In a recent article on Wired, Marcus Wholsen apparently comes to the conclusion that the new features announced for iOS 8 are an attempt to "crush" or steal the territory of DropBox and other apps. He sums up Apple's attitude as:
"Don’t try having your own ideas and not play with us, because we will take them, we will do them better and we will crush you in the process."
before going on to write:
"The new iCloud Drive for file-sharing and syncing takes direct aim at Dropbox, which Steve Jobs famously wanted to buy. Even the new iCloud photo features are an open assault on Dropbox’s new app Carousel for uploading and storing pictures"
in addition to effectively describing the new features for Messages as an attack on WhatsApp.
I must admit that I find such conclusions slightly surprising. Or at least, I see the new features in a different light.
As I see things, Apple is not simply trying to steal territory from DropBox. Rather, they are creating a more level playing field. Moreover, they're creating a more homogenous playing field that is closer to what users want and expect on a device nowadays. Via the new Extensions API, they are making it easier for DropBox-- but also for any other cloud storage provider, including Apple themselves-- to become more integrated into a wide variety of apps (and indeed into the OS itself). Users that find it convenient to use DropBox will not only be free to go on using it, but will find it integrated into more apps. Now that cloud storage is an everyday expectation rather than a novelty, a major issue with iOS as it stands is that certain applications tend to be coupled with storing documents in one particular storage provider. The new functionality in iOS8 promises to iron this out and make applications much more "storage agnostic".
It's true that the new features of the Message app are largely playing catchup to other messaging services such as WhatsApp. Features such as sharing one's location are now so basic that it's somewhat surprising that they weren't already included. (Actually, I hadn't even noticed that this feature wasn't-- I guess I just assumed it was there if ever I needed it.) However, I really wonder if the presence or lack of such a feature is what will switch people over from WhatsApp to iMessage rather than more fundamental things such as which messaging system one's friends and contacts are using...? WhatsApp is presumably free to go on adding innovations to its messaging system; meanwhile, Apple has now added to its system features that have become de facto standards.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Mac OS "Yosemite" and iOS focus on "continuity"
A key theme of the updates to Mac OS and iOS this year is what Apple is referring to as continuity: being able to start a task on one device such as an iPhone and then continue it on another device such as a Mac. This notion was demonstrated at the WWDC keynote with the task of writing an e-mail on one device and continuing it on another, or going to a web page in Safari on a Mac and then picking up the same page on an iPad.
In principle, this could be one of the biggest and most useful innovations to the Apple ecosystem, and certainly received something of a rapturous response from the WWDC audience. But the devil will be in the detail: how extensively is this rolled out across the built-in apps, and what support do developers have to build this functionality into their apps, and how easily? I look forward to seeing more details...!
In principle, this could be one of the biggest and most useful innovations to the Apple ecosystem, and certainly received something of a rapturous response from the WWDC audience. But the devil will be in the detail: how extensively is this rolled out across the built-in apps, and what support do developers have to build this functionality into their apps, and how easily? I look forward to seeing more details...!
Apple announces the latest version of Mac OS, "Yosemite"
At Apple's WWDC14 developer conference today, Apple announced its new version of Mac OS, codenamed "Yosemite". As well as increasing the number of hits to the Yosemite National Park wikipedia page, this new version harmonises the look and feel between iOS and MacOS.
I'm guessing that many will have the same reaction that I am having-- and indeed that many of us had when we first saw the new-look iOS-- i.e. something to the effect of "OK, but please can we turn that off?". I guess over time, the world will get used to it just as we did with iOS... :)
I'm guessing that many will have the same reaction that I am having-- and indeed that many of us had when we first saw the new-look iOS-- i.e. something to the effect of "OK, but please can we turn that off?". I guess over time, the world will get used to it just as we did with iOS... :)
Friday, May 2, 2014
Microsoft blurs the line on "ending support" for Windows XP
In a slightly surprise (albeit not unprecedented) move, Microsoft have announced that a patch for its high-profile Internet Explorer vulnerability will be rolled out to versions of Windows including the officially obsolete Windows XP. In a blog post yesterday, General Manager for Trustworthy Computing, Adrienne Hall, rationalises this move as follows:
"One of the things that drove much of this coverage was that it coincided with the end of support for Windows XP. [...] We made this exception based on the proximity to the end of support for Windows XP. The reality is there have been a very small number of attacks based on this particular vulnerability and concerns were, frankly, overblown."
"One of the things that drove much of this coverage was that it coincided with the end of support for Windows XP. [...] We made this exception based on the proximity to the end of support for Windows XP. The reality is there have been a very small number of attacks based on this particular vulnerability and concerns were, frankly, overblown."
Or, reading between the PR-speak: "We're sick of journalists banging on about this bug so we're going to go back on our support policy to shut you up just this once".
The interesting dilemma now is: what happens next time? If a remote execution vulnerability is an "overblown" one, then what happens when the next vulnerability arises that is serious enough not to be deemed "overblown"? Where will this leave Microsoft's policy on XP security patches? Presumably their official line isn't "we refuse to patch security vulnerabilities, except the overblown ones"...?
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Steve Wozniak on data security and privacy
Internet Explorer vulnerability given a high profile
A vulnerability in Internet Explorer announced by Microsoft last week appears to have received a much higher profile reaction compared to other vulnerabilities, with even the UK and US governments getting in on the act to advise people to switch browsers. (Some might say that advice about data privacy is a bit rich coming from them...)
The specific vulnerability is reported to be the exploitability of Adobe Flash Player using a technique baptised "Heap Feng Shui". Reported, that is, apparently not by Microsoft, who have so far disclosed little information other than that they are still investigating the matter.
And this may be one of the reasons for the higher-profile reaction. Since the recent retirement of Windows XP, the world is now coming to terms with the reality of a vulnerability report effectively saying: "There's a serious security risk whose details we are not fully disclosing, which we do not promise to fix on 29% of computers in the wild".
And it's a reality they may need to get used to.
The specific vulnerability is reported to be the exploitability of Adobe Flash Player using a technique baptised "Heap Feng Shui". Reported, that is, apparently not by Microsoft, who have so far disclosed little information other than that they are still investigating the matter.
And this may be one of the reasons for the higher-profile reaction. Since the recent retirement of Windows XP, the world is now coming to terms with the reality of a vulnerability report effectively saying: "There's a serious security risk whose details we are not fully disclosing, which we do not promise to fix on 29% of computers in the wild".
And it's a reality they may need to get used to.
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
Historic source code: Apple II DOS
Those programmers into a bit of nostalgia may be interested in various early Apple documents made available on line by the Computer History Museum. Notably, these include the Apple II DOS source code, in M6502 assembler. The code is a reminder of just how hideous and painstaking it must have been to have to code something such as a disk operating system in what is reckoned to be a relatively short space of time.
Other hand-scribbled planning/specification documents released in the bundle will make programmers feel more relieved about the contents of their own notebooks.
For those wishing to pore even further over historic assembly language with that feeling of "How on Earth did that ever work?", you may also wish to take a look at the Spectrum ROM Disassembly (I have fond memories of having had this in book form at one stage: with the same feeling of disbelief!).
Other hand-scribbled planning/specification documents released in the bundle will make programmers feel more relieved about the contents of their own notebooks.
For those wishing to pore even further over historic assembly language with that feeling of "How on Earth did that ever work?", you may also wish to take a look at the Spectrum ROM Disassembly (I have fond memories of having had this in book form at one stage: with the same feeling of disbelief!).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)