Skeuomorphism and Siri

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/12/01/why-siri-is-like-skeuomorphic-uis-the-magic-is-just-skin-deep/

 ”Skeumorphic UIs resemble physical objects, but they cannot hope to emulate the myriad ways we have to emulate physical objects — so they are always doomed to disappoint on some level if we let ourselves be fooled.”

The latest hoopla regarding Apple’s iPhone 4S Siri feature and its lack of information on abortion clinics has tied into another hot topic in the design world: Skeuomorphism. Simply put, I think it’s amazing that consumer technology is getting to the point where things like UI and UX seriously matter to ordinary, non techie, people.

Spotify vs iTunes

A few days ago Spotify made its USA debut and wow wee wow what a service. If you know me even a tiny little bit you’ll know that I am really hard to impress when it comes to apps and/or web services and Spotify knocks this one out of the park.

The music industry has been hurting for a LONG time thanks to Napster, P2p, and Mp3s and while iTunes put a bandaid on the music labels, the artists themselves (at least indie ones) have still been hurting. While I can’t say I’ve always acquired all of my music via iTunes or some other legitimate online music store, the process of purchasing, downloading, dealing with DRM issues, backing up and syncing music has been broken for a long time- making it easier to pirate music than to actually pay for it.

Last night after two glasses of Gosling’s I signed up for a Spotify premium account. Holy. Shit. All I can say is Spotify will trick you into paying for music again and you’ll feel good about it.

Spotify Key Observations

• SUPER FAST – searching seems almost too fast. WAY faster than the itunes store hands down.
• OTA Syncing – syncing is so seamless  you won’t have to think about it
•  An interface that makes sense both on the desktop version and the mobile version
• Sharing with other Spotify friends is really easy. You can drop a song in someone’s inbox and they have it!
• Spotify seems to have a good majority of the music I like (even the obscure stuff).
• Since everything streams (although you can make things available offline) you save A TON of disk space

 

How does Spotify stack up against iTunes
I believe Spotify just took a shot across the iTunes store bow. With the feature set iTunes Match introduces it might be too little too late. Although iTunes Match is $25/yr vs Spotify’s $120/year for a premium account, the functionality you get with Spotify is well worth it. From my understanding, iTunes Match will find music you’ve previously downloaded (from anywhere) and will match that song to one in the iTunes Library if it exists. In the other corner Spotify removes the need to even think about illegally downloading a song or album. It’s all right there in Spotify’s library and ready to sync. So from a user experience perspective, Spotify crushes the iTunes and the iPod ecosystem. All I can do is hope Apple is paying close attention to what Spotify is up to and continues to innovate the iTunes Match and iCloud system. People like things that are ‘easy’ to do (like illegally downloading music), so if ease of use is backed up by a large music library, an awesome feature set, and is also significantly easier to use that iTunes … that sounds like a recipe for [something].

It’ll take sometime before Spotify is a household name but mark my words in this permanent blog post that will live on the internet for eternity: Spotify will become a household name.

UPDATE:
After a week of using Spotify I have noticed that the one important feature it is missing is the ability to browse for music.  You can check out “What’s New” but there is no way to browse music by genre. Essentially Spotify needs a solid music discovery layer. Only a matter of time but this is an area where services like Pandora and Last.fm shine a bit more than Spotify.

Notes on iPad Magazine Publishing

Before I get too deep into this post, I must admit, I’m a huge big fan of physical print magazine. My current subscriptions include Inc. and Popular Science. I believe I paid $10 bucks to get both of these publications delivered to my door for an entire year. I must also admit that I have a vested interest in how magazines will work on the iPad which I plan to unveil sometime in the near future. Ok, cool.

It’s been said that the iPad could be the savior of the magazine publishing industry but truthfully I have yet to see a really amazing implementation of a digital magazine that makes me actually want to buy content and interact with the product on a regular basis. A few apps, including Flipboard and Pulse, have made me feel giddy about “consuming” content but after a few days I’ve found myself not opening these apps at all. Not to mention, these apps are not even selling any content whatsoever. I still regularly find myself opening my relatively *ugly* RSS reader and reading content there. It’s just easier on the eyes, for me anyways, to see content laid out in that fashion.

Needless to say, big magazines publishers are currently scrambling to get their content on the iPad. Many have resorted to charging ridiculous prices for “digital editions” of their magazine publications which has turned off many potential customers- myself included. I’m assuming the high cost per issue is really in place to cover the steep cost of production. They gotta pay off them developers some how!

Unfortunately, however, major magazine publishers have very few options at this point.

Hire an entire staff of iPad developers and content creators
The first option magazine publishers have is to hire iPad developers and additional resources to support a new wing of the business. This may require cutting some of your existing staff in order to allocate a budget for your new staff or shifting around some existing roles within the organization. I should also note that this kind of talent search also requires allocating additional resources in the staffing/recruiting department. Great iPad developers are hard to find and even harder to hire full-time so this will definitely be a challenge for magazine publishers.

Wait it out
Soon big magazine companies will either have to create new technology in-house to publish their digital content or wait until this technology has been made available to them. Creating new technology in-house may allow publishers to be first to market however this is a very expensive solution. Developers with the technical know-how to make this happen are very few and very expensive. Publishers who opt to build their own technology for publishing to the iPad or any other digital outlet, will not only need to build the new technology but also have a fully trained team on staff that understands their proprietary software and process.The alternative of course is waiting for the technology to arrive which will making publishing to the iPad easier and faster without having to completely rehaul your company. One of the drawbacks however in waiting for this tech is that it may make a publisher seem late to the game. In the end this is a less expensive option with a potentially higher or equal return on investment.

Dive in NOW!
Like many of the top publishers, getting their content on the iPad as quickly as possible was the solution. Regardless of quality in the end product, the content HAD to be available on the new platform. This is understandable and I think it’s very brave (and risky!) for a lot of this publishers to take the leap first. I also believe we will continue to see publishers take even bigger risks once iPad use becomes more ubiquitous.

It’ll be really interesting to see how the future of publishing is shaped before our eyes. In a way, publishers are making a huge bet that Apple’s iPad is indeed the best format and device for consuming their content and that’s probably good news to Apple. I have lots more to write about on the subject but I figured this would be a nice introduction to this topic and my thoughts on it.

What do you think about magazines on the iPad?

 

There is no ‘phone’ in iPhone 4.

The focus on Apple’s faulty iPhone 4 antenna seems to have robbed the spotlight from the iPhone 4 release and knowing Apple quite well, this is killing them.

With the latest blow being Consumer Report’s announcement that they can not recommend the iPhone 4 , Apple will really need to step up to the plate and show their customers some respect. The countless youtube videos reproducing the issues are not the kind of word of mouth Apple wants to spread.

Hoping to possibly avoid an iPhone 4 recall, Apple has decided to mask and cover-up the story with a simple software fix.While reprogramming the algorithm that is used to display bars on the iPhone 4 status bar will definitely fix the cosmetic issue , that’s like buying a ferrari and realizing it only goes 40 mph and then having a Ferrari mechanic tell you they’ll recalibrate the speedometer so it automatically adds 100mph to your speed. Bogus!

Apple can totally delete complaints from their forums all they want, but people will continue to voice their opinions. Sticks and stones rarely have an impact on Apple, but apparently these customer words do.

Don’t get me wrong, the iPhone 4 is an amazing device. It’s fast, it’s sleek, and the screen is gorgeous. Apps that have been update to take advantage of the Retinal Display look super crisp. Unfortunately, all of these technical achievements will remain in the shadows if Apple doesn’t fix the issue quickly and appropriately.

Day 1 of self-employment

Today is the first day I’ve been without a “real” job in about 7 years. It’s totally weird to be home on a friday morning and knowing that I don’t have to “go to work” persay. I chose to quit my job at Apple to have a bigger impact on the world and surprisingly enough I believe these opportunities are literally around the corner.

More to come …