Temporize -
Tags


Filed under

system

 
January 7, 2010

(Don't) Think Different

Although the web has been abuzz with rumours, musings and predictions on the Apple Tablet, I haven't really given it much thought. As Mr Jobs has said, if it's only going to be useful for surfing the Web in the bathroom, why make it. 

But this morning, something John Gruber mentioned on Daring Fireball grabbed my attention:

of course the App Store will be the only avenue for native third-party tablet apps. (“Native” as opposed to web apps, which by definition are wide open.) Whatever the problems and complaints developers have about the iPhone App Store, Apple clearly sees it as a huge win. They love the experience it provides, they love the control, and I’m sure they enjoy the 30 percent cut of the revenue.

That Apple would consider this is not all that surprising. As Gruber points out, for them it is a huge win. But for the rest of us, and the open web in general, I believe it is a huge step in the wrong direction. As we've already seen, Apple's iPhone application approval process has thrown up a number of questionable decisions over the past year, from a crippled version of Skype to a blocked Google Voice application (now being investigated by the FCC). Decisions that were made not in the interest of quality control, but in protecting Apple's (and AT&T's) control over the device and networks. 

Initially, Apple's application approval process seems like a great idea. Applications can be downloaded from a single location, without the worry of spyware or viruses. Software free of errors and bugs. Ultimately though, these decisions not only censor information, they stifle innovation. By setting up a platform where developers can't make whatever application they want, we get a situation where developers are only making applications that Apple want, as 'thinking differently' is likely to leave them out of pocket. 

The idea of that this model may be rolled out onto the PC level is quite disturbing. Apple already block 3rd party applications on the iPhone that 'duplicate' services  provided on the iphone, such as browsers, mp3 players and mail clients. All applications that could also be blocked in a Tablet OS should it follow the same model. What is even more concerning is that other companies are following suit. Google and Palm now also distribute 3rd party applications through stores that are subject to the same type of 'quality control'. 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   system  

Comments [0]

December 16, 2009

ISP Filtering And Technical Short Sightedness

After thinking about the moral issues behind the Australian governments plan the filter the internet, I started thinking about what technical implications this is going to have on our nation. Now, and over the next few years. 

This last year has seen a massive shift from desktop applications and services to cloud based alternatives. Services such as Spotify, Hulu and Netflix remove the need for locally stored music, TV shows and movies, and instead provide streamable versions accessible from any computer with an internet connection. These services are already largely used in the US and UK, and will no doubt make their way to our shores some time in the new year. Apple is also possibly looking to move iTunes to a cloud based application a some point in 2010. The biggest news in this area though, is Google's Chrome OS. With their new operating system, Google are aiming to remove the need for any desktop applications what so ever, focusing instead of putting everything online.

Such a mass cultural shift is going to hugely increase the demand on out internet service providers, the same who are expected to filter the internet for 'unwanted' material. Testing has already shown that such filtering will slow our internet by up to 87%. Combined with the increased demand from cloud based applications and streaming, this could result in disastrous effects for Australian businesses, networks and communications in general.

Have your say. Join the campaign at GetUp and sign the Twitter Petition.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   system  

Comments [0]

December 16, 2009

Locking Down The Net

From GetUp

The Federal Government is going ahead with plans to force all Australian servers to filter internet traffic and block any material the Government deems ‘inappropriate’. Under the plan, the Government can add any ‘unwanted’ site to a secret blacklist.

Testing has been released on systems that will slow our internet by up to 87%, make it more expensive, miss the vast majority of inappropriate content and accidentally block up to 1 in 12 legitimate sites. Our children deserve better protection - and that won't be achieved by wasting millions on this deeply flawed system. 

Despite opposition from all sides on the plan to filter the interent in Australia at IPS level, Senator Stephen Conroy and the Rudd Government still plan to go ahead. This is both disappointing, and a little unnerving. Not only is our government ignoring advice from leading industry professional on this matter, it is also ignoring mass disproval from the Australian public. 

What is unnerving about all this though is what exactly will be filtered. The Government is planning to filter out content that it deems 'inappropriate' and 'unwanted'. Obviously sites focused around child pornography are big issue, and needs to addressed, but at what cost? 

Refused Classification (or RC) is a broad category of content that includes not just child sexual abuse material but also socially and politically controversial material -- for example, educational content on safer drug use -- as well as the grey realms of material instructing in any crime, including politically controversial crimes such as euthanasia. This type of content may be unpleasant and unpalatable but we believe that government should not have the right to block information which can inform debate of controversial issues.

The Australian Google blog posted this earlier this morning, which sums up the dilema that Australians are now facing. Another side to this though is what may become 'inappropriate' in the future. We are at the start of an era where group action is easier to organise than ever before and public opinion can be voiced to the world in a matter of seconds. There is no current way for this to be easily silenced, and nor should their be, but I fear that laying such power in the hands of our government could lead to misuse, resulting in such voices and groups being blocked or cut off. 

Another issue in all of this is one of responsibility. If protecting our children from the negative aspects of the internet is the main goal, as Senator Conroy states, then responsible parenting should be the first step. We do not stop all cars from driving to remove the chance of children getting run over, we teach them to use designated crossings and look both ways before crossing the road. We provide supervision. There are always going to be people who drive dangerously and break the law, but they are the ones who are, and should held accountable, not the rest of the nation. 

Yes the government should be doing something about child pornography and violent websites, but sacrificing our civil liberties in order to do so is not the answer.

Have your say. Join the campaign at GetUp and sign the Twitter Petition.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   system  

Comments [0]

December 3, 2009

Typekit For Print

After discussing the idea with John from The Golden Grouse the other week, I've been thinking a little more on how a cloud based type library might work. Such a library, accessible via subscription, not only makes sense for web designers looking to expand their web type palate, but also for any designer requiring access to a large number of typefaces on a regular basis.

Avoiding issues such as duplicates, corrupt fonts and lost files would alone make such a system workthwile, but the main benefit would be greater financial accessibility to type faces. If users gained access to such a system via a monthly/yearly subscription model, typeface creators could be payed on a 'per use' basis, or with a contractual yearly amount depending on the foundry. Having such a database of typefaces at your fingertips for a yearly fee would sound extremely appealing to any designer, especially those who do not currently have access to legal versions due to licensing costs.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   software   system  

Comments [2]

November 17, 2009

Web Type In Moderation

It's great to finally see that type on the web is starting to come of age. Although I've become quite adapt at working with a limited font pallet over the last 10 years, having the option to work outside this restriction is a welcome development. 

Yet I can't help but feel slightly nervous about what this could potentially mean. The adoption of Flash in the late '90s opened the way for a barrage of excessively long introduction animations, sound effects and a 'Flash for Flash sake' mentality, which It took us 5 or so years to move past. Ultimately hindering, more than helping, the development of the web. 

So it's not hard to imagine that ability to incorporate any font into a web page will result in just that. Fonts for fonts sake. MySpace is a great 21st century example of excessive and over designing. Add to this the ability to include any font that ship with windows, and you're just making a bad situation worse.  

There are technical and legal restrictions that might help to curb this potential issue, but should mass adoption take hold, I don't see these being much of a safeguard for long. 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   software   system  

Comments [1]

November 17, 2009

Erik Spiekermann on web fonts

Spiekermann talks about the difference between using software and owning it, and how in the world of type, this was the norm up until desktop publishing.

Although not a new concept, I think it works well in this situation, and I would be interested to see how this could be applied to the printing industry as well as the web.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   software   system  

Comments [0]

October 4, 2009

Morality, Music & Money

I've been up at the This Is Not Art festival in Newcastle for the past 5 days, which is celebrating it's 10th birthday this year. This mornings panel on piracy, copyright and new distribution models set up a great discussion between the panelists on these issues, which you can listen to below.

Panelists included Larissa Mann (aka DJ Ripley), Elliot Bledsoe from Creative Commons, Frank Rodi from APRA and DJ Tim Shiel. (I apologise for the audio quality, I recorded it on my iPhone)

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   system  

Comments [1]

September 13, 2009

10 Years Too Late

Most innovative are the plans to offer unlimited downloads for a flat fee. British internet providers are keen to offer such a service, the cost of which would be rolled into the monthly bill.

Napster, the first main file sharing service to make an impact on the record industry, was released 10 years ago in June. At the time it was shut down, I remember polls and articles asking why a service such as Napster couldn't work as a paid service. Not on a per song basis such as iTunes, but as an 'all you can eat' service, supported by a flat monthly fee. It was a great idea that a lot of consumers were interested in.

So why didn't it go ahead? The primary reason was that in able to be a competitive service, the libraries of music had to be as good, if not better, than what the pirates could offer, which required complete co-operation from all of the major labels. Unsurprisingly, this didn't happen.

So it's quite ironic that 10 years later, after the major labels have taken a massive finacial beating, partly at the hands of piracy, does this great idea finally get dug up an marked as 'innovative' ...

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   software   system  

Comments [0]

September 11, 2009

Wordpress to Posterous

I've just finished relocating my blog, which previously ran on Wordpress at http://aaronmoodie.com, to its new home here at http://aaronmoodie.posterous.com. Why you ask? Well, there are a number of reasons. 

"The shoemaker's children are often shoeless", or so the proverb goes. In my professional career, I've had about 4 differently designed websites, each the result of countless hours of mockups and concept sketches. I have spent so much time changing my mind and reworking ideas that it's a wonder I've even got a site up at all. It's said that a designer is his own worst client, but I think this is even more so when there is no branding or identity involved, and the design is essentially a self portrait. So, I decided to take that issue out of the equation. posterous has no customisation, which is fine seeing is the site's design is clean, simple and extremely functional. Just the way I like it.  

The other reason is security. I spent a good half a day about a month ago manually editing my database in order to remove the spam links that had been injected into the SQL. A slight annoyance, yes, but it also made me realise that had that hack been any more malicious, I could have lost a lot more than a few hours of my time. John August recently wrote an interesting piece on blogging software and it's venerability, which got me thinking about whether I really need to be hosting my own blog. 

So, after looking at those two issues I found the decision to switch quite easy. But why posterous? Well, I've already mentioned the design side of things, but let me elaborate a little more on the functionality. To put it plainly, posterous is stupidly simple to operate, and a pleasure to use. I'm currently writing this post in gmail, and when I'm done I'll email it to posterous, which will not only create a new blog post for me, it will also send a link to that post to twitter, facebook and any other social media platforms I've specified. 

I am, and remain, a big fan of Wordpress. It's a great piece of software with a great community supporting it. All for free. I first started using it when I didn't know much about programming, and it gave me a great insight and introduction to web development. But now that I know a little more, I've found that all the time I spent updating, backing up and tweaking can be better applied elsewhere (such as writing content!). 

If you're reading this in an RSS reader, then all this waffle won't really mean much as my feed is handled through FeedBurner, and so you probably won't even notice a change. If on the other hand you've ended up here via aaronmoodie.com, well, now you know why! 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   system  

Comments [0]

July 28, 2009

How Piracy is Pushing the Digital Envelope

News that the Swedish online music service Spotify will be releasing an iPhone application is generating quite a bit of a buzz online. Spotify provides an extensive online music library that is free to access and listen to. The free service is supported by adverts, or you can sign up for £9.99 a month for a premium account, which has no ads (you will need to have a premium account in order to use the iPhone application).

Spotify is a great example of online music distribution done right. Sure, you can't download the tracks, but it's there to use for free, allowing you to 'try before you buy' from somewhere else, which is what I mainly used bit torrent trackers such as The Pirate Bay for. The question is, would there even be a Spotify if it wasn't sites like The Pirate Bay?

Back in April, when The Pirate Bay founders were jailed sentenced to a year in prison for their operation the site, the BBC published an interview with Mark Mulligan from Forrester Research. Mr Mulligan went on to say how Spotify was "one real example we've got of how the music industry is building a new (legal) business around new ways of distributing music". The thing is, Mulligan fails to mention why the music industry is building this new business, or, more to the point, how they have actually been playing catch up to a digital distribution model that has been in full swing for almost 10 years. Piracy.

Matt Mason, author of The Pirate’s Dilemma, says that "piracy is the sharp end of innovation". In a recent article for the BBC, he wrote about how pirates are "highlighting a better way for us to do things; they find gaps outside the market, and better ways for society to operate".

Site like The Pirate Bay have shown people that music, movies and all sorts of digital content can be easily distributed online (much to the dismay of the companies controlling and monetising that content). But without people taking these risks and, in this case, developing new methods of distribution, the chances are that services like Spotify would never have been considered, let alone be the working, productive business model it is today.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   software   system  

Comments [0]