Tag Archives: apple

The battle between Apple and Google is more than just a contest for who leads in the mobile platform space–it’s an appeal to the masses and their morals. In the ongoing saga regarding Apple’s stance on adult iPhone and iPad apps, Jobs tells customers to go ahead and get an Android. The Jobs jabs at Google’s mobile platform not only indicates that Apple has taken the moral high ground, but that Android is for the heathens that aren’t worthy of an Apple mobile device.

Good play, or bad? Just looking at the Internet at large, it would seem to be that the adult industry is relatively easy to access. Of course, Apple doesn’t have to create an adult category for its mobile apps–that’s its right. But when those morals come into question regarding banned apps with no seeming just cause, the moral police at Apple have a few more decisions to answer for.

Apple has been relatively strict over the accessibility and distribution of content available through its platform, and this goes for content sold through iTunes even before the App Store was opened to third party developers. The pricing and availability of songs, movies and books have been regulated, per Apple’s relationships with content publishers, owners and producers. This has a nice revenue model for Apple, but it also grants a large opportunity for Google to appeal to a large base of developers and consumers.

Sometimes the control Apple retains over these monetary relationships is strong enough to deter competing moves from other businesses, as we saw with Amazon’s Kindle and the pricing model behind its e-book sales. It’s a control that Apple holds dear, and Google is hoping to exploit. Who turns out the winner? It may be more for us to consider more than just the platforms, or the devices, or the companies, or even porn.

The overlap of all these factors means that Jobs could end up making his products and platforms look bad, driving even more support to Android. Though security is still a major source of strife for the Android platform and its apps, ongoing work on the platform, frequent updates, and partnerships with more and more device manufacturers also makes this battle one of numbers and accessibility.

Of course, the battle will live on for quite some time, particularly as Apple and Android continue to represent different aspects and attitudes towards the way in which a mobile platform should be developed. What will make the battle even more relevant towards consumer electronics and mobile devices is the growing presence of additional products and platforms. The resources that mobile platforms make available to developers and the platform owners looks to monetize consumers in an entirely different manner, attracting the likes of HTC, Sony and several others, towards owning as big of a piece of the pie as possible.

The iPad isn’t out yet, and that leaves us a few more days to speculate about its greatness. Isn’t speculation fun? We have no idea how many iPads have been ordered so far, meaning your guess is as good as mine. We have very little idea as to how the device will work in the practical, every day sense. We don’t even quite know where to categorize the tablet, seeing as it appears to be a bigger version of the iPod Touch, but with a lot of the cool factor that has been determined by the popularity of the iPhone.

Seeing as the iPad is a little bit the same and a little bit different from everything we’ve experienced before, there’s a lot of room for…speculation. When it comes to the applications built for the iPad, there’s not only room for speculation, but for opportunity as well.

Selling more apps could be big business for some app developers, especially as the iPad has such a large focus on media consumption. But a recent review by Wired indicates that a few other things may be different for the iPad’s app store, some of which could have consequences (good and bad) all their own.

Browsing the iPad App Store: A Video [By @viticci] from Federico Viticci on Vimeo.

The three areas Wired mentions are the cover flow, the pricing and the titles of the apps themselves. These partially address some of the concerns that have been brought up since we saw our first Steve Jobs demo of the iPad.

With what appears to be a new section for highlighted apps, the cover flow of the iPad app store may be different than what iPhone users are accustomed to. Yet similar changes are being made to the iTunes App Store as well, especially as Apple seems a better way to help users fin the apps they’re looking for. Adding a new Adult category for those apps that have previously been banned all together is just one concession Apple may make towards offering more app options within a system the company is comfortable with.

The prices of the iPad apps have already changed, as many developers are requesting higher prices for apps already present for the iPhone. Of course, the apps aren’t exactly the same–optimizing for the new tablet has been something many developers have already begun working on, particularly those in the media production and distribution industries. Yet, we’ll still have to see what the demand will be for pricier apps that are coming in a bigger size.

Naming the apps for an iPad app store would seem like a trivial thing to concentrate on, but the vastness of the existing iTunes App Store means that a properly named app could do even better on the iPad than on the iPhone. It’s safe to say that this can be confusing for consumers if a company has changed the name but not the product, but even more important is whether or not Apple will create a new store entirely for iPad apps. This would offer a bit of a reprieve for users, as the iTunes App Store is already filled with apps and its search and recommendation system is less than stellar. However, carrying over the iTunes App Store to the iPad seems like the logical thing to do.

What we’ve seen from the iPad so far seems to have merely raised more questions than answers, so we’ll still have to wait a few more days to see how things really play out. But the fact that so many questions have been raised means that the expectations around the iPad may truly offer Apple another great opportunity to build its brand and increase consumer satisfaction with its wireless, mobile devices.

Apple sold 120,000 iPads the day it opened its doors for pre-sale orders, making the new member of the all-star device lineup already a commercial hit. Yet the revelation of Apple’s battery replacement policy has stirred a bit of controversy, particularly as the device hasn’t even reached the hands of consumers yet.

The battery replacement policy will charge iPad owners $99 to swap out the device’s battery, upon which time they will also receive a new iPad. The policy is similar to the iPhone battery replacement system, save for the fact that your iPhone battery is the only thing that gets replaced. But the debate about whether or not the customers should pony up the cash to have their iPad replaced is of concern.

Several of Apple’s devices have limiting battery options, as they cannot be replaced on your own. The modified verbiage on the iPad, however, has raised a few brows. Compared to the jargon used for the iPhone battery replacement, it appears Apple may be expecting some issues with the batteries of its upcoming and heavily anticipated device.

One issue with the policy is that replaced devices could be refurbished. This is a relatively green (economic and otherwise) method for Apple, but should the company be charging so much for that process? The other issue is that your data will be lost, so backup of your iPad will be necessary for anything you want carried over to your replacement device.

The biggest issue, however, may be the iPad battery itself. Already the expectations around it have been compromised, so consumers and pundits alike will be looking for problems. The service fee, too, is a matter of debate, especially as the recall nation seeks retribution for faulty products. From Toyota to Pringles, the consumer trust level is waning for a few companies out there. With all the hype around Apple’s latest, will the iPad be something else to be distrusted?

If there really are battery problems with the iPad, consumers may be leary to purchase something with a known problem. Especially as they are made aware of the battery replacement policy beforehand, some consumers may want to wait until the next generation of the iPad all together.

Unless the iPad has major issues with its battery, I doubt this will become a major issue for sales or the legal system. Nevertheless, it’s important for Apple to protect its brand. Doing so will ensure the health of its media-changing potential with the iPad device itself.

Developers of Apple iPhone apps have noticed something new on their end–an Explicit category for iPhone apps. While the new category isn’t available in the iTunes store yet, its presence on the developers side of things suggests that Apple is looking to modify its app store and the criteria that goes along with a given application being accepted into the iTunes App Store itself.

The discovery comes shortly after Apple banned an overtly sexual app that was created for the iPhone’s mobile app platform, despite it being no more explicit than other apps already accepted into the App Store. The app banning was the last straw for many developers that have been seeking clarification from Apple as to what can and cannot be incorporated into a particular iPhone app. With confusion rising around the criteria Apple uses to determine which apps make it through the approval process and which apps are rejected, Apple has been stirring the pot and having to deal with a lot of frustrated developers, more than two years after launching the iPhone.

Some had even hoped that the Explicit category would appear with the latest iPhone device release, tough that didn’t happen. It’s a step that many platforms used for media distribution are hesitant to make, for mobile platforms, on-demand television and film content, and user-generated content. Finding the best way to deal with new and budding platforms as well as the established concept of tiered distribution to fit everyone’s needs is something that has not sped along with the mainstream adoption of certain technology, at least not without being labeled as taboo.

What this particular situation does highlight, however, is the need for Apple to improve its relationships with its developers and end users. The addition of an explicit category could prove to be an acceptable answer for dealing with the plight of concerned parents as well as developers looking for answers.

This is also something other developers and platforms can learn from. Google’s Android platform is open source, meaning it’s a great deal easier to push an app through to the Android market in comparison to the iTunes App Store. The open source tactic has caused its own set of problems for Google, given the security breaches some apps have benefited from for certain banking apps. So it’s clear that an acceptable medium needs to be met. For the time being, we’ll just look forward to the Explicit category from Apple, which would come just in time for the iPad release.

So, everyone is making their own mobile devices these days. At least, that’s how it seems. Connecting a hand held device to the web and enabling it with Wi-Fi seems to be enough reason to make one’s own mobile device and sell it for an exorbitant price. Yet the ability to use these mobile devices to run various platforms could entice developers, build out a growing marketplace, and become the new way of doing business. Companies such as Amazon are looking to move in on Apple’s turf in order to get a piece of this pie.

Apple’s iPhone still dominates on the mobile app scene. It’s cell phone has won the hearts of millions around the world, with the iTunes App Store attracting countless developers, publishers and buyers to its mobile marketplace. The growth f an entire industry is looking to mobile as its future, and Apple is starting to see more and more competition from others seeking a comparable platform approach to the mobile app forum.