Back at D5, Steve told Walt that the iPhone is “The best iPod we’ve ever made”, which I took on faith. At the time, I had a lowly second-generation nano (8GB black; what my friend called “the pretentious model”), which I felt was durned-near perfect in both form and function. Still, it was an exercise in discipline to wait to get an iPhone until my previous phone contract was over, which it finally was last fall. Now that I’ve had an iPhone for a few months (16GB black, natch), I disagree with what Steve said.
Did I just blaspheme? Well, let’s inject some reason. I think Steve was wrong about the iPhone being the best-ever iPod because it wasn’t an evolution in the iPod design, it was a compromise between having a portable media player and a portable communications platform (phone, email, and web browsing) in the same device. For example, the touchscreen uses the electrical conductivity of your skin, which is why you have to use your bare fingers. The nano and classic iPod have physical controls, which I find dead-simple to operate with gloved hands or in my pocket. And I didn’t have to change which application or orientation my nano was in before I started operating it; let’s be plain, Cover Flow flat out sucks.
The iPhone isn’t even the best phone I’ve had. Answering my old RAZR was simple: I just flipped up the cover with my thumb. Answering my iPhone means scrambling to get my gloves off to operate the touchscreen (I wish pressing the home button answered). Speed dialing an older phone meant holding a single button: calling someone on my iPhone can easily take 7 taps. Hanging up with a physical control felt more decisive than tapping a piece of glass and looking to make sure it worked.
All that said, there are a lot of things that the iPhone can do that no other phone or media player can do (or at least not as well, I expect). I’m definitely much more satisfied with my iPhone than my previous setup. For all the benifits—ubiquitous web access, maps & GPS, and increasingly for apps—I’m perfectly willing to make some compromises. Let’s just be clear that there are compromises.
Though my non-techie girlfriend does tell me that despite being an Apple geek, I’m a little cooler for not being totally satisfied with one of Steve’s products.
Do yourself a favor. Print this out and post it above your keyboard. My favorite is checklist item number eight:
Aside: the definition of permission marketing: Anticipated, personal and relevant messages delivered to people who actually want to get them. Nowhere does it say anything about you and your needs as a sender. Probably none of my business, but I’m just letting you know how I feel. (And how your prospects feel).
The NY Times Reader is now available for the Mac in beta form. If you can get past the fact that it’s built with Silverlight, and allow the installation of yet another crappy proprietary Microsoft technology, you will be rewarded with an enjoyable and readable electronic newspaper experience. Once installed, the underlying technology is transparent and you will forget all about it.
Reading text on the web of any significant length can be difficult, but I have been enduring the awkward experience of reading my favorite newspapers on the web for these reasons:
I could go into some detail about the flaws of the web versions of most papers, but it really just boils down to readability. It’s just easier to read the printed version. The Times Reader is a nice compromise between the printed and online versions. It has many of the interactive features I’m used to from the site: email to a friend, printer friendly versions and the ability to save the article. There is also a more logical implementation of text-size adjustment in a slider tool. But what really stands out to me (and not just because I’m a designer) is the columned layout and typography inspired by the printed version. The narrower columns of Cheltenham are much easier to read than the single-column CSS-styled text found in the web versions. And, adding to the whole newspaper-y experience, it just looks more like the Times. Also quite useful is that the program automatically syncs and keeps seven days of content for offline viewing. The interface is simple and usable. Navigating to different sections is easy with a grid of large buttons at the top.
It isn’t without its flaws, though I’ll go easy since it’s still in beta. The most glaring issue is that you can’t highlight and copy text, something present in the PC version. I have no clue why that would be so difficult to implement. The Reader includes accompanying photos with stories, but there is no video. Perhaps because the current implementation on the Times web site is with Flash.
The only thing that may keep me from using the Reader in the future? Once out of beta, access to it will be restricted to those with either a paid subscription to the Times or a Reader-only subscription for $15 a month / $170 a year. That’s a little steep for something I can get for free, even if free means tolerating those web readability issues. But if you’re a hard-core news junky or former New Yorker, it might be worth the expense.
I recently bought Madonna’s latest and greatest on itunes. Now, I’ve heard people talk about the sound quality of digital music and thought that maybe some people (i.e my husband who is a complete audiophile) were just being picky. Well, I must say that it really sounded like crap. If people like me can tell the difference in the digital file versus the CD, then I think there is a serious problem in the industry. Meanwhile, itunes has my money and I have a bunch of songs I can’t listen to.
These should come in very handy at our next business pitch:
Also, I love the Google ads on the sad trombone site. “Shop for trombones!” “Trombone sale!” I’m guessing these aren’t getting too many clicks.
So the other day I pulled out of my wallet a twenty, a ten, two fives and a couple ones. The fives had two different designs, the ten was a different color than the twenty, and the ones looked like they were relics from a bygone age. The question entered my mind, why does our money have to be so ugly?
Look, I’m not complaining about the big purple 5 on the new bill, I’m complaining that there’s no system enveloping the design of our money. It’s just a mishmash of vaguely related-looking concepts. It’s like whatever new idea they had for an individual design was added without regard to what came before or what would come next.
When the Supreme Court got kicked out of the Capitol building in 1935, they didn’t just house them in a couple of chicken coops in the back yard of the White House. No, they designed and built a suitable home for a co-equal part of the government. One that fit with the overall look and feel of other notable facades in Washington and reflected the court’s position relative to the other branches
In contrast, our current lineup of legal tender is a garish collection of individual thoughts that refuse to work in concert. A wad of our currency has all the design integrity of an airport parking lot filled with VWs, SUVs, and station wagons, all painted different colors, all from different manufacturers. Our money is supposed to be a reflection of the full faith and credit of our country. In a way, it’s the most widely distributed and most tangible reflection of our national brand. Shouldn’t it get the same level of thoughtfulness as our great buildings?
We could learn a thing or two from the British.
On page 21 of the 3/10/08 issue of Ad Age is a beige box where it is written that marketers are thinking of cutting back on direct mail in favor of increased email in the face of recession. While I, as a guy who helps create lot of email, should be seeing this as a good thing, I also see this as a potential bad thing. First, we all get too much email as it is. The email we do get should be relevant and help improve our quality of life in some way. Emails promising me a 0% APR on transferred balances isn’t either of those things. Second, approaching email as an electronic version of direct mail may be cheaper than the current tree-based method, but I don’t believe it will be better. Marketers who use it in lieu of direct mail because it’s cheaper are missing the unique attributes of the medium and, in fact, are making it less effective, not more.
We’ve had a rough couple months. Forever (I think literally), I’d wake up and the paper would be at the breakfast table. Finally, we decided the content of the paper (The Star Tribune) wasn’t worth the experience of reading it at the table.
This decision was not taken lightly. Our kids had already begun the tradition. Our oldest checked the comics and weather every morning. Currently, the paper is an amalgamation of other organizations work. As the staff continued to get trimmed at the Strib, it started feeling more like a Google homepage rather than a hometown source. So, after much discussion (no debate really), we canceled the paper.
This morning, as I sit here reading my MacBook, I found this article from the Rake (which went online only this week). You can read about the Rake ceasing its print operation in an article from The Star Tribune. The irony.
Long story short, the Rake article gives a nice picture of what they call “the online news scrum” in the Twin Cities.
This is brilliant:
Funny, but NO: Rejected Valentines
Obviously, they totally understand their brand’s relationship with its consumers and are unafraid to capitalize on it. Good for them.
This is the kind of thing for which the saying, “There, but for the grace of God, go I,” was coined:
Internet failure hits two continents – CNN
I break out into cold sweats just thinking about it.
*shudder*