GigaOM » Apple

Flipboard adds 1M subscribers: Good lesson for iPad apps

Darrell Etherington — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:36:36 +0000

For Flipboard, making the move to the smaller screen of the iPhone seems to have been a risk well worth taking; the personalized news delivery service has already added 1 million new users since the iPhone app launched (via TechCrunch). Since its launch in July of 2010, the iPad app had accumulated over 4 million users, so 1 million in a single week is a significant quickening of pace — a trend that other iOS news and periodical app publishers would do well to note.

Engagement is also up significantly thanks to the iPhone version. In terms of usage, Flipboard went from around 650 million “flips” (page turns in the Flipboard app) per month to a pace of about 2 billion per month post-iPhone launch. The iPhone version requires users to flip more often to view the same amount of content, but that’s still a remarkable improvement.

Obviously, this is great news for Flipboard’s reach, but it has implications for the larger iPad app market, too. Specifically, branching out may be a good idea even for apps which traditionally depend on the larger screen of the iPad to deliver their content.

Flipboard isn’t the only app out there branching out from iPad roots to iPhone implementations. News app and competitor Zite also released an iPhone-formatted incarnation last week, and streaming video apps like those for networks CityTV and Global in Canada recently introduced updates to their apps that make them universal, or usable across any iOS devices.

It’s a move that makes sense for companies who want to increase the adoption rate of their software product. Apple has previously stated that there were as many as 100 million iPhone and iPod touch users worldwide; that’s more than double Apple’s total iPad sales to date, let alone the device’s active users. It makes sense that iPhone apps reach a broader potential audience as a result.

Flipboard’s success is not just the result of repackaging an iPad app for a smaller screen. Instead, the app’s designers re-imagined it in a way that totally makes sense for the iPhone. That’s no small feat for an app like Flipboard, that takes its cues from magazines and definitely benefits from more available screen real estate. If publishers like those offering apps through Apple’s Newsstand want to reap the benefits of also offering iPhone products, they have to likewise bring a tailored experience, instead of just a shoehorned app that leaves you missing the iPad. Sadly that’s exactly how I’d describe many current iPhone Newsstand titles.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Somebody’s watching me: iOS remote cameras compared

Dave Greenbaum — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:48:51 +0000

Many folks traveling this holiday season will want to keep track of their home and belongings while away. I just want to make sure I didn’t leave the coffeemaker on! Previous generations of home surveillance systems required setup via a computer (usually a PC) and had a high cost of entry (I currently use a Logitech 750i), but a new crop of low-cost Internet-enabled cameras promise “post-PC” easy setup as well as iOS integration. I’ve tested two new players in this area: the VueZone $199 and iZon $129.

Setup

Setting up both devices requires no modifications to your router, and the should simply hop onto an existing network. VueZone uses a base station connected to your wired network and a series of battery-powered camera satellites that autoconfigure themselves. Add the base station, turn on the cameras and visit a website to check the video feed. The whole thing takes about five minutes.

iZon is a bit more complex. Setup is 100-percent iOS-based. The iZon camera is USB-powered and must be near a power outlet. On first install, it creates an ad-hoc wireless network you must connect to with your iOS device. You need to install the free iOS app to configure and view video. Once connected via its own ad-hoc network, you tell the iZon how to hop on your main wireless network, and you should be good to go.

Unfortunately, I ran into numerous glitches. The product support says the device works best with a WPA2 network, and indeed, it was unreliable on WPA. The app also was a bit unstable, and when it wouldn’t accept my password, there was no way to reset it. The setup process took about 30 minutes start to finish, though that includes resetting the network once I changed the password. The second time around, it only took me about 15 minutes.

Viewing and recording

The VueZone allows for remote viewing via their website, while the iZon allows viewing only via the iOS app and only for five minutes at a time. Both devices allow for recording upon the detection of motion, but with VueZone saving those recordings requires a $49.95 per year Premium account. iZon will directly upload private videos to YouTube. Personally, I liked the ability to view video via a website, but the additional yearly cost and initial and ongoing financial outlay for the VueZone may not be worth it depending on your needs.

Comparing the video between the two, the iZon displayed much higher quality in normal conditions. The VueZone didn’t have an infrared function, but it did have a low-light mode that worked well at night. iZon’s light settings weren’t modifiable. One key difference between the iZon and VueZone is the iZon can capture audio as well as video, while VueZone cannot. Both support activation upon motion, as mentioned, but since the iZon supports audio, it can also start recording if it hears loud noises. The motion detection in the VueZone was all or nothing: Either it detected motion in the area, or it didn’t. The iZon allowed for distinct zones and levels of audio and visual sensitivity (thought it didn’t always register movement or noise in testing even when there was some present).

Configuring the iZon via the iPhone app was really a pain. The settings didn’t always take, and the app constantly crashed. Changes to the device must be made while you are on the same wireless network as the iZon while the VueZone allows configuration from anywhere. Support for the iZon was excellent, however, and as an iOS based product, updates to increase reliability are likely.

Verdict

Which is better? If you’d like to view an area where you don’t have an electrical outlet, then VueZone is clearly the way to go. Neither camera is suited for outdoor usage, though the VueZone will go in more places since it doesn’t have to be tethered to power, although this does mean you have to take batteries into account. If that isn’t a problem, the iZon’s lower entry price and lack of ongoing cost might be the way to go, despite its more difficult configuration. The fact it doesn’t require a yearly subscription to auto-record motion is a big plus. I also liked iZone’s ability to customize the sensitivity of the audio and video recording zones.

A bonus (and for some killer) feature of the iZon app is that it will give you push notifications if there is an audio or video event the camera notices. I knew precisely and almost instantly if someone triggered the camera. The VueZone would simply record a motion event but wouldn’t notify you. When used for security and piece of mind while away, the iZon was definitely superior. I was a little disappointed in the reliability of the iZon, but support indicated patches were on the way that should fix some of the problems I faced.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

The living room PC is here: the iPad

Erica Ogg — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:32:30 +0000

While Apple’s iPad falls into the mobile device category, “mobile” doesn’t necessarily mean it’s being used while on the go. In fact, new research conducted by McKinsey & Company found that most iPads never leave their owners’ houses, and are used most in the living room, for many of the things previously done on a home computer. Though Microsoft, Google, Sony and others through the years have been vying to be the “living room PC,” Apple, at least right now, is winning that battle.

McKinsey came up with this data during a recent survey of 15,000 consumers in 15 countries, undertaken to create a profile of what the firm calls the “iConsumer.” Bertil Chappuis, principal for McKinsey & Company’s Silicon Valley office, presented his findings on Tuesday morning at Forbes’ Techonomy conference in Tuscon, Ariz.

Apple has sold about 40 million iPads since 2010. Of the iPad owners McKinsey surveyed, it found that 62 percent never take their iPad outside their house. In other words, it’s being used as just another home computer, like a replacement laptop for tasks such as watching video or browsing the web. While the iPad is “finding its way into places in the home we didn’t have computing in the past,” the living room is where people use their iPad: 70 percent of usage takes place there.

Said Chappuis:

“The PC tried to get into the living room for 20 years. Well, it’s here.”

The side effect of iPad owners finding their iPad good enough for certain computing tasks at home is a delay in plans to buy a new PC. You can see that in the slowly declining PC sales over the last few quarters: By the end of this year, IDC expects worldwide PC shipments will have grown a measly 2.8 percent compared to 2010.

“Folks who have tablets are significantly delaying their purchases of PCs,” said Chappuis. “They’re not doing away with it — [the PC] has a role to play for a long time — but that delay of a purchase is having a very direct impact on unit volumes in the PC ecosystem.”

To watch the full presentation, see the clip below:

Watch live streaming video from techonomy at livestream.com

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

iPads the gateway drug for college data usage

Darrell Etherington — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:57:17 +0000

Data is in demand on college campuses, and it’s putting a strain on shared school networks. The iPad is partly to blame, according to University of Missouri-Columbia IT director Terry Robb (via The St. Louis Post-Dispatch), but it’s mostly acting as a gateway drug for the real culprit: online video.

The report from the Dispatch describes slow or severed connections that students at the University of Missouri-Columbia experienced when coming back to classes this September. At that U.S. school, the number of wireless devices active on the network at any one time maxed out at 900 last year. Already in 2011, it’s hit 8,000 devices actively using the school’s connection at once.

The iPad is the biggest change in terms of the mobile connected-device landscape in recent years. Apple’s tablet still owns the market for that category of device, and it’s an optimal device for consuming streaming video, since it features a much larger display than smartphones, but is much simpler to turn on and hold than a cumbersome notebook computer. The iPad alone was already equal to Android’s share of online mobile video consumption back in May, and Apple’s other devices occupy a huge slice of the pie, too.

While Apple’s iPad may have multiplied the problem, iPhones and other smartphones have already significantly affected demand for Wi-Fi on college campuses. Students now expect strong on-campus Wi-Fi as one of the perks associated with going to school–it factors into their feeling of satisfaction over what they pay in tuition. Washington University’s Andrew Orstadt, who is the associated vice chancellor for information services and technology, says the demand for high capacity should be met within reason, no matter what students end up using the bandwidth for. He told the Dispatch that since students live on campus, schools should “make sure they are doing what they want to do” with their recreation time, too.

The challenge now is for schools to be able to meet the growing demand for reliable Wi-Fi with a growing population of connected devices with increasing technical specs. Next-gen devices will be able to stream higher-quality video to and from the web, and do more than one task at a time without as much of a cost on battery life or processor power. Students two years from now could likely be streaming one full HD video to their tablets while downloading another two equally high-bandwidth files in the background.

Apple’s devices may only be fuel for the fire that is demand for college Wi-Fi Internet access, but the iPad’s success and the rise in connected-device usage seen by the University of Missouri-Columbia in the wake of its introduction is a good sign that as far as fuel goes, it’s the rocket-powering kind.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Color changes gears, becomes Facebook photo/video app

Darrell Etherington — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:26:50 +0000

Some might call it a pivot, but the decision to change iPhone app Color from its own contained social network into a photo/video extension of Facebook (via NYT) is more like a last-chance effort at achieving relevance. The new Color will plug into a users’ Facebook accounts, neatly organizing their Facebook photos and allowing them to “visit” and live stream one another.

Color will add some useful features that make it more than just another Facebook photo browser. It lets you Like and comment on photos, just like you can on the web, but it also introduces the ability to create and share group photo albums with multiple people, which is more than Facebook currently offers through its own service.

It also lets you view your Feed and the new Timeline history of activity as pure photo streams. And there’s the “visit” feature, which lets you request access to live-streaming video from either friends, or anyone who has their permission settings arranged such that you can see their content.

You can request visits whenever you want; someone doesn’t have to be online. If they aren’t, they’ll receive a push notification from Color on their iPhone (or Android device). Live streams initiated through the app can be viewed either through the app itself, or on the Facebook website. It sounds a little bit like the new approach Google is taking with its ability to broadcast through Hangouts. It’s not exactly video chat, and it’s more interactive than straightforward video posting. It doesn’t currently allow video recording or audio, but that could come in future versions.

Color’s problem was that it was too ephemeral and too small. It couldn’t muster a large enough group, even at major events, to be relevant to any users. Facebook’s network means it shouldn’t have a problem when it comes to users. But its differentiating factors still depend on being in the moment; without the real-time elements of visiting and live streaming, it seems like little more than a Facebook photo browser.

The new version of Color will remain in private beta for a while longer, and then move into a larger, invite-based testing phase. The broadcast angle is interesting, and could make Color a very useful Facebook feature. We’ll see if Color can thrive using the network of another, where it failed trying to curate its own.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Wozniak originally skeptical of Jobs’ ability to turn Apple around

Darrell Etherington — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:57:38 +0000

Apple co-founders Steve Wozniak and Ron Wayne spoke to Bloomberg’s Emily Chang in a combined video interview on Bloomberg TV late Thursday, prompted by Steve Jobs’ departure as CEO, and the result provides some insight into how Apple got started, Wozniak’s thoughts on the turnaround, and where the company might be headed next.

I was especially interested to learn that though Wozniak had confidence in Apple’s ability to rise out of the depths in 1996 when Jobs returned to the company through the purchase of NeXT, he admitted that he was initially skeptical of how Jobs would accomplish that. He then goes on to state that Jobs’ success in doing so was due in large part to his ability “to keep secrets where you need to keep secrets” and “to make sure you’re not overbuilding a bunch of junk you can’t sell.”

It’s also interesting to see the role that Wayne played, which was explained by both in what are obviously fairly diplomatic terms. It was pretty harsh when Chang reminds Wayne that he’s “not a wealthy man” after selling his stake in Apple at a very early stage, which comes at around 6:50 mark in the interview. Take a look at the full interview below and let us know what you think.

Watch this video for free on GigaOM

Video courtesy of Boomberg Televison.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Flash analysis: Steve Jobs

iPhone SLR mount is kind of expensive, kind of awesome

Darrell Etherington — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:02:21 +0000

Is it wrong that I want this new iPhone 4 SLR mount from Photojojo so badly? The new accessory provides a simple case/adapter combo that allows you to use either Canon or Nikon lenses with your iPhone 4. It’s a bit pricey at nearly $200, but also potentially a very cool add-on for consumers looking to up their mobile photography game.

The aluminum case itself features a tripod mount and hooks for a pro camera strap, so you can wear it around your neck and take night shots like a true pro. Just think of how jealous your Instagram followers will be when you snap some quality wildlife pics with your $3,000 telephoto lens. You might doubt the ability of the iPhone 4′s 5-megapixel camera to deliver the goods, even with your expensive SLR lens collection attached, but the Photojojo demo pics are actually pretty impressive.

As with previous prototypes, this solution runs up against the fact that you can’t replicate an internal mirror system with the iPhone’s built-in camera. However, it should be better than just your iPhone 4 acting on its own, especially when you’re trying to use digital zoom to capture a far-away subject. You could probably also shoot some pretty cool HD video with this lens adapter.

As of this writing, the check-out process is down but a fix is in the works, according to a Photojojo.com service rep. Maybe it couldn’t keep up with overwhelming demand for the iPhone 4 SLR mount. Anyone thinking about a purchase? I have a bag full of seldom used Canon-mount lenses that suggest it might be worth considering.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Apple posts a Final Cut Pro X FAQ, but why did it take so long?

Darrell Etherington — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:53:39 +0000

Apple has apparently decided that the poor reception of Final Cut Pro X by many professional video editors isn’t going away on its own, and has released a special FAQ page to address commonly voiced concerns about its editing software. Arguably, it’s a step Apple should have taken before the FCP X release, not once opinion is starting to galvanize against it.

As digital media consultant and Final Cut expert Larry Jordan notes, Apple botched this launch. It did so by not recognizing that change, especially major change to a platform essential to how people make a living, often isn’t welcomed with open arms. That doesn’t mean Apple should just stick with what’s comfortable and give FCP customers a slightly tweaked version of what they already had. But it does mean it should have done a better job of anticipating sore spots for pros making the move to FCP X, and provided transition aids to make those changes less jarring — like the FAQ that arrived Wednesday, for instance.

The FAQ also reveals where Apple missed the mark with FCP X, and where it still needs to address concerns. It addresses some complaints, like the ability to support multi-cam editing, XML export, and audio track exporting, by promising the features will arrive in future updates. If these are big enough pain points to address now, however, it likely means they would have been relatively easy to anticipate and prepare for prior to release.

The FAQ describes other issues as things third-party add-ons should — and will — handle. It’s true that third-party developers need some time to cope with a new release, but again, it seems like Apple missed a trick by not making better use of its closed beta program to head these complaints off by working more closely with third-party devs.

The biggest issue many editing pros will probably have with this FAQ is that Apple doesn’t plan to offer project importing from FCP 7 to FCP X. It’s the first question Apple addresses, and it’s a complaint I’ve seen often. Apple says “there is no way to ‘translate’ or bring in old projects without changing or losing data,” due to FCP X’s completely redesigned project architecture and trackless editing. This may be one of the biggest problems for editors going forward, even after other issues are addressed with updates and third-party plugins.

I still think the strength of the reaction to FCP X has a lot to do with the shock of encountering a dramatically different program than people are used to, but there’s no doubt that Apple overestimated the willingness of users to jump on board a new way of doing things. If Apple had already identified problems like multi-cam support during the limited beta, it should have delayed the FCP X release until fixes were ready. And if it didn’t, it needs to rethink how it approached pre-release testing and who was included, since it seems like it might have been an excessively approving crowd.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Isn’t it about time we did content discovery differently?

Darrell Etherington — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:10:52 +0000

Is anyone else a little tired of being pushed towards certain content because of mined personal information? It’s kind of like having that friend who resembles you a little too closely; eventually they become tiresome. Plus, there’s a fine line when it comes to personalized recommendations, which sometime WebWorkerDaily contributor Dave Clarke spelled out on Twitter earlier this morning:

That’s why I was happy to see new iOS app Video Time Machine ($0.99) take a different approach to mobile content discovery. As its name suggests, Video Time Machine allows a user to take a trip back in time, to check out audio and video clips organized by year, going all the way back to 1860, with the first sound ever recorded. It’s an app-based client for the content on YTTM.TV, an archive of videos from the past that surfaces content based on the year and content type (commercials, sports, etc.) chosen by the user.

Video Time Machine basically just pulls content from the website, and puts it in a very touch-friendly wrapper, but that’s all it took to make watching movies on my iPhone (and iPad) feel like a novel experience. Part of that is because the content I’m checking out is very rarely something I’d come across on Twitter, Facebook, or through any recommendation engines that plug into my regular daily consumption habits. I don’t want to “discover” things I already like, you see; I want to check out things I’d never come across on my own.

In a world where finding content consists mainly of services or people saying “you like this and this, so you should also like this” or “your friend likes this and you like your friend, so you should also like this,” trying out an app where the locus for what content gets surfaced exists outside of the individual doing the searching feels like a revolution. It reintroduced one key element that few recommendation engines can claim to achieve: the ability to surprise oneself. Good surprises might require a bit of input from the user along general lines, but as highly personal recommendations narrow the scope of what they’ll offer you, they also exclude a much larger cross-section of content. Striking a balance using input from the user, and criteria that are pre-selected through other means would make for more serendipitous finds.

I don’t think the appeal of Video Time Machine only works because of the type of content it offers, either. I’d love to see an app discovery tool that uses some other similar contextual criteria to group titles together, too. App releases organized by date would be cool, or by most frequently updated, or even by more irreverent coincidental similarities, like all apps that use a bird in their icon. It might not be as good at pigeonholing the average customer, but it would offer an alternative approach for users, who, like me, are tired of having their social graph mined for the purposes of being fed the same old content over and over again.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Live learning and conferences get a boost from Ustream AirPlay update

Darrell Etherington — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 19:33:47 +0000

Ustream has become a popular choice for live video streaming: People use it to broadcast live podcasts, talk shows, deluded rants, educational seminars and lectures, and even conferences. Thursday, all of that content became much more accessible thanks to an update to Ustream’s iOS application, which introduces AirPlay output support.

Now any content available to be viewed in the Ustream iPhone application can also be viewed on the big screen or a connected projector, so long as you have an Apple TV to beam content to. That means the whole office can gather around the boardroom table to view a conference taking place halfway round the world, without the need for a more complicated computer setup. Users following online learning tutorials can also watch more comfortably from any display connected to their Apple TV, which could include a hotel room television, since the Apple media streaming box is only about the size of a deck of cards.

Ustream has also become a popular site for people to use for delivering entertainment content, like the bizarre Sheen’s Korner, from actor Charlie Sheen, or smaller productions from enterprising amateurs like Nat&Marie. AirPlay support adds another way for users who are looking for alternatives to traditional cable programming to get content to their living room, without the need for expensive HTPC equipment.

The app also boasts a lot of bug fixes, according to Ustream, so hopefully that will address some of the other issues people have been reporting about an inability to load many live streams. I’m looking forward to being able to tune in to conferences without having to either be glued to the computer or hunched over my iPhone or iPad. Do you think this will have any effect on your viewing habits, educational or otherwise?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Apple continues to blur the line between pro and consumer

Darrell Etherington — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:52:58 +0000

Final Cut Pro X arrived in the App Store today, and though it’s one of the most expensive apps at $299.99, it’s also topping the Paid and Grossing app charts right now. That’s because it’s a relative bargain compared to Final Cut Pro 7, which was only available as part of the $999.99 Final Cut Studio suite. That kind of price drop will not only help encourage pro customers to upgrade, but it should also convince some pro-sumer customers to step up to the big leagues.

This is only the most recent example of Apple bringing significant price cuts to once expensive software. Mac OS X 10.0 cost $129.99, for example, while even a family pack of Snow Leopard was priced at only $49, and a single user license was just $29. Lion, which is said to be coming in July, will cost $29 for a copy that can be used on multiple Macs associated with your Apple ID. Windows still starts at $79.95 for entry-level upgrade pricing, and can cost as much as $219.99, depending on the edition.

But pricing isn’t the only difference. Windows also divides its software product offerings, making clear distinctions between tools it thinks consumers need vs those that professional users would want. Apple has always done a good job of steering clear of such defined lines, and although it does offer an OS X Server variant of its software, that product is much more clearly designed for a very specific use than Microsoft’s “professional” grade operating systems.

Apple also seems to be gaining ground in the enterprise thanks in part to its refusal to target professionals specifically. BlackBerry tried that strategy, and while it worked well for many years, mobile companies now appear to be following Apple’s lead, realizing that the new path to the enterprise is by convincing individual users of the value of your product, and not necessarily by selling to corporate IT. Apple doesn’t ignore business, but it definitely doesn’t unduly prioritize that market, as evidenced by the decision to stop selling Xserve late last year.

$300 is still a lot of money for a consumer to spend on a single application, don’t get me wrong. But Final Cut Studio once cost $1300. To say that it isn’t more likely that hobbyists or pro-sumers will drop the cash to take their craft to the next level than it was four years ago just isn’t realistic.

Some might claim that the disappearance of Final Cut Express, Apple’s mid-range offering between Final Cut Pro and iMovie actually indicates the distinction between pro and consumer applications is getting more defined. But Final Cut Express was priced at $199, just $100 shy of the new Final Cut Pro X, and it didn’t incorporate the same audio and color correction tools of the newer application, plus it carried a lot of limitations that made it pale in comparison to the full Final Cut Pro product.

And that’s the key: Apple isn’t narrowing the gap between pro and consumer by leaving out features and dumbing things down; it’s making things easier, certainly, but it’s also just making them more affordable. It’s the smart move for a workforce that is becoming more and more contract-based, where freelancers often have to source their own tools in order to impress potential employers and win contracts.

Apple is already a company that knows how to make a tool that everyone can use. Now that it’s increasingly becoming one that also knows how to make tools that everybody can afford, there are even fewer barriers to the potential heights it can reach.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

You wanted apps on your Apple TV? Apple delivers with AirPlay Mirroring

Darrell Etherington — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:31:45 +0000

Since the second-generation Apple TV was released back in September of last year, people have wondered if and when apps would arrive on the device. After all, it runs on iOS software, so the underpinnings of app support are already present. But Apple hasn’t opened up the Apple TV to third-party developers; or at least it hadn’t before it unveiled iOS 5 on Monday.

iOS 5 doesn’t bring native support for apps on the Apple TV, but it does introduce AirPlay Mirroring for the iPad 2. Mirroring is a feature that was introduced alongside the iPad 2. It allowed users to display exactly what was on their tablet on an external display, too, using the Digital AV Adapter Apple released that provides an HDMI connection for video and audio out. When it was announced, I said the mirroring ability was the iPad 2′s killer feature. That’s even more true now that Apple has promised to make the technology wireless.

I’ve had a chance to go hands-on with AirPlay Mirroring, and it works as advertised. Once you select your Apple TV as an output source in the multitasking menu bar, everything you do on your iPad will be transmitted to your Apple TV–connected display. Even in this early beta form, it works remarkably well, with very little lag time and without any interruptions in the connection during my test. It does seem to be fairly taxing on the iPad’s battery, but by no means to such an extent that it affects the usefulness of the experience.

It does require that users have both an iPad 2 and an Apple TV in order to work, however. The cost of the Digital AV Adapter from Apple’s retail store is $39, but the Apple TV is itself only $99. That’s still just shy of $100, and even basic wireless video transmitters that don’t provide any additional functionality start at around $80.

Note also that while the home screen and most apps display in the 4:3 aspect ratio of the iPad 2′s screen (or in 3:4 when viewing in portrait orientation), full-screen video outputted to the AirPlay-connected TV automatically adjusts to fill the screen if it is formatted for widescreen. Developers can also specifically tell their apps to adjust to a widescreen aspect ratio, as Firemint has done with Real Racing 2 HD, which it has announced will support HD wireless output in iOS 5.

iCloud may be hogging the tech press spotlight, but AirPlay is Apple’s big play in the living room, and it’s one of the most significant and potentially disruptive new technologies the company has introduced in a long time. iOS 4.3 brought third-party developers access to AirPlay video streaming, a major step in attracting consumer attention to the tech. Now, with AirPlay mirroring, Apple will completely change the way users and the market think about its Apple TV relaunch. With the help of Apple TV, the iPad 2, and future Apple mobile devices that support it, AirPlay Mirroring could become the Google TV that actually works for consumers, and one that users can easily take with them.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

How Apple’s Next AirPort Routers Could Make a Great CDN

Weldon Dodd — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 20:24:54 +0000

There are signs that Apple’s Time Capsule and AirPort Extreme are poised for an update, based on diminishing stock of the current models. One suggestion was that the next Time Capsule, which includes a hard drive, might download and cache software updates for iPhones and Macs on the local network. John Gruber even dared to hope that this might provide a way to get iOS firmware updates without a computer. While that’s a neat possibility, I think there’s another, more interesting one. What if that cache could be used for iCloud media streaming?

iCloud is rumored to be, among other things, a cloud-based music service that would let you stream songs, and perhaps movies or TV shows, from your collection to your iPhone over the Internet. Streaming requires buffering to avoid stuttering or pauses as you wait for content to arrive. A bigger buffer is required if you want to rewind and fast forward, or skip a chapter in a movie. While storage is somewhat limited on an iPhone (8 to 32 GB), a Time Capsule has a much larger drive — up to 2 TB. If the Time Capsule, which also acts as your Internet router, were to cache the content from iCloud, it would be like having your own Content Delivery Network (CDN) in your house to guarantee smooth streaming.

Having a local cache of content from iCloud would also make it easier to pause on one device and pick up the stream on another. Say you were listening to an album on your iPhone while working in the den. You could move to the kitchen to start making dinner, and push the stream to your Apple TV connected to the stereo in the next room. Or maybe you could push your movie streamed from the cloud from the small screen of an iOS device to your TV without skipping a beat. Ars Technica heard from a source that new AirPort hardware might run iOS, which would make this kind of thing even easier.

AirPlay would make a nice update to the AirPort Extreme as well. Adding an optical audio out to the router, like the one the Express has, wouldn’t be difficult. And while we’re on the subject of adding support for features, why not AirPrint? The current AirPort Express, Extreme and Time Capsule have USB ports to support wireless printing. Is it much of a stretch to imagine AirPrint-compatible printer sharing so that iOS devices could use any printer connected to an AirPort, even if that printer doesn’t directly support AirPrint itself?

I would love to see some updates to the AirPort Extreme and Time Capsule. And while caching software updates would be useful, caching iCloud music and video and adding support for AirPlay and AirPrint sounds a lot sexier to me. The AirPort devices haven’t seen an update since 2009, and adding CDN capabilities would certainly make for a splashy refresh. What do you think?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

When It Comes to Video, Why Is the iPhone a Second-Class Citizen?

Darrell Etherington — Thu, 19 May 2011 14:47:33 +0000

Comcast’s Xfinity TV app for iOS has been updated to allow iPhone and iPod touch users to get in on the on-demand streaming video action. Before the update arrived late Wednesday, streaming was restricted to iPad devices. The update is a welcome one, but I can’t help but wonder why the iPhone always gets treated like a second-class citizen when it comes to streaming video.

Time Warner Cable and Cablevision have yet to introduce iPhone versions of their streaming video iPad apps, and even Netflix’s iPad client predated the arrival of the iPhone version by around five months. The ABC Player tfor iPad remains restricted to that platform, and here in Toronto, where major networks CityTV and Global both offer iPad apps, only Global also offers an iPhone version of the same content-streaming software — and its introduction only happened recently, months after the iPad app went live. There are many other examples of iPad-specific video apps without iPhone counterparts, too, like HGTV.

In some ways, it makes sense. Due to its size, the iPad is a better video consumption device than the iPhone, even when one considers the iPhone 4′s Retina Display. Given the choice, I’d much rather watch video on my iPad than on my iPhone. But while I have the luxury of being able to choose, many users don’t. Estimates for active iPhones and iPod touches are somewhere between 50 and 80 million, while there are only probably about 19 million iPads active worldwide, and that’s a generous estimate based solely on reported sales. Catering only to the iPad means video apps are conceivably only reaching about one-quarter of the potential iOS audience. While the iPhone may not be as good as the iPad for mobile viewing, it’s still an attractive option to owners of that device.

Creating a universal or iPhone-specific version of an app is definitely a non-trivial undertaking, but it also isn’t an endeavor that could account for many months of delay between the release of an iPad and iPhone version on its own. There seems to be a consensus among video content providers that the iPad is for video, and the iPhone isn’t (or only sort of it, at a later date).

Even though I have both an iPhone and an iPad, it’s a priority arrangement that doesn’t make much sense to me. I am far more likely to have my iPhone when I’m on the train or otherwise mobile, and that makes it my preferred video device in many instances. It’s frustrating to know that often, the content I’d like to view is available for another, slightly larger device with the same operating system, but not for the one I have with me.

Maybe, in the case of cable companies, de-prioritizing the iPhone makes sense because the apps they create keep content in the home. But by that logic, even providing an iPad app could be considered pointless, since there are better viewing options available (i.e. the TV), and yet the apps are doing very well. In households without iPads, an iPhone app would probably do equally well.

The iPad is newer, more exciting, and arguably better suited to video than either the iPhone or the iPod touch, but for the vast majority of iPhone owners who don’t have an option, platform limits for iOS video apps are a considerable drag. Content providers would do well to consider a reversal of the current paradigm and target the largest audience first, if they want to stand out from the crowd.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Quick Fix: MobileMe Gallery Video on Apple TV

Charles Jade — Tue, 10 May 2011 21:32:28 +0000

Use just a MobileMe name to add an account to the Apple TV

For Apple TV owners that also subscribe to MobileMe, Gallery is an underrated feature. By uploading pictures and video on the go, there’s no need to sync an iPhone or camera with iPhoto at home before enjoying content on a television. MobileMe Gallery and the Apple TV just work, at least most of the time.

After upgrading my broadband service, I had to reset the Apple TV to get it on the network, after which I logged on to MobileMe without issue. After looking at some pictures from a day trip, I tried viewing some video. Instead of a home movie, I saw a dialog box that said, “an error occurred loading this content. Try again later.” I did, many times, always getting the same error. While it’s important to remember that video for the Apple TV must be H.264 or MPEG-4, this was video recorded with an iPhone and uploaded to MobileMe.

At first, I thought the problem might be with MobileMe, but it turned out to be user error, though I think Apple shares a little blame. When adding the MobileMe account to the Apple TV, I inadvertently used my MobileMe e-mail address, not just the user name. Nonetheless, it was accepted, and Gallery photos worked fine, but not video. Removing and re-adding the account with just the user name solved this odd problem, and should work for anyone else experiencing the same curious issue.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

AVPlayerHD Unlocks the Power of Apple’s Dual-Core A5 for HD Video

Darrell Etherington — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:23:54 +0000

Support for non-native video formats on the iPad and iPhone has been somewhat of an issue since the introduction of both devices. Users with existing libraries that work with their televisions or other streaming devices often have to spend a lot of time converting their content to formats that will work on iOS devices. But Apple started letting third-party apps that play files like DivX-encoded AVIs into the App Store not too long ago, and one of those, AVPlayerHD, got an update this week that makes it pretty much perfect.

AVPlayerHD($2.99), like the now-removed VLC for iPad and a number of other video player apps, allows you to sideload your own movie files using iTunes’ File Sharing feature for iOS devices, or you can use your browser to transfer files over Wi-Fi from your computer to your iPad. The app supports XVID/DivX files, AVI, WMV and MKV files, and can even use external subtitle files in SMI, SRT, TXT and other formats.

It also offers a number of other attractive features, like support for TV out, AirPlay, playback ratio selection, folders and playback speed control. Like most other video player apps, AVPlayerHD had trouble with HD content, though, until a recent update that introduced support for full dual-core processing on the iPad 2. Now, any HD file you want to play back (even those tricky .MKV files) play smoothly (at least the 720p backups I created did) on Apple’s latest tablet device.

The multi-format video player category has become a crowded field on the iPad, but thanks to this update, AVPlayerHD is now the most useful of the bunch, especially if you’re an iPad 2 owner. If you have a considerable existing video archive (perhaps one backed up from your physical Blu-rays or DVDs), or if you’d just rather shop somewhere other than iTunes for your video content, this app does a lot to help alleviate the incredible additional annoyance of having to reconvert those movies to play on your iOS devices. It also shows that the A5 found in the iPad 2 (and hopefully, the next iPhone, too) is more than equal to the task of doing some heavy lifting with rich media content.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.