What's a MacBook Air good for?

At the beginning of this year, I bought a MacBook Air. I bought a maxed out one, with a 13" screen, 2.13 GHz cpu, 4 gb ram, 256 gb SSD. This past week Apple refreshed the MacBook Air line and I've seen a lot of people asking the question "Could I use a MacBook Air for ___?" So here's what all I use it for, along with a comparison to my work computer a maxed out 15" MacBook Pro.

• Web browsing. I run Chrome on it and it screams. Actually the MBA set an expectation for me about how ChromeOS and in particular how my Samsung Chromebook should perform. I basically expected the Chromebook to perform exactly like the Chrome browser on my MBA, which is awesome. I was very disappointed, as the Chromebook is nowhere close. Anyways, browsing on the MBA is fantastic. I can notice a slight difference in performance on super-JS heavy sites, with my MBP being slightly smoother. I think a non-engineer would have difficultly spotting these differences.
• Word processing. I'm not just talking about rudimentary word processing either. When I got the MBA, I had a couple of chapters and appendices that I was still working on for Android in Practice. I used the MBA to write/complete these chapters. This involved using Microsoft Word along with the Manning Publications template for Word. The chapters were usually in the 30-50 page range, and often with tons of formatting (code, sidebars, etc.) and large graphics. I cannot tell any difference between my MBP and MBA for these massive Word docs.
• Programming. Speaking of AIP, part of finishing it meant writing code for those chapters. I've run pretty much all of the code from AIP on my MBA with no problems at all. For smaller apps like I have in AIP, there is no appreciable difference between my MBA and MBP. Building a small app is an I/O bound task, and the SSD on the MBA shines. Now I have also built Bump on my MBA, and there is a very noticeable difference between it and my MBP. There are two major phases to the Bump build. The first is the native compilation, which is single-threaded. You can definitely notice a major CPU speed difference here, even though the raw clock speeds of the two machines are close. The second phase is the Scala/Java compilation phase. This is multi-threaded, and the four cores on my MBP obviously trump the two cores on the MBA. Still, I would saw the MBA compares favorably to the late-2008 era MacBook Pro that I used to use for work.
• Photography. I used to use Aperture on my old MBP. On the MBA I decided to give Adobe Lightroom a try. So it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. However, Lightroom on my MBA blows away Aperture on my old MBP. I haven't tried either on my current MBP. Obviously the SSD makes a huge difference here. Nonetheless, post-processing on the MBA is super smooth. When it comes to my modest photography, Lightroom presents no problem for my MBA.
• Watching video. I haven't watched too much video on my MBA, mostly just streaming Netflix. It is super smooth, though it will cause the machine's rarely used fan to kick-in (as will intense compilations, like building Bump.) Next week I am going on a cruise to Mexico, and I will probably buy/rent a few videos from iTunes to watch on the cruise. Based on previous experiences, I expect this to be super smooth and beautiful, though I have considered taking the MBP just for its bigger, high resolution screen.
• Presentations. I've done a couple of talks using the MBA. For creating content in Keynote, I do sometimes notice a little sluggishness on the MBA that is not present on my MBP. For playback, it seems very smooth. However, I did have an animation glitch during one presentation. This never happened when previewing just on my MBA's screen, it only happened on the projected screen. Nobody seemed to notice during the presentation, except for me of course.

So there you go. What's a MacBook Air good for? Pretty much everything. If you are a professional developer who compiles software, then I think your money is best spent buying the most powerful computer available. This has always been true. Maybe this is also the case for professional photographers/videographers as well. However my MBA is way more than enough for most folks. Finally keep in mind that the new MBAs introduced this week are a good bit faster than my MBA, at least in terms of CPU speed.

I hate your smartphone

When people talk about smartphones, they often mean iPhones and Android phones. Sure there are still Blackberries out there, I think I once saw a guy using a webOS phone, and Microsoft has 89,000 employees who have to use Windows Phone 7, but it's mostly an Android and iPhone world right now. If you have a phone running Android or iOS, life is pretty good. You've probably got a really powerful phone, with a huge number of apps and games to choose from. You've also got a web browser that's more advanced than the one used by most desktop computer users. So given all of those things to be happy about, why is that smartphone owners are so hostile to each other?

iPhones user love to look down their noses and make derisive comments about Android users. Not to be outdone, Android users never miss an opportunity to mock iPhone users. There is an obvious parallel here to Mac vs. Windows, but I think it's actually much nastier than Mac vs. Windows ever was. Here's a list of my theories (in no particular order) on why there is such animosity.

1. It's so easy to do. The truth is that both iOS and Android are deeply flawed. Going back to the Mac vs. Windows comparison, think about how much less mature these smartphone OS's are compared to Windows and OSX. So if you have any inclination to make fun of either OS, it's embarrassingly easy to do. This is where things really differ from Mac vs. Windows. There's not much to debate there. If you wanted to say "Mac sucks", there is a short list of things that you can point to. Not true for iOS or Android.
2. Social networking. In this day and age of social networks, your "friends" shove what they are doing in your face constantly. Smartphone apps make heavy use of this, as a way to spread virally. But what happens when there is an impedance mismatch caused by apps available on one OS but not the other? The folks with the unsupported OS get a little annoyed, and the other folks get an artificial feeling of 133tness
3. It starts at the top. Apple and Google both frequently take shots at each other. They do it at developer conferences. They do it when reporting quarterly earnings. It doesn't stop there. Motorola, Verizon, T-Mobile and others have all taken shots at Apple in commercials seen by millions.
4. Big decisions. You only have one smartphone (unless you are weird like me) and in the US, you usually buy it on a two-year contract. So you have to pick just one, and then you are stuck with it for two years. Thus if anybody is gonna suggest that you made a bad decision, most people will defend their decisions vehemently.
5. The Apple effect. So this really is straight out of Mac vs. Windows. Apple wants their products to seem elite and luxurious. They want the owners to feel like they have purchased far superior products, and feel that they (the user) is superior because of this. It's brilliant marketing, and it totally works. The air of superiority hangs over any Apple product owners, but especially iPhone users. So naturally any non-iPhone users are going to react negatively to the haute attitudes of iPhone users.

Rallying the Base

This week was WWDC 2011. Last year I was lucky enough to attend what appears to be the final stevenote. This year I followed along online, like much of Silicon Valley. There are a lot of reasons why so many of us who work in the tech world pay such close attention to the WWDC keynote. This is the place where Apple typically unveils innovative hardware and software. However, this year's event reminded me of another  watershed moment in recent US history: John McCain choosing Sarah Palin as his VP candidate back in 2008.

These two events were similar because they were both examples of rallying the base. In 2008, McCain decided against trying to appeal to moderate Republican/Democrats/independents who were either inclined to vote for Obama or undecided. Instead he went with Palin, a candidate who did not appeal to those people. The idea was to appeal to the most conservative elements of the Republican party and get those people to vote instead of staying home for whatever reason. Obviously this did not work.

So how was WWDC 2011 a rallying of the base tactic? Apple did not try to introduce near software or hardware that would get non-iPhone owners to go out and buy an iPhone or more strongly consider buying an iPhone the next time they were in the market for a new phone. Instead they did their best to make sure that current iPhone owners continued to buy iPhones. The strategy was two-fold.

First, they needed the places where they were weak and other were strong. Now let's be honest here, by others we are talking about Android/Google. There were a couple of glaring problems with iOS 4. First was notifications, so Apple essentially adopted Android's model here. Second was the dependency on iTunes the desktop software application. They introduced wireless sync and their iCloud initiatives to address this weakness. Apple did not break any new ground in any of these areas, they simply removed some obvious reasons for people to buy an Android device over an iPhone.

Phase two of rallying the base was to increase lock-in. If you are an iPhone user, you already experience lock-in. Buying an Android phone means losing all of your apps and games. Depending on what you use for email, calendar, etc. you might also lose that data too. Of course this is true to some degree about any smartphone platform. However, with the expansion of the Android Market (I've seen many projections that it will be bigger than the App Store soon), pretty much every app or game you have on your iPhone can be found on Android. Further, there's a good chance that it will be free on Android, even if you had to pay for it on the iPhone. Further, with the popularity of web based email, especially GMail, you probably would not lose any emails, calendar events, etc. So the lock-in was not as high as Apple needed it to be. Enter iCloud and iMessaging.

As many have noted, iCloud/iMessaging does not offer anything that you could not get from 3rd party software. Syncing your docs, photos, email, calendar, etc. is something that many of us already do, and that includes iPhone users. Further many folks already have IM clients that do everything that iMessaging does. The big difference is that all of those existing solutions are not tied to iOS or OSX. Thus they are cross-platform (no lock-in) but that also means that you have to add this software to your devices. It's very nice for users to not have to worry about installing Dropbox, Evernote, or eBuddy. But the obvious win for Apple is here is the lock-in. If you start relying on Pages for writing docs and sync'ing them across devices, you are going to be very reluctant to buy anything other than an iPhone (and a Mac for that matter.) If you get used to using iMessaging to chat with your other iPhone toting friends, same thing.

Apple is keeping the cost of using all of their new offerings very low. It's a classic loss leader strategy. It's ok if iCloud and iMessaging both lose a lot of money for Apple. If they can just lock-in existing iPhone users, they can continue to make huge profits. In that scenario, it's ok for Google/Android to have N times the number of users as Apple. The Apple users won't be going anywhere, and they spend a lot of money. Seems like a smart strategy by Apple. It should work out much better than it did for the Republican party in 2008.

WWDC Wish List

Tomorrow is WWDC. Much like how I had an Android wish list for Google I/O (and I got my top two wishes!) a few weeks ago, I have one for the iPhone and WWDC. Given that OS 4.0 has been in beta for quite awhile, there is a little less suspense. So my wish list is a little more product based instead of development based.

1.) iPhone for Verizon. AT&T has nixed the generous data plans for the iPad (as well as for the iPhone,) so really why is there any reason for Apple to stay exclusive with them? In fact one could imagine that AT&T busted out the new pricing last week because they knew their exclusivity was coming to an end. I certainly hope this is the case. Personally I would not switch to Verizon, but I hope that many folks do. Plus I think that if folks had a choice of iPhone on AT&T or iPhone on Verizon, then both companies would compete much harder, improving networks and dropping prices. This is a key but subtle component of the Android strategy that fanboys/apologists often seem to miss.
2.) Non-AppStore apps. No way, right? Don't be so sure. How easy would it be for Apple to give folks a deeply buried user preference for allowing non-AppStore apps on their iPhone? An insignificant number of users would ever enable this "dangerous" option, but it would do so much. From a PR perspective, it would take the heat off Apple. Actually this might not just be PR, it might be legal as well. Want to use Flash to develop for the iPhone? Ok, just distribute it through your own channels to users who want to go outside of the AppStore. Obviously this would really make life easier on developers. The current provisioning process is ridiculous.
3.) Mobile Safari improvements. I expect that we'll hear about how Safari and/or Mobile Safari is fifty-billion percent faster than ... something else. Apple is fond of blowing up micro-benchmarks. I'd like to also see some new features. I'd really like to see Web Workers, especially since Safari already supports them. I'd be thrilled to see the Device API, so that we can get access to the camera (and how about that front-facing camera, too?) and how about access to a user's contacts? It feels like Android'd browser is really pulling ahead of Mobile Safari, so it would be great to see Apple take back their lead.
4.) Real multitasking. I'm probably going to hurl tomorrow when I have to hear Steve Jobs brag about multitasking in iPhone OS 4.0. It's bullshit. As I've said before, OS 4.0 does not implement multitasking, it implements a handful of multitasking use cases. There is a big difference. Of course there is no chance of this. The multitasking in OS 4.0 is obviously technology designed by marketing and business people, not by engineers. They want to put an end to those obnoxious Motorola Droid commercials that make fun of a "a phone that can't walk and chew gum at the same time." So instead of figuring out how to do multitasking right, so that it enables developers without sacrificing performance, we get a useless feature (unless you happen to be one of the three use cases) that will be hailed as revolutionary.

Mobile Zealotry

"You're either with me or against me!"
Does this feel like the rhetoric coming out of Google and Apple lately? Sometimes I wonder if Russell from Survivor is working for these guys. I was at Google I/O last week, and I have to admit that Vic Gundotra delivered a great keynote. It really got the troops excited.

"One man, one company, one device, one carrier would be our only choice ... Not the Future We Want"
Indeed. But before you go out and get an Android tattoo, and toss your iPhone off of the Golden Gate Bridge, take a deep breath and remember: You don't work for Google (unless you do, in which case I assume you've already got said tattoo.) You should not care who wins this jihad -- but make sure that you aren't collateral damage.

If you are a mobile developer, what you should most care about is delivering the best and most useful experience to your users. So first and foremost, you need to care about what kind of devices your users are using. If they are all iPhone users and you really want to build Android apps, well sorry. Further, if they are all Blackberry users, then you can just ignore the drama going on here in the Valley.

Of course the device of choice for your users today is quite possibly not what they will be using tomorrow. Former Android engineer Cedric Beust makes the point that the iPhone may well have peaked. Things look great when you're at your peak, especially if you don't realize that the descent has begun. So you might build a killer iPhone app this year, only to find that your users have moved on next year. Nobody ever said that this was an easy game.

Hedging your bets and investing in multiple platforms seems like the safe thing to do, if it's practical. But don't forget the other factor: delivering a great app. If you can't deliver a great app on Android, then don't bother. If you can't deliver on the iPhone, then don't bother. Both Apple and Google have gone out of their way to provide developers with fantastic tools and platforms for creating great apps, so this may be a moot point. There are definitely types of apps that are better suited for one platform than the other. For example, the iPhone seems to be superior for games. If you look at the success of consoles, you can see why that kind of environment where hardware and software are highly standardized, translates well to the iPhone. Similarly, the lack of background processing on the iPhone (and don't believe any hype about iPhone OS 4 changing this, it does not except in a few special cases) cripples the capabilities of many iPhone apps.

The most important thing to keep in mind in all of this is that it is in Apple and Google's best interests to be as divisive as possible. If they can convince you that they are "right" and that you should only develop for their platform, this is a huge win for them. So expect the rhetoric to only get worse. How many days until WWDC?

Apple, Flash, and The Truth

I'm sure by now you've read "Steve Jobs"'s Thoughts on Flash. Did it convince you? Do you think it was truthful? Not me. Sure it has some valid points, especially about Flash being buggy on OSX. As someone who has developed Flash applications using a Mac, I am especially aware of this bugginess, and part of me can't help but get a perverse sense of satisfaction that this bugginess is now coming back to haunt Adobe. However, this doesn't change the fact that Jobs's epistle is far from the truth. It is corporate slander, designed to make Adobe look as bad as possible. Why? So that when devices from competitor's ship with full support for Flash, this technological advantage can be discredited in the eyes of consumers. In other words, this well thought out post by Apple is not some intellectual/technical analysis, it is just marketing designed to boost Apple's profits.

The most dishonest thing about the post is what Apple says is "the most important reason" to ban Flash from their devices: that it will result in sub-standard apps and hurt their iPhone/iPad OS platform. This is complete bullshit. It's not like developers would suddenly only be able to create iPhone apps using Flash. It's not like they could no longer use all of the tools they use today. The difference is that they would have a choice. They could choose to use Flash. Or they could choose to use Objective-C/Cocoa/XCode.

But don't forget, that not only would developers have a choice, but so would consumers. If for some strange reason, some developers started choosing to use Flash,  it's not like consumers would be forced to buy those Flash-authored apps. No, they could still choose other, traditional apps. In fact, if, as Apple claims, Flash-authored apps would be of such low quality, then one would expect that few consumers would choose to purchase those apps.

So if Apple allowed developers to use whatever tools and technology they wanted to use, to create apps for the iPhone and iPad, what might happen? Well if Apple's claims are right, then there would be bad apps that nobody would buy (aren't there already a lot of such apps on the App Store?). Consumers aren't idiots, and they won't buy crappy apps when there will be better alternatives. So those Flash-authored apps will lose money. Developers aren't idiots, and they won't keep using technology that produces software that nobody wants. So they would abandon Flash and go back to Cocoa. So Apple's "concerns" would be unwarranted.

Or perhaps what would happen is that some developers would produce good apps using Flash that consumers bought for their iPhones. Certainly developers would continue to use Flash. However, in this scenario, Apple's "concerns" are proven to be false -- Flash produces some good apps. But wait, what about Flash holding back innovation on the platform? Apple would still be free to add new features to their OS, and make them available to developers through new APIs in the iPhone SDK. Who knows how long it would take Adobe to expose those features through the Flash authoring tools, but who cares? If those features greatly improve apps, and they aren't available in Flash authoring, then what happens? The power of choice wins again. Developers can still choose to use Cocoa, tap into these innovations, and user's can choose to purchase the apps that take advantage of these innovations. If these features are so great, one might expect that Adobe would try to bring them to Flash authoring as quickly as possible. Either way, the notion that the Flash platform would be held back makes no sense.

So Apple's self-described most important point is so false that it is laughable. Some of their other parts are equally false. For example, the notion of touch and Flash. Yes, many things in Flash are designed for users interacting with a mouse, not a finger. Such things don't work well on touch devices. However, this is not just true for Flash. It is equally true for HTML and JavaScript. If you've done a lot of surfing on your iPhone or iPad, you have surely experienced the "rollover" issues described in Apple's post. Want more examples? Check out this clever little video on HTML 5 and the iPad:


So why all the bullshit? As I said earlier, the reason for the post is to discredit any competitor that provides Flash support on their devices. First and foremost on that list is Android, which will support Flash in Android OS 2.2. That doesn't explain why Apple doesn't want to allow developers to use Flash to develop for the iPhone? The answer to that is simple. They want complete control of their platform. If you want to make money off of the iPhone, you have to be in bed with Apple. They saw how the web has hurt Microsoft, and they will not let this happen on the iPhone or iPad.

Now wait a minute, isn't Apple investing heavily in the web, namely HTML 5? Doesn't that demonstrate that they are willing to give up control of their platform? Yes, and no. Yes, Apple has invested into WebKit, a technology that in various forms implements a decent chunk of the HTML 5 standard. But you see, the key word here is "standard." This is how Apple fools you into thinking that they are providing an "open" alternative to their proprietary system.

It's easy to get fooled into thinking that any company that implements and open standard is innovative, but just the opposite is true. We think standards=innovation for browsers because of Microsoft IE 6. That browser dominated the world for a long while being completely stagnant. It was both non-standard and non-innovative, but this is an exceptional. It is rare that such technology can flourish. It took the unique nature of Windows, IE, and Microsoft's legal troubles to produce this situation.

Adopting a standard just means that you either change an existing feature of your technology to comply with the standard, or you copy a feature from others in the space. It is anti-innovation. When it comes to web standards, they are introduced post-hoc. XMLHttpRequest, the key technology behind Ajax, was proprietary Microsoft technology for many years before it became a standard. Many of the features of HTML 5 were introduced by various plugin technologies like Flash or Google Gears before they became part of the HTML 5 spec. You cannot innovate while waiting for some super slow moving corporate committee to vote on a new standard.

Going back to the iPhone/iPad, Apple is saying: pick either Cocoa and go through the App Store, or stick to the web, but only the "open standards" part of the web. They have given you a choice, but only the weakest, most impotent choice possible. You see this is where the other part of their Flash ban comes into affect. Not only have they recently banned compiling a Flash authored application into a native iPhone application, they have always banned Flash running in the browser. Why? Because with browser plugin technologies like Flash, Silverlight, and yes even Java, you can create user experience's on par with desktop applications. If they allowed Flash in the browser on the iPhone, then developers could create web applications that might rival the native iPhone applications. And we wouldn't want that, now would we? So Apple give you a single alternative to using Cocoa/XCode/AppStore, and then they horribly cripple it, by removing the most innovative parts and tying a design-by-committee-technology weight around its neck. Apple's endorsement of HTML 5 is one of the greatest marketing ruses ever. They stifle innovation, limit choice, and line their own pockets while getting everyone to believe they are being developer friendly and innovative.

After all of the above, you might think that I am very anti-Apple, anti-iPhone, anti-iPad. I'm not at all. I am anti-bullshit though. I don't like being lied to and treated like a lemming. Apple has every right to keep Flash off of their devices. It's their OS after all. They have very right to ban apps that were authored with Flash from their AppStore. It's their AppStore after all. Just don't lie to me about this stuff. Don't say it's better for developers or better for consumers, when it's actually worse for both. Just tell the truth: it's just better for Apple.

Thoughts on iPhone OS 4.0 and Section 3.3.1

I'm on vacation right now. Earlier in the week, I took my kids to the Kennedy Space Center:

Now I am in my hometown of Panama City, Florida visiting family and friends. However, yesterday Apple released the beta of iPhone OS 4.0. I read about it briefly on my iPhone while riding around town yesterday. Saw that it supported multi-tasking -- yay! Saw some nice features, like unified inbox, multiple Exchange accounts, geo-tagged pictures, etc. I was psyched, and planned on reading more about it later.

Later came, and I started reading more details on my laptop. Of course what everyone was talking about was Section 3.3.1. Soon I went from being psyched about OS 4.0, to being very annoyed about it. Now I know that some people do not think Apple is singling out Adobe, but it damn sure seems like a reaction to Flash CS5. Let's not forget that Apple also made several barely-disguised jabs at Google-owned AdMob while unveiling Apple's own iAd platform. OS 4.0 is all about Apple going after other big software companies that are making money or trying to make money off of the iPhone. However, in the process, Apple is going to take out other companies like Appcelerator. Not that Apple cares...

So yeah, Apple is screwing lots of other people who are trying to make a dime while at the same time enabling more developers to support the iPhone/iPad platform. Nothing to see here, move along. A number of people have pointed out that Microsoft in all of its monopolistic, evil ways never tried to pull anything like this. In fact, this is polar opposite of Microsoft. For all of their faults, Microsoft always supported developers. Sure they wanted to sell you Visual Studio, but if you wanted to use Java Swing or GTK or C++ using make, they did not care. Heck, they even weighed down Windows for years and years to maintain backwards compatibility APIs used by 3rd party developers.

Enough negativity... there are many good things about OS 4.0. The most obvious thing is its multi-tasking. To be honest though, it is fundamentally flawed. It is an "OS" feature that is purely designed around use cases. It's like Apple saw ads by Google/Verizon and Palm, that showed users listening to Pandora in the background, or using GPS, or receiving VOIP calls, and told their engineers "Can we do this without really enabling background processing?" Background apps are limited to these use cases: Pandora (music), Garmin/Magellan (GPS), and Skype (VOIP). That is lame. Background apps are also prohibited from networking (wait does this screw Pandora after all?) Better than nothing? Yes, but lame.

As part of this background processing stack, Objective-C blocks have finally come to the iPhone. Yep, that means closures. Of course, it's grafted on top of Cocoa, so that means you can't just take a button and set its event handler to a block of code. But again, better than nothing. Maybe we'll see some Cocoa evolution that will allow developers to take advantage of this.

Back to the meat of the background processing... One of the use cases mentioned above is geolocation. One of the new features added in OS 4.0 is advertising via iAd. As mentioned earlier, this is a clear attack on Google's AdMob platform. The impending explosion of advertising and constantly location-aware applications suggests that location based advertising could also see an explosion. Of course a background app that is location aware cannot make network calls, a prerequisite for fetching relevant ads. Ah, but they have iAd! Apple has positioned itself quite well to take advantage of mobile advertising.

Finally, I've probed the new version of Safari. It's version 532 of WebKit, up from build 528 in iPhone 3.1.3 and 531 in Safari 4.0.4. However, it still doesn't support Web Workers... Shortly after OS 4.0 was announced, Apple also announced WebKit2. This appears to be WebKit built on multi-processing, a la Chrome. No word on when it will come to the iPhone and iPad, but perhaps that is where Apple's efforts are these days.

Nexus One vs. iPhone

I recently purchased a Nexus One, primarily for Android development. I needed a device for developing Android 2.0+ on. The 2.0 SDK has been out for almost three months now, and yet it is still not available for my old developer phone, the Android Dev Phone One. I had gotten pessimistic about HTC making Android 2.1 (since apparently 2.0 is being skipped) for the ADP1, which is essentially the G1, so it was time to buy a new phone for development. I decided to spend some quality time with the phone, i.e. as a user, not a developer, and share my thoughts.

First, a caveat... I plopped in my AT&T SIM card into the N1 before turning it on. That worked just fine -- with some known limitations. By working just fine, I mean that the N1 recognized the SIM card and configured itself for AT&T's APN without me doing anything. This was not the case with the ADP1, which was actually a pain to get working initially. You see, every Android phone that I have used wants you to sign in to Google before doing anything else. This can be a real problem if it cannot use the SIM card to access a data network. Anyways, it was no problem at all for the N1. However, as Google has pointed out, the N1 is not able to access AT&T's 3G network. It does not have the right radio for this. I have no idea why this is the case, but I will say this. Let's just imagine that I loved the N1 so much, that I decided that I wanted it to be my everyday phone instead of my iPhone. Even if that was the case, there is no way I would do this, since I would have to switch service to T-Mobile in order to access a 3G network on the G1, and for me (as well as most iPhone users) that would meaning breaking my contract with AT&T. On the other hand, if Google/HTC had only put the right radio in the N1, so that it could access AT&T's 3G network, then that would not be an issue. I bring all of this up now, because it does make it more difficult to compare the two phones. If you have one phone that is on 3G and another on Edge, you will prefer the 3G one unless the Edge phone is just way better in every other way.

Ok, so the good news is that the N1 is definitely a phone that I could live with. It is fast, I mean really fast. Navigating between applications, applications execution, startup, etc. are all very fast on this phone. I would say it is noticeably faster than my iPhone 3GS. In fact, I did some mini-benchmarking between the eBay Mobile app for the iPhone and our new eBay Mobile app for Android, running on the 3GS and N1 respectively. I put both phones on the same Wi-Fi network for this test. The N1 app was definitely faster than the 3GS app. Now the code is different, as our Android app takes advantage of some the Android features to speed up some common things in the app. Still, the Android app is running in an interpreted environment, the Dalvik VM, not as native code like the iPhone app. So even though it was definitely an apples to oranges comparison, I still found it relevant. Our app on the ADP1 (Android 1.6) was much slower.

The phone is also aesthetically pleasing. It is a pleasure to use. It looks nice. It is incredibly thin. In fact, the iPhone feels very chunky in my hand, after using the N1. Using the phone was very intuitive, but of course I have been using Android phones for over a year now, so I am certainly used to the OS. As a phone, it is on par with the 3GS, which is to say it is ok, nothing to brag about. The soft keyboard is easy to use for me, probably because I am used to using an iPhone. The word suggestions on Android are really nice, and it took me no time to start using them aggressively, thus saving myself a lot of typing.

My favorite part about the phone is the email. We use MS Exchange at work, and I am a long time GMail user for my personal email. With the N1, I could setup both to be in a push mode. On my iPhone, I can only setup one or the other to be in push. So on my iPhone, I have to check my mail to know if I have new GMail, but I immediately know about it on the N1. Also, I think email for both of my accounts looks better on the N1.

However, this brings me to a negative for the N1. It will connect to our MS Exchange server with no problems and can sync both email and contacts from Exchange, but not calendar. I have been told that this should be possible, but all solutions I have seen involved either 3rd party software, or using a workaround like syncing my Exchange calendar to a Google calendar first, and then syncing the Google calendar to the N1. I don't want workarounds, I just want something that works easily, so this is a huge negative for me. When I am at work, I often go from one meeting to another, and it is invaluable for me to be able to look at my phone to know when/where my next meeting is.

Speaking of apps, the Android Market is growing rapidly. The Facebook app for Android is very nice, and its use of the OS to allow you to integrate your friends list with your address book on the N1 is excellent. There are a lot of Twitter apps for the N1, I personally liked Swift. There are a lot of other quality apps out there as well. Here is a handy equivalency table of apps between iPhone/Android from Alex Payne. Still, this is definitely an area where the iPhone has a huge advantage. For me, the advantage is most pronounced for games. There are so many more games on the iPhone, with more well known titles (often backed by big companies like EA.) Also, the games seem to be much higher quality. The number/quality of titles will likely improve over time. Hopefully the quality of the games will too. Perhaps this is an area where the Dalvik VM gets in the way, though you can certainly go native for games, potentially reusing code developed for the iPhone.

A couple of more things, both good and bad... The browser on the N1 is excellent, definitely on par with the iPhone's. That is both from a user perspective and a developer perspective. Having multi-touch in the browser makes a huge difference for users. Adopting HTML 5 standards makes a big difference for developers. I never saw any pages that rendered noticeably differently on the N1 than they did on my 3GS. Usually it was the same only faster. Overall the browser, like most other things, tend to look better on the N1 than the 3GS simply because the screen is so much better... On the downside, the camera was a little more inconsistent for me on the N1. There have been times where I took pictures on it that came out completely out of focus. They certainly did not look out of focus when I took the picture. Maybe this is bad luck. The N1 has a 5MP camera, but I would not say that rates it above the 3GS. Don't get fooled the megapixel myth. I think pictures on both cameras were of similar quality -- except when the N1 would get things out of focus. The flash on the N1 seems useful however.

So there it is. If I lost both of my phones and AT&T cancelled my contract, it would actually be a tough decision between the 3GS and the N1. I would go with the 3GS because of the calendar issue and its big advantage in number of apps/games available for it. The calendar issue seems like an easy issue to address, and the apps/games discrepancy is become less pronounced. It's not like the Android Market needs to have parity with the App Store, at least not in terms of quantity. Also my issues are far from universal. So I could definitely see a lot of people picking the N1 over the 3GS.

The iPad: A Brave New World

Has any piece of technology ever been more anticipated than the iPad? Has anything created as many extreme reactions? Has anything generated as much immediate ridicule?

Anyways, there are a lot of opinions out there, including some very good ones. I really like Alex Payne's take on the iPad. His post led me to Daniel Tenner's analysis, which is probably the closest thing I have seen to my own opinion. While we are at it, I think Timothy Blee's case against the iPad is definitely worth a read. Adobe's Mike Chambers has a very predictable reaction, but is still worth a read as well. But who cares about those guys, you're reading this because you want my brilliant insights, right?

I think the iPad is Apple's boldest move since the 80's. In the 80's, they liberally borrowed a lot of existing ideas and added some of their own twists to reinvent personal computing. It was no longer the command line driven process. There no need for Unix or DOS. The iPad is equally ambitious. 

Over the last two years, Apple has had a chance to experiment with a new kind of computing. The iPhone is accurately described as very capable personal computer that fits in your pocket. With it, Apple changed the way a user interacted with their computer. There was no more mouse, yet the keyboard was rarely needed. There was very little physical media to interact with, i.e. no floppy disks, CDs, or DVDs, only a very occasional physical linking to a desktop/laptop. Apple gave software developers a much more limited environment than they had ever had to deal with. Compared to desktop computer software, iPhone software is amazingly limited in how it can interact with the system (the iPhone). The distribution model was also controlled in a way rarely seen before. Apple had to approve your applications before they could be sold to users.

Yet even in this most restricted of environments, software developers have flourished. Why? As Joe Hewitt wisely points out, many of these restrictions really are for the best. I can install any app from the App Store, and I don't have to worry about it harming my iPhone. This is in stark contrast to desktop software, particularly the ubiquitous world of Windows. 

But wait, it's worse. At least if you're a software developer. The Draconian distribution machine that is the App Store and its approval process is a key part of this peace of mind given to iPhone users. It also makes their lives much easier. Just go to the App Store, and you can find whatever kind of software that you are looking for. Or just browse the games, or maybe lifestyle or social media apps, and you can find something interesting. Reviews are built right into the system. It could get better, and Apple is working on this with their Genius system, but it beats the heck out of anything else out there. 

The iPad takes this new model of personal computing and packages it into a personal computer. The iPad does not invent a new category. Just like the iPhone, it is going after an existing huge category, only this time it is the desktop/laptop category. Yes, this happens to be a category that Apple already plays in and is having a lot of success in. That is part of why this is so bold. The iPad is not going after the statistically insignificant category known as netbooks. Apple does not aim so low. Instead it is going after every person who owns a laptop.

Perhaps you think I am overstating, that Apple is not as bold as I claim. There were four new apps that Apple unveiled along with the iPad. One of those is iBooks, and I won't bother too much with that. The other three were Pages, Numbers, and Keynote. This is Apple's office suite. These are competitors of Microsoft's Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Now you can read many Office documents on an iPhone, but it is largely a read-only experience. These are not read programs. These are content creation programs. If you think about the history of Apple, could there be anything more symbolic than them shipping a word processing application with their new computing platform? 

I bought my wife a laptop a couple of years ago. It was essential for her to have Office on it. Word processors and spreadsheets are the meat and potatoes of desktop software. Of course she uses photo management and media management software too. All of these things are available on the iPad. The truth is she could easily replace her laptop with an iPad. It would be easier for her to carry around, have better battery life, and the 3G would work even if she was visiting her mother (who does not have wi-fi.)

Think about all of the people whose job involves a computer. For most people, could they not do their job on an iPad? Wouldn't it even be easier in many cases? Of course it would be more convenient, again because of the size, battery life, and always being connected.

Now there will definitely be some people who cannot use an iPad for their job. I am one of those people. Maybe you could write code on it ok, but compile/debug? Don't think so. Designers who do intense things with Illustrator, Photoshop, etc. will need more than an iPad, too. Ditto for scientists, engineers, etc. There are more groups as well, but it's still probably a minority. For all of those people who have to do a lot of typing? Well there's a dock for that. You get the idea.

Apple is offering a new model for personal computing. They are attempting to disrupt an entire industry, once again. The iPad is not a big iPod Touch or a big iPhone. It is not Apple's attempt to go after Amazon's Kindle. It is an attempt to dominate in a way that even Microsoft never got close to. Apple is going to every person who owns a computer and saying "look there's another, better, easier way." I think it's an all-or-nothing bet. The iPad is either a world changer, or a total failure. Which one will it be? 

Hacking My iPhone 3GS

If you are a long time reader of this blog ... nevermind there are no long time readers of this blog. Anyways as it turns out, two of my most popular blog posts of all time have been about hacking my phone. First there was Hacking my A950. That was about enabling MP3 playback and Bluetooth dial-up-networking on my Samsung A950. A year later came Hacking my 8830. This was mostly about useful tips for the Blackberry, along with a failed attempt to get GPS working (thanks for nothing Verizon.)

Two weeks ago I deactivated my Blackberry after two years of excellent service, and bought the new iPhone 3GS. I have been working on iPhone apps (one app in particular) so this made sense. Oh and the iPhone is the best phone ever. The Exchange support is so good on it that it is an easy move for a Blackberry user, but I digress. Back to the point. As a rite of passage, it was time for me to write about hacking the iPhone.

There are two things that I will point you would-be hackers to. First up is ringtones. Just like with the Blackberry, there is no need to spend any money on ringtones for the iPhone. There are a few ways to create ringtones on the iPhone. This is the guide that got me going. If you don't want to read it (you should) the idea is simple. A ringtone for the iPhone is an AAC encoded, .m4r file. So clip a song down to less 40 seconds, convert it to AAC, and rename the file from .m4a to .m4r. It is a painless process. I created a half dozen or so ringtones in a few minutes, mostly Girl Talk songs...

The other tip is also pretty well known. The iPhone OS 3. 0 has support for tethering and MMS, but neither is currently supported by AT&T. However you can hack this at the software level, and pwn AT&T. Here is the best guide I have found for this. What is great is that it only involves going to a web page in Mobile Safari, and it is easy to undo. For me it works great for tethering, but MMS did not get enabled.

iPhoto Faces Awesomeness

I've been using iLife '09 since it came out. I've made heavy use of its integration with Facebook and Flickr. One of the features that I've wanted to experiment with is Faces. This is face recognition technology. Using it is simple. You have to train it by taking a few pictures and telling iPhoto who are in those pictures. This is very easy. Look at a picture, click on the "Name" button, and iPhoto immediately recognizes the faces in the picture. There is a little text box next to each face, and you just type in the name. It remembers previously typed names or names from your Address Book, so there is usually very little typing to do. Obviously the more training you do, the better the results that iPhoto will have.

Despite this being so easy, I've been too lazy to use this. Until now. I was importing a handful of pictures taken with my iPhone. These were mostly pictures of my boys playing and being goofy. Here is a picture of Michael, Jr. (age 5):

And here is a picture of Raymond (age 3):

Now the reason that I show the pictures and mention the ages will become obvious momentarily. Back to the narrative. After tagging my kids in these pictures, iPhoto was ready to show me other pictures with the same faces. The very first one that it showed me nearly made me cry:

Yes that is my oldest son. He was just six months old in that picture. The pics I used to train iPhoto were all very recent. It was really cool that it recognized his face, even though he certainly looks a lot different today than he did four and a half years ago. Similarly, iPhoto served up this gem for Raymond:

Mobile OS Wars: Upgrades

Right now Apple and Google are in the midst of major upgrades to the OS on their devices, the iPhone OS and Android. If you develop for these platforms, you need to make sure your applications have no issues on the new versions. The simplest first step is to upgrade your SDK and development tools, and re-compile. Neither OS updates remove (any?) APIs, they mostly add to them. So it is unlikely your application does not compile under the new SDK. You can also launch your application in the emulator provided with each SDK. Now there is a little more chance of a bug popping up.

Still, a lot of upgrades are only found when you run your app on the new OS on a device. Why is this? A lot of the bugs that come from these upgrades are memory management issues, multi-threaded issues, or networking issues. When you run on an emulator, many of these issues just never happen (memory/networking) or behave differently because of the difference in processor seed (multi-threading.) So you need to upgrade the OS on your test devices (you do have dedicated testing devices, not just your personal phone, right?)

Upgrading your iPhone OS is really quite easy. You download the new OS. You right-click on the "restore" button in iTunes, or you can use the Organizer in XCode. Either way, device is wiped, the new OS is installed, and then your data is reloaded from a backup (iTunes backs everything up automatically.) The only gotcha is that apps that weren't installed via iTunes, i.e. apps you developed and are testing, do not get backed up, so they disappear. This should not be a problem since you have the source code for such apps. However, in order to re-install from source code via XCode, your SDK must also be upgraded to the same version as the OS. Again, you probably upgraded the SDK first anyways, so no big deal.

Upgrading your Android device is not quite as straightforward. There are a lot of steps, so I won't repeat them all here. The upgrade is fundamentally different in that you replace parts of the system in place. Your device is not wiped. This is necessary because there is no automatic backup process on Android phones. On the iPhone, this is handled by iTunes. There is no analogous desktop software companion to Android. This is viewed by many as a pro, but in this case I consider it a con. Anyways, there are a lot of steps, but it is very smooth and very fast. In fact, it is much faster than the iPhone process because there is no delete/restore going on.

All of this points to some of the core differences between these platforms. Others have pointed to the Mac vs. PC scenario of the 80's as being similar to the iPhone vs. Android scenario of today. Apple went with a closed platform where they controlled everything, vs. the "open" combination of Windows plus Intel. Any manufacturer could slap an Intel chip in their machine and install Windows on there, with full freedom on what else went in to the machine. Same thing is going on here. Apple controls the OS and hardware of the iPhone. Android can go on many different types of hardware. Right now this is not making a big difference, since there are not yet a lot of Android phones. However, it seems likely that at some point you will see Android phones that are free with a contract or maybe $100 from Metro PCS or even pay-as-you-go carriers.

Ok so that was a tangent, what does it have to do with this issue? Well, by having a closed system, Apple can provide a lot of advantages. Upgrading is simple. For consumers, you get the upgrade from Apple directly. You might notice the Android link above is from HTC, the maker of the first Android phone. Most consumers will get the upgrade from T-Mobile. Notice that Google is not even in this conversation, even though not only do they make the OS, but it is open source. In addition, many developers I know are dreading the proliferation of Android. Currently development for Android is nice, in fact a lot nicer than for iPhone. The development/emulator scenarios are equivalent, but debugging on devices is much simpler. However, when more variants of Android appear, and those variants are more specific to the devices they run on, then right once / run anywhere fades away. Again, notice that the OS upgrade came from the handset manufacturer already. That is very significant.

iPhone OS/SDK 3.0: Remote Notifications

If you are an iPhone developer, you were probably excited about Apple revealing a beta of OS 3.0 and the corresponding beta of SDK 3.0. There was a lot of excitement and speculation over what new features would be available in 3.0. One of the most anticipated ones was Push Notifications. Everyone thought that Apple would release this since they had promised it in the past, and they were right. So how do you use it? That was the question I asked myself, and here is what I have been able to figure out so far from the documentation.

The first thing you need to do is have your application call the new API registerForRemoteNotifications. This a new API on UIApplication. So when you create your app's delegate (i.e. the class that conforms to the UIApplicationDelegate protocol) you will probably want to invoke registerForRemoteNotifications in your applicationDidFinishLaunching: method (or in the application:didFinishLaunchingWithOptions: method, more on that later.) This will cause the UIApplication to send a request to the Apple Push Service (APS) and it will respond with a token.

When the UIApplication receives that token, it will invoke your app delegate's application:didRegisterForRemoteNotificationsWithDeviceToken:. As the name implies, you get a token as one of the parameters to this method. Your application needs to send this token to your servers. When your server then determines that a notification needs to be sent to a particular device, it will send a request to APS using this token. That is how APS knows where to send the notification to, and also what application the notification is being sent to. It looks like you are pretty limited in what you send to APS, i.e. you do not send (much) application data to APS. You just send it a message saying "hey tell this device that I've got something waiting for it." APS will send this to the user's device.

So the notification arrives, and now there are two possibilities. First, the user is still using your application. In that case, your app delegate is once again invoked, this time it's application:didReceiveRemoteNotification: method is invoked. This lets your app know that you need to phone home to your server and go get the new yummy data.

If your application was no longer active, i.e. that pesky user quit it so they could do something else, then the user will receive a pop-up asking them if they want to launch your application because a notification has been sent to it. If they choose to do so, then when you application launches the app delegate's application:didFinishLaunchingWithOptions: method will be invoked.

In both cases, the delegate will receive an NSDictionary representing the notification as the last parameter passed in. Again, it appears that what can be in this dictionary is pretty limited as its max size is 256 bytes. You can put some custom stuff, like maybe some enum value to represent what kind of notification it is, or an ID to use as a request to get more information.

That is pretty much it! It is fairly straightforward, pretty close to how many people imagined this would work.

Function Templates in Objective-C

If you're lucky enough to experience my TwitStream lately, then you might have noticed that I've been doing some iPhone development. That means I'm working in Objective-C. It's reflection capabilities are interesting, to say the least. Low overhead reflection does allow for some code templates. Take a look at this.

double MeanTime(SEL selector){
 NSArray *dataList = GetDataList();
 if ([dataList count] == 0){
  return 0.0;
 }
 double cnt = (double) [dataList count];
 double sum = 0.0;
 for (StatData *data in dataList){
  if ([data respondsToSelector:selector]){
   sum += [[data performSelector: selector] doubleValue];
  }
 }
 return sum/cnt; 
}
double MeanDownloadTime(void){
 return MeanTime(@selector(downloadTime));
}
double MeanProcessingTime(void){
 return MeanTime(@selector(processingTime));
}
double MeanTotalTime(void){
 return MeanTime(@selector(totalTime));
} 

Yeah, I know, what's up with the C-style functions? This was inherited code where I was only changing the implementation of those functions, and I didn't feel like wrapping them in a nice pretty class just for the blog. The StatData class has several synthesized properties, including downloadTime, processingTime, and totalTime. I needed three functions that iterated over a list of StatData and computed the average of these properties. Objective-C's selectors provided a nice way to do this. I have to admit that I tried to over-think this at first, and tried using @selector(getDownloadTime:) at first, instead of @selector(downloadTime). I thought that this would be the method name that the compiler would synthesize from the property. This didn't even work, but the more obvious, straightforward usage did.

iPhone 3G

It was fun to watch the WWDC keynote today on MacRumors. It was even more fun to watch things on summize as Twitter held up admirably during the keynote. I was impressed with the new iPhone. I really like the white version, as it seems like a nod to the original iPod to me (an owner of the original.) It made me think, should I get rid of my Blackberry 8830 and switch to the iPhone?

iPhone 3G

• The screen on the iPhone is awesome. The Blackberry's is nice, but it's not really close.
• Much better for listening to music. Blackberry is functional for this, but hardly elegant.
• Web browsing is much better on the iPhone, especiall now that it has a 3G network. The Blackberry browser is good, and Opera works great, but mobile Safari is very nice.
• The iPhone has a camera. I miss having a camera, even if the iPhone's is crummy (as are most phone cameras.)
• The iPhone has wi-fi. I often use my Blackberry's network access in places that have free wi-fi.

Blackberry 8830

• I have tried the iPhone keyboard, and greatly prefer my Blackberry's keyboard. This one is not even close.
• The GMail app for the Blackberry is excellent. On the iPhone you can use the GMail as IMAP, but that is not as good, not even close.
  
• Of course the Blackberry receives my email and calendar from my work's Exchange servers. This is the main appeal of Blackberry for many. If I had an iPhone, I think I would have to run a client from my desktop computer at work. Co-workers have told me that this is a problem because our desktop computers run the 64-bit version of Windows 2003, and a lot of Apple's software has issues with this.
• Google Maps is also very nice on the Blackberry, even if Verizon screws us over and doesn't let it access the device's GPS. Then again I have used GPS on phones (both mine and my wife's) and it is useful, but definitely not a replacement car GPS. Anyways, Google Maps on the Blackberry seems a lot better than accessing the web application on the iPhone.

Hmm, it doesn't seem like a slam dunk either way. It seems like the calendar/email push advantage may be negated, depending on the OS issues. If Google made iPhone apps, especially for GMail, it would almost clinch it for me. I've used GMail as IMAP provider with Mail.app and did not like it very much. Blackberry GMail is a killer app for me. Given Google's investment in Android, it seems unlikely that they will create a similar app for the iPhone... I think I will stick with my Blackberry.

Some Love for Microsoft

I got Office 2008 for my MacBook, and I have to say, I love it so far. Actually, I should say that I love PowerPoint and Entourage, as those are the two programs I have used a lot so far.

PowerPoint -- This is mostly a case of lowered expectations... A lot of the older bugs I used to experience with PowerPoint have been fixed. It works better (perfectly) with some of the templates I use from work, especially those that involve integration with Excel. This should have been the case with Excel 2004, but it was not (the templates were made with Excel 2003 on Windows of course.) This fact alone gives PowerPoint 2008 a huge edge (for me) over Keynote or NeoOffice. I might still use Keynote if I was making a presentation for a conference or the like, but when doing "work", PowerPoint wins easily.

Entourage -- This is the really big winner. This beast works flawlessly with Exchange. I put in my email address and said "use Exchange". It prompted me for my domain and password, and everything just worked. All of the features of Outlook that I use work fine. Many of the features are much better on Entourage. Case in point, auto-complete on addresses. Our Exchange server stores names like Galpin, Michael. So if you start to type "Michael" then "Galpin, Michael" will be a hit on the "M" but not on "Mi" etc. Entourage 2008 is definitely smarter than Outlook 2003 (haven't used Outlook 2007 enough to say about it.)

I generally use Word and Excel more than PowerPoint and Entourage/Outlook, so I will definitely be giving them a workout soon. Finally, as for the UI... I like the switch to the metal look that is the de facto on OSX now. I actually like the ribbon in Office 2007, so I was a little disappointed that it was not used. However, there is very nice consistency between Office 2008 and Office 2004.

So kudos to Microsoft for making a great product for the Mac.

The Joys of Parallels

Mo' Ram

I've been working some lately with DB2. The worst thing about DB2, at least for a Mac-totin' developer, is that DB2 is not (yet) available for OSX. So what to do? I already had Vista installed on my MacBook via Boot Camp. So I installed DB2 on there and ... developed under Windows. Ugh. Running DB2 and Eclipse at the same time often resulted in not only a slow computer, but Eclipse stack overflows and out of memory errors. Funny how I never had such problems on OSX.

Once that project was done, I decided to upgrade the memory on my MacBook. The max it handles is 2GB (I had the 1 GB that was stock) so I went with that. So where to get the 2GB? Well there is always Apple @$300. Ouch. A better choice is Newegg, of course. For a change though, I found an equally good deal at Fry's, just up the road from my office. 2x1GB sticks of Patriot RAM for $65.

Now it was time to install the RAM. I am always quick to tell people that I am a software guy, not a hardware guy. However, Apple makes it really easy to install RAM on the MacBook. It took me like ten, maybe fifteen minutes total to upgrade the RAM. It could not have gone smoother.

The extra memory has inspired me to give Parallels a try. So far the results are mixed. Every time it launches, I get a message form Parallels saying it is installing Parallels Tools. Then Windows crashes (blue screen.) It reboots and seems ok, but it's still aggravating that it does this every time...

Mac Java 6

There's been a lot of developers upset that Leopard does not include Java 6. Does this make the Mac a poor choice of Java developers? No, it doesn't, not yet at least.

First of all, I fully expect that Apple will release an update to Leopard that will include Java 6 before the end of the year. But it doesn't matter too much because Java 6 was mostly a performance release for Sun. There's some nice things in the Swing implementation included on Hot Spot. Neither one of these things is even relevant for Apple. There are some language features (debugging, StAX parser) but these are pretty minor.

So to me it doesn't matter too much that there is no Java 6 for the Mac. Oh, but there actually is, or was. I personally had some problems with it, so I wasn't too surprised that it's no longer available from Apple.

Things only become problematic if Apple takes a long time to support Java 7 when it comes out, especially if you assume there will be a lot of language changes in Java 7. If that happens, then it could be conceivable that developers won't be able to use OSX. Others have pointed out that a major litmus is Eclipse. If Eclipse will run on OSX, then all is well. Eclipse 3.3 was released just a few months ago and was the first version of Eclipse to require Java 5... Eclipse is obviously important for Java developers, but also for Flex developers and even PHP developers.

Leopard

Am I going to buy Leopard? Take a look at this desktop...



Yep, I think I need stacks.