Apple, standards and plugins

I hate to sound dramatic but with Apple sounding off about web standards over plugins with their latest products I was wondering just how much Apple was dragging he industry forward, or if it was doing the opposite.

Some years ago, developing web applications meant having to know the details about the browsers your audience were using. We're still suffering from this today with discussion over different box models and questions about just when are Microsoft going to release a standards compliant browser. One example of this is anyone who uses Exchange for email. They might know the pain of using the web client given how rich it is in Internet Explorer and how average it is in any other browser.

The advent of cross browser JavaScript libraries helped reduce many of these pains and it's great to see a lot of work going into the new HTML5 specs that are taking lessons direct from these libraries. However, whilst singing the praises of a few websites that are using the new HTML5 audio and video elements, Apple seem to be creating their own events for touch that I can't see anywhere in the specs. It seems Mozilla are also playing the same game also and I'm worried that we're returning to a world where we have to tailor lots of code to target specific browsers.

You only have to go to Nike.com or log into Gmail to see iPad websites that have orientation and swipe support. It's all very nice but how much extra work is going to have to take place to get a website to work in different browsers and different devices? What happens when a new device comes out with different events, or even as with the new iPhone and it's different screen resolutions, how will that change the work already in the wild?

This raises further questions for me, especially after reports of JavaScript execution speed on the iPad , even though some frameworks claim this isn't so much of a problem, such as Spoutcore Touch
and others go further saying that no framework should be used at all to ensure performance

Although Apple have created fairly complete documentation about building web content for their devices, it does beg the question why there should be differences if we are supposed to live in a standards world? How long will it be before you hit a webpage and have it say "The website is best viewed with iPad", or any other device or browser for that matter?

Should we ignore the devices ad go for standards like the BBC iPlayer for big screens like PS3 and iPad , use libraries to augment sites like how apple.com/iphone allows the user to swipe the image carousel, tailor something specific for each device such as Nike.com or should we just be building native applications?

How should we progress? Should we let our analytics decide? Should we take the standards route or device specific route? This will certainly be one to keep an eye on.

It's a Mac Mini Adventure

It certainly has been a mini adventure, but one that spans several years in a quest for home entertainment. I think I may even be finally happy with that. With my new home I've been able to do some things I've always wanted to do. Since I left school I started to build my collection of stereos, TVs and other goodies. Recently I added two pairs of Mordaunt Short Genies with a matching centre to add to my 32" Samsung LCD TV.

I had a dilemma where I'd moved my PC away from close proximity to the TV which I was using to view videos with the VGA port on my TV and amp for my MP3s from the PC.

I had tried streaming to my xBox 360 using the Media Centre Extender, and although this works quite nicely for audio it can't cope with DivX movies even though the xBox has been given DivX support. There were a few products on the market which might have done the job, but then I thought "what is the most configurable, most likely to work how I want it work solution?" - the answer. A computer.

It needed to be small, be able to handle videos and music which all computers can. Be able to support DivX and other formats and ideally have a Media Centre like application with remote. The Mac Mini was my answer to that question.

Having a computer as a media centre is both a great thing and a bad thing. It's great as it's flexible but it's bad because it needs input through keyboard and mouse. There may be a way to disable this from the Mac I'm unaware of, but I added a wireless keyboard and mouse that works really nicely. The mouse even works on the material of my sofa.

See, for the smallness of the remote, the small keyboard and mouse are more powerful and easily stashed under the sofa.

All in all, I'm very happy with the purchase, a small media centre hooked up to my TV and amp for £500 that can also be used as a full on computer from the sofa. Throw in a 750GB external hard disc and I'm laughing.

Battle for your TV

So I've been wondering who'll be weighing in for the battle for our TVs. There are certainly some interesting prospects on the market at the minute, but I who will win and does there even need to be a winner? This feels different to a format war reminiscent of VHS vs Betamax or more recently (and on-going) HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray. It's more akin to the cable vs satellite vs freeview vs top-up-TV wars we've seen recently.

Both the cable and satellite offerings have pay-per-view content, while freeview generally doesn't. All of these offerings have recording options, although generally with cable or satellite you would have to use the operators set up box, with freeview you are free to choose from a variety of products, some with hard drives for recording.

Two more recent entries on the market are worth looking at further though. BT and Microsoft. BT have released Vision, which is a freeview recorder with pay-per-view capabilities. It looks as if BT have taken two interesting features from the above and merged them before the others had a chance. Get free digital channels, the ability to record programs and the option to purchase movies, TV shows and sporting events all without a contract and monthly fee.

So far so good, apart from the fact with BT Vision, as the content is delivered over the IP network it means you have to have a minimum broadband speed to cope with the streaming, and the way to do that is to have BT broadband. As a side note, to have BT broadband you need a BT land line, sorry all those who switched to cable.

It seems like a lot of competition, but let's not forget the software companies attempts. Well, I call them software companies, but if you have an Xbox 360 or Apple TV then that's hardware really isn't it?

Now in the UK you can download standard definition or high definition pay per view content. Its movies and TV shows at the minute with no sporting content signed up, but who knows what the future might bring. We've been able to download TV content from iTunes for a while now (well not really in the UK) and let's not forget the muted Amazon Unbox.

We're crossing into interesting territory now. With cable and satellite operators you need a billing relationship (and all that implies, i.e. address etc). With BT, you also need that, but have to buy into their other products. With iTunes, xBox 360 Live and Amazon Unbox you pay for what you use when you use it (or use pre-pay credits) and use them where ever you are signed in to the relevant hardware or software to view your content.

Are we living in a world where we increasingly don't need or want bundles? With mobile broadband from providers like 3, and wireless city meshes potentially driving out needing a cable run into your home for land line phone services and broadband, where digital TV is free and pay-per-view content available through a variety of sources be they games consoles, set top boxes or just over the web do consumers want to be tied into contracts and services they can only use in one place?

Steven Fry, Techo Blogger

I grew up watching Steven Fry in Blackadder and always found him funny. When ever I'd read an article from him I'd always found myself chuckling. I had no idea that he wrote a gadget column in the Guardian until they printed an article about the iPhone on the front page on the Saturday edition. You can read it here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/10/iphone1?gusrc=rss&feed=media

This is probably the most convincing article I've read about the iPhone for the UK, worth a read.

Keeping it Simple

I love this quote from Lifehacker.com

In short, Apple's used the best productivity trick in the world: to make the right thing to do the easy thing to do. Leopard's release will no doubt bring on an uptick of Mac users who diligently back up their system and data without even thinking about it.

I love that some companies are driving simplicity as product differentials. Apple are a great example, but I love the stuff 37Signals are churning out as well.

Keep us honest!

More finger pointing in the music biz

Apparently Apple and Tesco are more to 'blame' then the P2P file sharing sites for the 'crisis' facing the music industry. There has been a flurry of activity around 'the biz' recently with Radiohead's freebie album. At least Universal have taken some steps to move forward by selling USB sticks with singles on them with additional value add features such videos and the like. I can't say that I'd buy one, but at least they're trying something.

Once again I'll repeat my message. Stop moaning and change your business models to survive, or you will fall.