from the App Store for using dirty language, yet approve a fast-growing category of fart-related applications, has many wondering exactly what sort of standards are used to evaluate iPhone applications.”

According to CNN Money and Dow Jones, Apple is being sued over the technology it uses to “zoom” content displays in the iPhone and iPod Touch. The lawsuit, filed by a company called Picsel, alleges that the “devices incorporate Picsel-patented technology that facilitates rapid redrawing of content displayed on devices’ screens.”

As I’ve discussed before, I’ve not owned an Apple product since some time in 1998.  It’s been longer than that since I have purchased one (and it still is).  Regardless, this Christmas I received one of the items on my wish list, the Apple iPod Touch 32GB.  I haven’t had the device long enough to give you a full review, but I have some initial observations that I think are worth sharing because they’re not something I’ve seen covered elsewhere (though I acknowledge that I can’t possibly read every iPod Touch article ever written or published).

Though it may surprise some of you, I’m going to start this article with the things I like about the iPod Touch.  The display is crisp and easy to read at a variety of angles.  The multi-touch interface generally responds instantaneously, and Apple’s tradition for including eye candy touches in the interface continues in full force, whether it’s the scroll animation in the home display, the way the built-in Safari browser animates the opening of and switching to new windows or tabs, or the browsing of music in cover flow mode.  It’s a small, thin device that fits easily and comfortably into a pocket.  It’s light enough that you almost wouldn’t know it was there (which I admit worries me a little since I fear sitting on and smashing the screen).  The Wi-Fi connectivity has worked well in the office, at home, and a few other places I’ve been since I got the device.  It syncs fairly quickly and with minimal trouble. I’ve found a number of interesting free apps in the App Store, and continue to browse it periodically to see what new ones I can come up with.  When I’m in range of a Wi-Fi connection, it’s a fun and handy little device to have with me.  In general, I like the iPod Touch and am glad I received it as a gift.

But, no article on a site that’s “critical of Apple” would be complete without some mention of the things I don’t like about the iPod Touch, and this one will be no exception.  There are things about the device that I don’t especially like:

• The fact that I have to synchronize the music with the iTunes software bugs me. My other (non-Apple) players have allowed me to simply drag and drop music onto the player or synchronize it through Windows Media Player.  I’d like the device to function more like an external hard drive when connected to the computer.  I guess since I get my music and video from sources other than iTunes (Zune Marketplace, Amazon.com, etc.), I’d rather not have to install iTunes at all.
• When I first launched iTunes, it made an effort to import information about my rather extensive (300+GB) MP3 collection.  I say “an effort” because it somehow managed to miss all of my comedy MP3s, my podcasts, and some other MP3s in the same directory structures as the items it did discover and import.  I have no idea why, for example, it managed to successfully import 3 albums by an artist and not the other 5.  All of them were in the same directory structure, all of them were MP3s and not a mix of MP3 and WMA files, and were in any significant respect essentially the same.
• When I first attempted to sync the iPod, it wanted to sync the 200+ GB of items it found (out of my 300+GB) onto the 32GB device.  Clearly, that wasn’t going to work, but that didn’t stop iTunes and the iPod from trying.  Given Apple’s reputation for ease of use and design, why didn’t the device and software recognize that 200GB wasn’t going to fit on a 32GB device and start asking me to pick and choose what I wanted?
• Recognizing that my entire collection clearly wouldn’t fit on the device, I went through and hand-picked the artists, albums, and tracks I wanted to include on the iPod.  Even though I’d selected that iTunes should sync the “checked” tracks, for some reason it only synchronized a handful of them and thought it was done.  Eventually I had to muck around with some of the synchronization settings until I found a combination that caused it to synchronize all the things I’d selected, and only those.
• Although the built-in Safari browser does do a nice job of rendering pages, the small size of the screen means that at the default resolution and zoom level most pages I visit are blurry if not outright unreadable.  If the device’s screen was just an inch or so larger, the zooming might not be necessary and the iPod would still fit comfortably in my pocket.
• One of my favorite uses for my MP3 player is to listen to the Bob and Tom radio show podcasts through my VIP subscription on their web site. I thought it would be fantastic to be able to download the podcasts directly onto the iPod Touch and listen to them without having to go through a synchronization process.  Unfortunately, Apple prevents you from being able to download files through Safari.  This means that in order to get the podcasts onto my iPod, I have to go to my PC, log into the site, download the podcasts, import them into iTunes, hook up the iPod, sync the device, and then listen.  In my opinion, this is a very lame restriction for a device that purports to offer me “the entire Internet” in my hand.  (Granted, I would have to download the podcasts to my PC to use with any other MP3 player, but for an “Internet enabled” device like the iPod Touch, this seems like a really crappy limitation.)
• One of the more enjoyable web sites, to me, is hulu.com.  This site offers a large number of television shows and movies for free over an Internet connection.  Unfortunately, like many YouTube videos and other sites, hulu.com relies on Adobe Flash technology.  Apple, in its infinite wisdom, continues to reject Flash for the iPhone and iPod Touch while allowing other video technologies.  I hope they’re able to sort this out in the future. Flash would make the device quite a bit more useful (and fun) in my opinion.
• While I acknowledge that I’m still getting used to it, I find the on-screen keyboard on the iPod Touch to be a little frustrating.  There are times that I tap on a key, see that the Touch has recognized which key I hit (because the right key “zooms up” to greet my touch), and yet still displays the wrong letter in the text field I’m typing in.  Although I hope at some point to be able to enter short blog posts through the device, I’m not exactly brimming with confidence at the ability to do so at this point.
• For reasons I don’t understand, the device will not charge when connected to certain USB ports on my computer.  It’s easy to identify one of these ports, because the battery icon will “blink” extremely rapidly and the iPod will emit a sort of “sad, sick” sound due to its low battery and lack of charge success.  The weird part is that it will synchronize just fine when connected to one of these ports, it just won’t charge.
• If I use the Touch to its fullest potential while I’m at the office, which is to say that I make use of Wi-Fi connectivity, listen to music, watch an occasional video, check my personal email on my lunch hour, etc., I find that the battery is gone well before the end of the work day.  Granted, the Touch is doing more during the day that any of the other media players I’ve owned (which have done music and video and that’s about it), but the other players’ batteries have lasted for days between charges… and they’ve also used standard USB cables so I could if I wanted attach them to my office PC for a quick charge without having to invest in a specific cable or cart one back and forth between work and home.  I’d be happier with a slightly larger device that had a much longer battery life, or one that used a standard cable that I have lying around the office.
• Maybe I’m missing it (and I acknowledge that I probably am), but most media players I’ve had offer some kind of on-screen indicator of how far into the track the player has played.  That is, there’s some kind of countdown or “meter” that shows yo
  u’re 2 minutes into a 4 minute song.  I’m not seeing any indication of that on the iPod Touch’s display while it’s playing a song.  That’s a relatively minor nit, but losing a feature you’re used to having is kind of frustrating.
• The supplied headphones are decent, but not great.  To my ears, they sound a little hollow and tinny at times, even with the equalizer set to the type of music I’m listening to (or adjusted to some others to experiment).  I’d expect a $400 “premium” media player to include some equally “premium” sounding headphones.  Fortunately, the iPod does use a standard headphone jack so I’ll be able to rectify that soon.

As I said at the outset, I like the iPod Touch and I’m glad I have it.  It’s a good player, offers a very rich feature set, there seem to be a number of interesting and useful free apps in the App Store, and I’m enjoying using it.  Regardless, I’m a little frustrated and annoyed by some of its shortcomings, things that seem to have either been overlooked in the design or intentionally left out.  A lot of what I noted above, such as the inability to download MP3s with Safari, I haven’t seen commented on in reviews of the device. 

The Register published an article on 10/22 about Intel’s UrbanMax tablet, which was referred to as a “giant iPod Touch” by Intel staffers showing off the product in Taiwan. The UrbanMax tablet features an 11.1″ touch-sensitive display and the same Core 2 Duo processors found in the MacBook Air. The device, The Register says, is “merely a concept, developed to encourage the ocmpany’s customers to steer their own product design efforts.”

Unstrung.com writer Jeff Belk thinks that if a microphone is ever included in the iPod Touch, it will signal a war between Apple and cellular phone companies. His argument is based on the fact that the cost of ownership of an iPhone over two years is over $1,500 and the cost of a 32GB iPod Touch is only $399. If you combined the iPod Touch with VOIP (voice over internet protocol), the iPod Touch would effectively become a wireless phone. Many people would, Belk suggests, buy a microphone-enabled iPod Touch and tether it to a cheaper cell phone or Wi-Fi network to make Internet based phone calls. It’s an interesting thought.

Earlier in the year, we predicted that the “cat and mouse game” involving unlocking of the iPhone to install unauthorized software and use unauthorized cellular networks would continue unabated through 2008.  We based that prediction in large part due to the fact that the iPhone runs a stripped-down version of Mac OS X, and Mac OS X’s security reputation hasn’t been the most solid lately.

It appears our prediction is correct.  According to The Register, iPhone hackers have posted the latest jailbreak tool on the Internet. The “iPhone Dev Team” released “Pwnage Tool 2.0.3.1″ which allows iPhone and iPod Touch owners to jailbreak their devices for use with third-party applications.

According to The Register, Apple may be dropping
prices on the iPhone and iPod Touch again soon.  The Register
quotes the website 9to5Mac as having received word that
price cuts are on the way.  The reduction is expected to be $100
off the current price for models in both iPhone and iPod lines.
 The 8GB iPod Touch is expected to drop from the product line as
well.  If you’re planning to buy one it might be worth waiting
a while longer.

A while back, Steve Jobs said that it would be a “cat and
mouse” game between Apple and the hackers to keep unauthorized
applications off the iPhone.  So far, it seems that the hackers are
winning.  Apple has just released iPod Touch and iPhone firmware
1.1.2 and the hackers have already figured out how to
“jailbreak” the new firmware before most users have even
installed it.

According to the CNET News, the same people who
created the JailBreakMe program are responsible for this latest
crack.  (See
http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9814114-37.html)

As
we’ve covered in the past, I happen to be one of the many Microsoft
Zune owners.  Because of that, I happen to know that the Zune ships
with several music samples, including songs by a Brazilian group named
“Cansei de Ser Sexy” (CSS).  Despite being a Brazilian
band, CSS sings many of its songs in English or a combination of English
and Portuguese.

One CSS song is “Music Is My Hot Hot
Sex”, which includes the lyrics:

Music is my
boyfriend
Music is my girlfriend
Music is my dead end
Music is my imaginary friend
Music is my brother
Music is my
great-grand-daughter
Music is my sister
Music is my favorite
mistress

From all the sh*t the one i gotta buy is music
From all the jobs the one i choose is music
From all the drinks
the one i get drunk is music
From all the b*tches the one i
wannabe is music

Music is my beach house
Music is my
hometown
Music is my kingsize bed
Music’s where I make
my friends
Music is my hot hot bath
Music is my hot hot
sex
Music is my back rub
My music is where I’d like you
to touch

If you’ve been watching the
iPod Touch commercials , that last line should sound familiar to
you.  To prove that I know what I’m hearing, have a listen to
track 10 of this album in the Amazon preview or this
YouTube video .  It should sound incredibly familiar.

Since the readers periodically ask “where are my
facts?” that the Zune has anything to do with the group CSS, let me
direct you to a few links that illustrate that
connection:

CSS Pays the Zune Team a Visit – Zune
Insider

Installing the Zune… sucked – Engadget

Cansei De Ser Sexy – Zune.net
 

So Ican VERY legitimately say that both
Microsoft’s Zune AND Apple’s iPod Touch are being promoted using
the Brazilian band CSS.

I can also at least INFER from this that
no one at Apple has bothered to buy and examine a Microsoft Zune. 
If they had, they’d have known Microsoft was using CSS to promote
the Zune and they wouldn’t have wanted to use the same music to
promote their latest, greatest, iPod…

It didn’t take the customers long to find a significant issue with the new iPod Touch.
According to TUAW (The Unofficial Apple Weblog), “There are
increasing reports out there about problems with the screens on the new
iPod touch. Apparently many folks (including here on TUAW) are complaining that the screen is very dark and lacking
in details. [snip] Over at the Apple Discussion boards a third-party LCD engineer
weighs in with a possible answer: bad quality control in manufacturing
led to an error with the anti-reflective coating. If this is right, he
suggests the problem might be fixed at the factory in the near
future.” TUAW recommends waiting if you plan to buy one of these,
to see what Apple will do.

Most of the comments below the
article appear to agree with TUAW, saying things such as:

“Mine went back to Best Buy over the weekend. The
problem is obvious and unacceptable.”

“I had an
iPhone with a 7 series screen with the same prob and I just figured it
had to do with the screen version. I had the same problem though where
it would be so dark that some blacks almost looked reflective. My new 5
series screen has worse contrast but you can make out different shades
of black and stuff. My point: iphone/ipod touch may very well share the
same screen because they sure as heck suffer from the same
defects.”

“i bought an ipod touch last thursday,
the first day they were released.. and i can verify that this problem is
not an overreaction by overzealous early adopters. the screen looks
terrible and is completely unacceptable.”

“I’ve had the bad screens on two different touches. One was
from the Apple store, and the other was from Best Buy. Apple better
offer a replacement… and none of this refurb crap.”

“This is why I avoid buying the first version of new hardware.
I’d rather not be an unwitting hardware beta tester.”

“Apple are losing it. They better start concentrating on
engineering and quality control instead of music and video sales.”

“my second touch unit is WORSE than my first, in
terms of the black video problems.. very, very demoralized right now…
the press needs to.. um, press this issue so that apple will make things
right”

“I too have the same issue on my 4GB
iPhone which I bought immediately after the price drop.”

There were two or three positive comments about
the screens, but the bulk appeared to be negative. We’re not saying
that this is a widespread issue (e.g., maybe all the people with bad
screens are counted in this list), but it does sound like it’s a
problem people are familiar with and have experienced on more than one
device.

According to a 13-year-old hacker, it’s possible to load third-party
applications on an Apple iPod Touch without a great deal of computer
savvy. An
October 14 CNet article says, “AriX sent us a press release Sunday
promoting iJailbreak,
an automated program that allows third-party applications to run on the
iPod Touch. It doesn’t work for the iPhone, and it’s only available
iPod Touch owners who are using Intel-based Macs.” The article says taht
“According to the press release, ‘the only user interaction required for
iJailBreak to work is to restart the iPod Touch using the button on the
top of the iPod. The application does the rest.”

The
iJailBreak.com web site says that “iJailBreak is an automated
jailbreaker for your iPod Touch licensed under the GNU General Public
License v2 written by 13-year-old AriX. The only user interaction
required is for you to restart the iPod Touch. Works on Macintel OS X
Tiger. PPC version is in the works. iJailBreak is heavily dependent on
Niacin and Dre’s awesome tiff hack, you can find them at toc2rta.com. They really
started the whole iPod Touch hacking scene. iJailBreak also makes heavy
use of iPhuc, which you can find on Google Code.”

Apple apparently released a statement indicating that they will make
an iPhone and iPod Touch development kit available to developers some
time early next year.   I haven’t read the statement yet, but
BusinessWeek has and they posted an article about it on October 17,
2007.

BusinessWeek says Apple won’t say why it’s made this
sudden change from keeping the iPhone totally locked down, but
developers who spoke to BusinessWeek were encouraged by the turn of
events.

BusiniessWeek tells us that “Jobs said it will take
until February to release the software kit because the company wants to
give developers an open platform and also protect iPhone users from
viruses, malware and privacy attacks.”  I would interpret this
to mean that if they were to let people develop for the iPhone now, it
would be very susceptible to viruses, malware, and privacy
attacks.  In other words, the Michael Mace article we published the
other day might have been right on target for suggesting that Apple is
fighting third-party development to cover up the fact that iPhone
security is relatively weak.

The article also reports that
“Jobs noted that rival Nokia Corp. also does not allow third-party
applications to be loaded onto some of its new phones unless the
applications have a digital signature that can be traced to a known
developer.”  Jobs is said to have indicated that he thought
this was a step in the right direction, implying that Apple wants some
way to track programs back to individual developers and to keep
unapproved code off the iPhone.

Hot on the heels of the iPhone fiasco, in
which Apple drastically reduced the price of its iPhone products and
ticked off early adopters, it’s apparently decided to go after the
iPod customers as well. The new iPod models discussed at the recent
Apple product announcement won’t display video on a television using
the existing docks. According to a report on the iLounge newssite,
plugging the new iPods into an old add-on automatically disables the players’ TV Out
functionality. The site says that Apple has begun shipping iPod
add-ons with an authentication chip, without which some functionality is
disabled. This is Apple’s bid to control the distribution of iPod
accessories…

So if you owned lots of iPod accessories
and planned to use them with the new device, Apple just took some of
your options away from you.

Oh, they also seemed to have
removed calendar functionality as well…

Today in California, Steve Jobs unveiled Apple’s new and updated
products. These include:

Updated iTunes
Software: It supports their new products and allows you
purchase songs you already own to use as iPhone ringtones. (What’s
that? Pay twice for the same song just to use it as a song AND a
ringtone? Good racket, Apple.)

iPod Shuffle
Refresh: Apple’s picked out some lame new colors for the
iPod Shuffle, which Steve Jobs says you’re going to love… so it
must be true.

iPod Nano
Update: The iPod Nano gets a new display, full metal case,
Cover Flow, more storage, video, and games. Engadget says the Cover Flow
isn’t nearly as smooth or as nice as on the iPhone. The Nano just
doesn’t have the horsepower for it. The 4GB version is going to be
priced at $149, and the 8GB at $199. 

iPod
Classic: OK, here, we’re slightly impressed. A 160GB player
for $349 isn’t bad. It’s still pricier than it should be, but
it’s not bad. If I was going to buy an iPod, this would be it… and
it would be the first iPod I’d have considered buying.

iPod Touch: Well, OK, it’s the iPhone without the
phone in it. Same basic form factor, slightly thinner, but more or less
the same. Apple deserves kudos for including a web browser and wi-fi
capability. They lose some of it for the browser being Safari, but at
least it’s got a browser. It should also include email, RSS, instant
messaging, and a lot more since some of that’s already in the iPhone
and Apple could add it for minimal cost. Kudos also to Apple for upping
the storage from the 4GB and 8GB in the iPhone, but a big “come
on” for limiting it to 8GB and 16GB, one-tenth what you get in the
iPod Classic. Why couldn’t they have kept the slightly thicker
iPhone form factor and included a hard drive with the 160GB capacity in
the Classic? Then you’d have a music player I could easily justify
paying $399 for! The fact that you can finally buy your music on the
iPod is one of those “Apple finally gets it” concepts.

iPhone Price Reduction: Steve announced also
that the iPhone price is dropping to $399 for the 8GB model. While
that’s certainly where it should have been priced AT INTRODUCTION,
it’s still a good chunk of change for a limited capability iPod and
limited capability cell phone.

Starbucks
Partnership: I don’t drink Starbucks very often and rarely
stay in their stores for more than a few minutes when I do. This
doesn’t excite me at all. Doesn’t make me the least bit
interested in buying an iPhone or iPod.

As for the iPod
Touch being the first music player with a web browser, Steve is wrong,
as Engadget points out. But then, Steve always thinks Apple is first
with everything it does… and it isn’t always.

From
this site’s perspective, the 160GB iPod is the only tempting
offering in the list, but since Vista is our main desktop OS and iTunes
isn’t working so well with that, we’ll stick with our Zune.