Keep OSNews alive by becoming a Patreon, by donating through Ko-Fi, or by buying merch!

Apple Archive

2015: Apple’s year in beta

All of Apple's products this year were just fine. You could settle yourself totally within the Apple ecosystem and use Apple Music and Apple News on your iPhone while taking Live Photos and you would be just fine. You wouldn't have the best time, but you wouldn't have the worst one, either. It would just be fine.

And that's really the issue. We're not used to Apple being just fine. We're used to Apple being wildly better than the competition, or sometimes much worse, but always being ahead of the curve on some significant axis. But what we got in 2015 was an Apple that released more products than ever, all of which felt incomplete in extremely meaningful ways - ways that meant that their products were just fine, and often just the same as everyone else's.

In defense of Apple, the company did put out a significant number of new platforms this year. Let's see if they manage to improve these clearly beta platforms in 2016.

The new Apple revealed itself in 2015

Quartz looks back at Apple's 2015.

This year, CEO Tim Cook did a lot of interviews by Apple standards, from this month's "60 Minutes" episode to 20 minutes with BuzzFeed in the back seat of a Cadillac Escalade. He "crashed" a coding party - conveniently while a Mashable editor was in attendance - and "wrote a message" to CNBC's Jim Cramer. You might even say he likes the attention.

Meanwhile, Jony Ive, Apple's chief design officer, participated in an FT profile and received the New Yorker treatment earlier this year, inviting a journalist into his Bentley. To the media, a "rare look inside Jony Ive's design lab" seems to be the prized new "rare look inside North Korea." (And similarly staged.)

This PR campaign by Apple seems designed to make the company look more open and inviting, but in the end it just makes it all look fake and staged - which reflects incredibly badly on the media outlets participating in these PR events. For a company and accompanying fanbase riling so heavily against advertising, Apple sure does a lot of advertising thinly veiled as actual "reports" or "news stories".

But hey, people eat it up, so I can't blame either the advertiser or the willing media participant.

Apple pushes iPhone 6s pop-up ads to App Store

Apple is beginning to push fullscreen pop-up ads for the iPhone 6s to people opening the App Store app on some older iPhone models, according to a rush of user complaints.

Apple has previously marketed new devices through things like App Store banners and collections, but this is the first time Apple has temporarily prevented people from using an app simply for the sake of marketing - at least when excluding the Apple Music sign-up screen seen after launching the iOS Music app for the first time.

I got the ad as well, but on my iPhone 6S, which makes even less sense. This is just sleazy and scummy.

Apple's been pushing a lot of sleazy advertisements into iOS lately, which is kind of ironic when you think about it. The company that keeps spouting the "if you're not paying for it, you're the product" nonsense, is the one pushing sleazy advertisements into their mobile operating system, while Google, the advertising company, is not.

Apple’s Swift is open source now

Today we launched the open source Swift project along with the Swift.org website. We couldn't be more excited to work together in an open community to find and fix issues, add enhancements, and bring Swift to new platforms.

Apple's Swift is open source now.

Swift is made up of a number of different projects, providing a complete ecosystem for building great software. The Swift compiler project interprets Swift syntax, produces diagnostics to help you write correct code, and employs LLVM to generate machine instructions. The LLDB project is a first-class debugger that includes a REPL for interactive programming. And the Swift standard library project includes all the core types and basic functionality you need to write software in Swift.

Today, we released two additional projects for Swift in open source: the Core Libraries project, and a new Swift Package Manager project.

It's also available on Linux.

We don’t need a thinner iPhone

If a report from the Japanese blog Macotakara is to be believed, Apple is planning on getting rid of the headphone jack in the next iPhone. As it attempts to once again shrink its flagship device, Apple is reportedly planning on shipping EarPods that connect through the Lighting port with the next iPhone in order to remove the thicker 3.5mm headphone jack. This is a bad idea.

Indeed it is. If Apple were to really remove the 3.5mm jack, it will do so for one reason: control. The 3.5mm jack is obviously an open standard, and Apple can do little to control what kind of headphones you use. Now that Apple owns a very popular brand of headphones, I'n sure the company is itching to lock consumers into its Lightning port.

If true, yet another terrible anti-consumer move from Apple.

The iPad Pro has an App Store problem

Much of the marketing around Apple's new iPad Pro has been centered on its ability to run professional grade software and the variety of creativity apps it supports. But for smaller developers of pro software, the iPad Pro may present more of a quandary than a new computing platform.

The reason? Despite the new tablet's processing power and capabilities, it's still running on mobile software - and developers aren't totally convinced the economic incentives exist in the App Store for iOS. In short, they feel they wouldn't be able to charge users the amounts they normally would for a version of their software that runs on a desktop.

It's a problem that exists not only around the iPad Pro, but mobile software development in general, and highlights the very real challenges that smaller software companies face when deciding which software platforms to prioritize - especially as mobile tablets and PCs converge.

This is a huge problem for closed, mobile-first devices like Apple's iPad Pro. Large companies like Adobe can run comprehensive cloud infrastructures and fund the burden of mobile development with the sales of proper software. Smaller developers, however, cannot. This problem doesn't exist on competitors like the Surface Pro, because they run a traditional, proper desktop.

After the starry eyes of the initial gold rush subsided, it became clear centralised application stores wreaked havoc in the software industry, and caused a spiraling race to the bottom. Sadly, it seems like Apple has no answer to this problem for its iPad Pro.

How Apple is giving design a bad name

An absolute must-read from Don Norman and Bruce "Tog" Tognazzini, two absolute heavyweights in the field of usability. On top of that, Tognazzini was heavily involved in the development of the early interface guidelines at Apple, which gives him a unique perspective on the matter.

The products, especially those built on iOS, Apple's operating system for mobile devices, no longer follow the well-known, well-established principles of design that Apple developed several decades ago. These principles, based on experimental science as well as common sense, opened up the power of computing to several generations, establishing Apple's well-deserved reputation for understandability and ease of use. Alas, Apple has abandoned many of these principles. True, Apple's design guidelines for developers for both iOS and the Mac OS X still pay token homage to the principles, but, inside Apple, many of the principles are no longer practiced at all. Apple has lost its way, driven by concern for style and appearance at the expense of understandability and usage.

Apple is destroying design. Worse, it is revitalizing the old belief that design is only about making things look pretty. No, not so! Design is a way of thinking, of determining people’s true, underlying needs, and then delivering products and services that help them. Design combines an understanding of people, technology, society, and business. The production of beautiful objects is only one small component of modern design: Designers today work on such problems as the design of cities, of transportation systems, of health care. Apple is reinforcing the old, discredited idea that the designer's sole job is to make things beautiful, even at the expense of providing the right functions, aiding understandability, and ensuring ease of use.

The problem Apple is facing - as has been explained to me by people who are in the know about these matters - is that the people originally responsible for usability at Apple, including those responsible for the first multitouch interface of the first iPhone, are no longer at Apple. The company currently doesn't have an overarching philosophy when it comes to user interface design, leading to the problems described in detail in this article. The software side of Apple lacks its own Ive, if you will.

And boy, does it show. I bought an iPhone 6S (the pink one, 64GB) a couple of weeks ago, and while I don't want to reveal too much from my review, I'm appalled at just how unfocused, chaotic, messy, inconsistent, and hard to use iOS has become. This article articulates really well where the main problems lie.

It's easy to look at Apple's massive profits and the quality of its hardware and miss the abysmal state of Apple's software. They've got a lot of work to do - and they really need the right people to get there.

On the iPad Pro

The reviews for the Apple Surface are coming in. There's two reviews at The Verge, one at the Wall Street Journal, and John Gruber's got early access from Apple as well.

The general gist? If you've ever read a Surface Pro review, you've read all the iPad Pro reviews. Well, mostly - the complaints leveled at the Surface Pro are being tip-toed around a bit now that they apply to an Apple product, of course, and suddenly, the magic argument "but it will get better in the future" is now completely valid, while the same argument is never considered valid for the Surface Pro (or something like the Priv and its early bugs).

That being said, all reviews dive into just how uncomfortable the iPad Pro is to use as a laptop - and the problem, of course, is iOS itself. iOS is a mobile, touch-first operating system that Apple is now trying to shoehorn into a laptop role. iOS provides no support for mice or trackpads, and the keyboard and iOS lack most basic shortcut keys, so in order to do anything other than typing, you'll need to lift your arm and reach for the screen to use touch. This is something Apple has mocked for years as the reason not to include touch on laptops, and now they release a device which requires it 100%.

This is what happens when you run out of ideas and try to shoehorn your cashcow - iOS - into a role it was never intended to fulfill, without being gutsy enough to make the changes it requires. The iPad Pro is clearly screaming for a touchpad (and proper keyboard shortcuts), but it doesn't have any, and according to John Gruber, it never will (a comment I filed away for later when Apple inevitably adds mouse support to iOS).

Microsoft's Surface may not be perfect, but its problems stem almost exclusively not from a lack in hardware capability or a faulty concept, but from Microsoft's Metro environment being utterly shit. The concept of having a tablet and a laptop in the same device, seamlessly switching between a tablet UI and a desktop UI, is sound - the only problem is that Microsoft doesn't have a working tablet UI and applications. Meanwhile, trying to shoehorn a mobile, touch-first UI into a laptop form factor is just as silly and idiotic as trying to shoehorn a desktop UI into a mobile, touch-first form factor - and Apple should know better.

Or should they? Paul Thurrott, earlier this week:

While the iPad Pro was in many ways inevitable, it also points to a crisis of original thought at Apple, which has been coasting on the iPhone’s coattails for perhaps too long. At Apple, the solution to every problem is another iPhone. And the iPad Pro, like the new Apple TV and the Apple Watch, is really just another attempt to duplicate that singular success in other markets.

Thurrott really hits the nail on the head. The iPhone became a success because Apple sought - and succeeded in - designing an interface and interaction model that was specifically designed for the iPhone's input methods - the multitouch display, the home button. Ever since that major big hit, they've been trying to shoehorn that exact same interface and interaction model into every major new product - the Apple Watch, the new Apple TV, and now the iPad Pro. However, if there's one thing we've learned from Palm OS (pen-first, mobile-first) and iOS (multitouch-first, mobile-first), it's that every form factor needs a tailored interaction model - not a shoehorned one.

When you're a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - which sums up Apple's new major product lines ever since the release of the iPhone, and the iPad Pro seems no different. It will do great as an iPad+, but beyond that? It's not going to make a single, meaningful dent, without considerable restructuring of iOS' UI and interaction models - and lots and lots of crow.

Apple’s Tim Cook declares the end of the PC

"Yes, the iPad Pro is a replacement for a notebook or a desktop for many, many people. They will start using it and conclude they no longer need to use anything else, other than their phones," Cook argues in his distinctly Southern accent (he was born in Alabama). He highlights two other markets for his 12.9 inch devices, which go on sale online on Wednesday. The first are creatives: "if you sketch then it’s unbelievable..you don't want to use a pad anymore," Cook says.

Aside from the fact that the death of the PC has been predicted just as often as the death of Apple, I'm obviously not going to claim the man successfully running the largest company in the world is wrong, but I am going to state I'm rather skeptical of the iPad Pro. I predicted the original iPad would do well, but this Microsoft Surface clone?

The doubt is very real.

Apple blocks Chaos Computer Club content on its platform

You can read the German source version of the article, or the English translation.

A CCC made Apple TV App for displaying CCC-talks may not be released on the platform. According to Apple the app is in breach of developer terms and conditions because it enables access to content of which the company disapproves: Apple criticizes that the CCC's app allows watching publicly given talks, which among others deal with security holes in the widely used Bluetooth technology, or help "jailbreaking" Apple devices - enabling the use of applications that have not been approved by Apple. The talks criticized by Apple are all available under the website media.ccc.de and can also be watched through the Apple TV YouTube app, which is not criticized by Apple.

Still feel comfortable with letting Apple police the news you read?

Inside Apple’s perfectionism machine

A bit of a fluff piece, as these articles tend to be, but still a fun and great read.

"No. 1, the importance and value of great hardware has not diminished in any way," he said. "Across the board, our goal is to make the best in the categories we choose to compete in. It's what we're doing and it's reflected in customers choosing our products over anyone else's. So I do think people are showing with their choice that they do value quality and beauty of the hardware and that is not diminishing."

"I have never heard anyone say, 'Because I like to keep my stuff in the cloud, I will take a cheap piece of hardware and I want it to be ugly.' All things being equal, of course, nobody wants that," Schiller said.

While I personally believe Apple's software leaves a lot to be desired, and even though Apple sometimes makes absolutely ridiculous hardware choices (5400RPM? Seriously?), there's no denying that when it comes to the sheer feel of Apple's hardware - such as my iPhone 6S, or retina MacBook Pro - they really are in a league of their own. They say the latest Galaxy phones and the new Nexus 6P come close, but I haven't used them yet.

In any event, especially compared to other PC OEMs, Apple is so far ahead it's not even a contest anymore, really. Let's hope Microsoft's hardware efforts finally - finally - lights a few fires.

DoJ to Apple: iOS is licensed so we can force you to decrypt

Apple is currently embroiled in a legal tussle with the US Department of Justice over a defendant's iPhone. The DoJ wants to force Apple to unlock the phone, but Apple argues that first, it technically cannot do so, and second, that it doesn't have to. It's that second point the DoJ is trying to address in a very interesting way.

Effectively, the DoJ is arguing that because Apple only licenses iOS to its users, and because Apple specifically states it retains ownership of iOS, Apple can be forced to unlock the phone. It is, namely, the DoJ argues, iOS which is thwarting law enforcement's ability to do its job, and the copy of iOS on the phone in question is, as Apple itself clearly states, Apple's property. Or, in the DoJ's legalese:

Apple designed, manufactured, and sold the Target Phone that is the subject of the search warrant. But that is only the beginning of Apple's relationship to the phone and to this matter. Apple wrote and owns the software that runs the phone, and this software is thwarting the execution of the warrant. Apple's software licensing agreement specifies that iOS 7 software is "licensed, not sold" and that users are merely granted "a limited non-exclusive license to use the iOS Software." Apple cannot reap the legal benefits of licensing its software in this manner and then later disclaim any ownership or obligation to assist law enforcement when that same software plays a critical role in thwarting execution of a search warrant.

This is a remarkable argument, and it fascinates me to no end - if the DoJ actually manages to pull this one off, it will not only be a glorious case of the insane anti-consumer implications of commercial software licensing coming to bite a large corporation in the ass, but it will also have far-reaching consequences for the power the US government has - in a very, very bad way, as Cory Doctorow explains:

To my knowledge, this is an entirely novel argument, but as I say, it has far-reaching consequences. Virtually every commercial software vendor licenses its products, rather than selling them. If the DoJ establishes the precedent that a product's continued ownership interest in a product after it is sold obliges the company to act as agents of the state, this could ripple out to cars and pacemakers, voting machines and tea-kettles, thermostats and CCTVs and door locks and every other device with embedded software.

Commercial software licensing is a shady practice that should've come under intense scrutiny decades ago, but this is not the manner in which I want it to be done.

iOS 9.1, OS X 10.11.1 released

Apple's released both OS X 10.11.1...

Apple today released OS X 10.11.1, which is the first update to the new El Capitan operating system that was launched to the public on September 30. In testing since mid-September, OS X 10.11.1 is a minor performance update that focuses on fixing bugs found in the first version of El Capitan.

...and iOS 9.1.

iOS 9.1 has a limited number of outward facing changes. It includes support for Unicode 7 and 8, introducing a range of new emoji like taco, burrito, cheese wedge, middle finger, champagne bottle, unicorn head, and more.

iOS 9.1 includes an update for Live Photos, which now sense when the iPhone is raised or lowered to refrain from recording unnecessary movements. The update also introduces a new Messages option in the Settings app that is designed to allow users to disable photos for contacts, and it brings Apple News to the UK for the first time.

Apple also released an update for the iPhone Mini, but nobody cares.

‘Big money is coming’

Yesterday, I linked to a story from Samantha Bielefeld, in which she respectfully and eloquently disagreed with Marco Arment concerning the viability of the patronage model for independent developers. I would've left it at that, but as it turns out, she's really been facing a considerable amount of abuse from Arment and his followers. Yesterday, John C. Welch published a (rather rantish) overview of some of the public tweets going back and forth, which were already pretty bad, but apparently, the private emails and messages Bielefeld received were way, way worse.

I'm new to the idea of writing for an audience, and certainly inexperienced when it comes to receiving hundreds of hurtful emails in response. A word of wisdom to female writers out there; if you publish something negative about Marco, you will receive threats of rape, and physical harm.

I hope Bielefeld doesn't quit writing - even though I would completely understand if she did - because this industry desperately needs people who aren't white, male, well-off, 20-40, and straight. Less people like myself, please.

I'll let Bielefeld take it away.

Marco, I've never argued that your success fell into your lap. You worked for years to get to where you are now, and you've earned your following. I do stand by my belief that your position gives you an immediate leg up, even when it isn't warranted. My article on Wednesday only came to be because of a statement I made when reviewing Overcast 2.0. I said that I was pleased to see your attempt at a patronage model, and this led to many developers reaching out to me, to inform me of the broader discussion, and their disgust that you would attempt to categorize yourself alongside them. So why don't you just do us all a favor, and start acknowledging yourself as the arrogant, privileged rich guy with a huge advantage that we all know you to be? After all, you did earn it.

Same design, new insides, better screen: all iMacs are retina now

It's been over three years since the very first Mac went Retina, and we're still waiting for every model to get the upgrade. But this year, the scales started to tip in Retina's favor. We got an all-new Retina MacBook in the spring, and today Apple is killing the 27-inch non-Retina iMac and introducing a new 4K model at the top of the 21.5-inch lineup.

The 4K iMac starts at $1,499 and does for the 21-inch iMac what the 5K version did for the 27-inch iMac a year ago: it gives it a Retina screen and leaves pretty much everything else alone. You do get a handful of nice internal upgrades, including Intel's Broadwell CPUs and GPUs, Thunderbolt 2 support, and faster storage and RAM (all also available on the refreshed non-Retina 21.5-inch iMacs). But for most intents and purposes, this thing is just a 2012-era iMac chassis with a nice sharp screen installed in place of the old 1080p display.

Believe it or not, but that $1500 base model? It comes with a 5400RPM hard drive. Unacceptable.

In any event, Apple also replaced its keyboard, Magic Mouse, and Magic Trackpad. As a fan of Apple's current keyboard (I know I'm the only person who actually seems to really love it - it's the only keyboard I use, on my PC even), I'm excited about the new model because you can also use it wired. That said, it's a whopping €129 here, which is kind of insane.

Elon Musk takes shots at Apple

Elon Musk, in an interview over at Handelsblatt:

Apple just hired some of Tesla's most important engineers. Do you have to worry about a new competitor?

Important engineers? They have hired people we've fired. We always jokingly call Apple the "Tesla Graveyard." If you don't make it at Tesla, you go work at Apple. I'm not kidding.

Do you take Apple's ambitions seriously?

Did you ever take a look at the Apple Watch? (laughs) No, seriously: It's good that Apple is moving and investing in this direction. But cars are very complex compared to phones or smartwatches. You can't just go to a supplier like Foxconn and say: Build me a car. But for Apple, the car is the next logical thing to finally offer a significant innovation. A new pencil or a bigger iPad alone were not relevant enough.

He's not wrong. Should be interesting: Tesla and Apple are companies with some of the most.... Enthusiastic fans, and I'm sure there's quite some overlap.