iPhone and iPod Touch apps need to consider real people

Remember the Nintendo Game Boy? It was a hand-held gaming device that was released about 20 years ago, but was popular up until quite recently. It was a great device that sold over 100 million units during its life and at the time it was state-of-the-art. That doesn't mean it was perfect though and one of its limitations was that it had a small screen. It was only about two and a half inches and it was difficult to see. This led to a thriving market for clip-on magnifying glasses. They were plastic gadgets that clipped onto the Game Boy and magnified the screen so you could actually see what was on it. I need one for the iPhone! Developers either have the eyes of a hawk or they don't test the apps on a real iPhone/iPod Touch with real people. Some of the text is so small I struggle to read it. I've even resorted to holding the phone in one hand and a magnifying glass in the other! You try using an app like that!

iPhone and iPod Touch developers need to consider real people when they develop their apps. Not everyone has perfect eyesight and incredibly small text can be hard and sometimes impossible to read. My eyesight is fine for reading and I can read any newspaper, magazine, book, computer screen and so on, but some apps on my iPhone are beyond the resolution of my retinas. Just because the iPhone 4 has a super high resolution 'retina' screen it doesn't mean it's OK for developers to make text even smaller. There comes a point where you start to lose people.

Small text is just one irritation with some (not all) apps. How often have you run a new app and jabbed a finger at random all over the screen just to see what happens? It's sometimes not obvious what to do in an app, what hotspots their are, how to navigate from one part of the app to another, and so on. Desktop applications have buttons and menus, but iPhone/iPod Touch apps aren't so clear and sometimes I'm reduced to random poking to see what happens.

This could be solved by having instructions or help with an app that actually told you how to use it. Many do, of course, but a lot don't. At one time a printed manual used to be supplied with software, then that was dropped and a help file or on-screen manual was supplied. Too often with apps on the iPhone/iPod Touch there's nothing at all. You're on your own and you have to guess how to use an app.

There are lots of good apps in the iTunes store of course, but there's still room for improvement.

Read More

The new 7in iPad - real or rumour?

Over the last few days there has been an increasing number of rumours about the existence of a new iPad with a 7in screen. There is certainly no shortage of rumours about Apple products and this is partly because the company is so secretive. It works hard to ensure that no information is leaked to the public, so it's impossible to know whether there is any substance in these rumours. However, it doesn't stop everyone speculating and we can ask whether a 7in iPad makes sense. Does it fit in with the product range? Would it boost sales? What are the implications for app developers? Will existing apps work or will we have yet another category in the app store?

A 7in iPad does actually make sense and if Apple keeps the screen resolution the same as either the iPhone or iPad then all existing apps should work without any modification. The iPad currently has a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels and if a 'retina' type display is used in the 7in iPad as with the iPhone, then the 7in iPad would be able to run iPad apps. They will simply look slightly smaller, but also super sharp. Another alternative, but a less attractive one, would be to use the iPhone 4's display resolution. This is 960 x 640 pixels and it's incredibly sharp on the iPhone. It could be used on a 7in iPad and it would give a similar display quality (dots per inch) to the current iPad. A retina display would clearly be best though.

From a hardware and software point of view, a 7in iPad is obviously do-able. It would take very little effort indeed and it's not like designing a tablet from scratch. Would it fit in with the current iPhone, iPod and iPad range though? Is there a need for it or a demand for it?

Despite all the millions of iPad shipped I haven't yet seen anyone carrying one around or using one in public. Where are they all? Do people just use them at home? I don't think it's as portable or as useful as it could be because it's just a bit too big and heavy. It's great when you're sitting on the couch in front of the TV and want to look something up on the web, but it's not that portable and if you really want a portable device that does everything then there is the Macbook Air (and there are rumours of a new version of that in the pipeline too). It can be tiring to hold when gaming or reading for any length of time unless you rest it on something.

A 7in iPad would not fit the pocket as well as an iPod Touch or an iPhone, but it would be much smaller and lighter than the current iPad. It would have the same screen resolution and run the same iPad apps, but it might fit a large jacket pocket and it would certainly fit a small bag. It makes more sense to me than the current model.

A 7in iPad might even be cheaper too, although I wouldn't bet on it because the smaller you try to make something, the more it costs to make. However, I don't think that you could price them exactly the same because the public might perceive a smaller iPad as being a lower spec model that should be cheaper. It might therefore be priced at $100/£50 less than current prices. That seems possible.

So will there be a 7in iPad? The current iPad has been more successful than most people (non-Apple fans that is) expected and it would be daft not to capitalise on that and increase the range of models offered. I would think that the rumours are true.

Read More

Genius for the app store is, well, genius

Tweet

I have never been a fan of the Genius feature in iTunes for several different reasons. One is that the Genius panel on the right of the iTunes window is just an advert. It's little more than an attempt to get me to buy more music at the store. Sometimes the recommendations bear no relation to the track I've selected in my library and sometimes among the tracks it recommends are tracks that I already have.  It doesn't take a genius to check whether I already have a track before showing an advert to buy it. Genius playlists also seem uncannily like a Smart Playlists. Create a Smart Playlist by selecting tracks at random within a genre and then compare it to the playlist created by the Genius feature. If I choose a rock song and click Genius then I get 25 random rock songs with a couple of pop thrown in - there's always a couple of wildcards. I can do that with the Smart Playlist feature. Genius in the app store on the iPhone and iPod Touch is great though and I love it. Genius is actually useful at last.

There are several reasons why it works in the app store and one important one is that many apps for the iPhone and iPod Touch are free. So Genius isn't just trying to part me from my hard-earned money. Free apps are included in the Genius recommendations along with the paid apps. (There's a Genius tab when you go to the Featured section of the apps store on the iPhone/iPod Touch and it's a slight irritation that it's not also in iTunes on the computer, but browsing on the mobile is fine.)

It's interesting that Genius shows what each recommendation is based on and sometimes the link is obvious, for example, if you have a news app then it will recommend another news app. However, sometimes it recommends a completely random app and there's no link at all. I've got Dropbox and it recommended Digits Calculator based on this. What's the link between cloud based online storage and a pocket calculator? I've got Dictionary.com and it recommended Alphabet Tracing, which is a kids app that teaches them to draw the letters of the alphabet on the screen. Apart from them both containing letters, where's the link?

I actually don't mind these random recommendations. There are 200,000+ apps in the app store and many people probably don't browse beyond the featured, top selling, top grossing, top free and other top lists. A few hundred at most. Genius often picks apps at random and you'll get to see apps you probably wouldn't normally see. What's more, they might even be free. Genius in the app store is great. Forget Genius though, just give me a Random button or an I'm Feeling Lucky button.

Read More

FaceTime for new iPod Touch?

September is usually the time of year that Apple introduces new iPod models, presumably to cash in on the pre-Christmas buying spree that takes place each year. However, there have been rumours that this year will be different and that the new iPod line-up will be announced mid-August. Among the rumoured new features are a front-facing camera that will enable iPod Touch users to call other iPod Touch Users and iPhone 4 users with FaceTime. FaceTime, of course, is the video calling facility in iPhone 4 and it's brilliant, but so few people have iPhone 4s that it's hard to find someone to chat to. Adding iPod Touch users will help, but Apple needs to go further.

Imagine you have a brand new phone, but that it is incompatible with everyone else's phone. Who are you going to call? Only those few people that have the same brand and model of phone as you, nd that's not very many. It would be pointless. That's pretty much how FaceTime is right now. It's great if all your mates have iPhone 4s, but useless if they don't.

The way to get FaceTime working is to make it available everywhere and this is what Apple should do if it wants to make a success of the technology. Putting a front-facing camera on the iPod Touch and adding FaceTime is a step in the right direction and this will increase the number of people that are FaceTime-capable. But why not go further?

Macs have front-facing cameras, so why not release a FaceTime application for the Mac? This would mean that anyone with a Mac can video call anyone with an iPod Touch or iPhone 4 and vice versa (providing you both have Wi-Fi connections). The number of FaceTime users would very quickly grow as Mac users installed FaceTime and the more people that have it, the more people will use it. Apple could own the video calling market.

FaceTime could be a great unique selling point for Apple devices and it would encourage even more people to switch. How hard can it be to put FaceTime on a Mac? It's got the hardware and the Wi-Fi connection, so what's holding it back?

Read More

Apple's long term plans

I was reading the news this morning and there was a story on Cnet that said the next iPad is likely to have a camera.  There was a huge amount of speculation about this before the iPad was launched and it was one of the most desired features. Well, I can confirm that a future iPad will definitely have a camera. It's a certainty. What isn't so certain though is when we'll see a camera in the iPad and what it will be capable of. Apple largely sells to existing customers and to keep them coming back and buying new products, it introduces new features and functions gradually rather than all at once. The company has a long term plan and you can see this with the iPhone. The original model had a 2 megapixel camera that could only take photos. The next generation could also take videos, the next one had a 3 megapixel camera, and now we have a 5 megapixel camera. We also have cameras front and back. This isn't cutting edge technology, this is Apple holding back features so they can be introduced gradually at regular intervals to make existing owners upgrade.

The iPad could easily have had a camera in it. After all, it's old technology and every mobile phone has one (or two) and even Apple's iPhone has cameras, so it knows how to do it. There is absolutely no technical reason why the iPad could not have had a camera and it must surely have been because it is part of a long term plan. The company will introduce features gradually so that people that bought the original iPad will upgrade to subsequent models. Apple's long term plan could look like this: iPad 1 with no camera, iPad 2 with low resolution webcam that shoots video, iPad 3 with higher resolution camera that shoots photos too, iPad 4 with front and back cameras like the iPhone.

I don't know if this is the exact order that features will be added, but you can bet that it will look something like this. We may well see new iPads introduced on a yearly basis as with the iPhone, with a gradual introduction of new features. It will sell mostly to the same people - after all, which iPad owner wouldn't want a new one with a camera in? Of course, not all sales are to existing owners and Apple fans, and as new features are added the device will become more attractive to the wider world. Most sales will be to Apple fans though.

The iPad could have had a camera from the start, but Apple chose not to put one in. It's all part of the company's long term plan to keep sales going as long as possible. It's a brilliant business plan, but it's irritating as a consumer. I'm holding off buying an iPad until it has all the features I need. I may have to wait several generations, but there's sure to be one at some point down the line. Maybe it'll be an iPad 3 or 4. We'll have to wait and see.

Read More