Apple *always* lets you down!

I upgraded to Mountain Lion, and expected to get laptop/desktop/phone integration. That's what they had publicized. A more "iOS" experience, also on the desktop. Yeah. Right.

Got an alarm just a few minutes ago. Clicked it "shut" on my desktop. What the h*ll... It's still ringing on the phone in the entrance!

I genuinly thought they'd make the things *integrated*. You react to a message on one device, it gets handled on the others as well.

Nope.

Apple always leaves something for the next update. But this one they should have covered.

While whining, how about incoming SMS'es. If I'm working on a computer, let me see the SMS'es there, and react to them. INTEGRATE.

Currently, SMS'es are still confined only to the phone. No technical reason they would need to be so.

I'm beginning to think Apple is losing the magical "it just works" that they were known for, in the time when using PC's was hard. Losing their innovation mojo. Please - do better!!!

App Store should meet Bonjour (= local caching of downloads)

http://twitter.com/bmdesignhki/status/231451046185148416

Some more details on that.

It feels stupid that after one 4.3 GB download, each family computer under the *same* App Store license must perform the exact same download again, from who knows how far on the Internet.

A better approach would be for App Store agent to keep a cache of recent downloads (or even partial downloads) and expose that cache to any other computers on the same network, via Bonjour. Technically, this should be easy.

Authentication would still happen via the actual App Store servers, just as now. Only once the download begins, local caches would be preferred over the actual server seeds on the Internet. This is much akin to torrents, but not quite. It would reduce the server load that Apple is getting by some (maybe 10-15%). 

What do you think? I find no down side to Apple doing this, starting in some future version of App Store. Luckily, we only have two Macs at home.

Nordic Crown - new currency for S, N, DK, Iceland, Finland - others?

There was an article recently that proposed Finland to be the first Euro country to get "enough" and exit the currency. It was called Finexit.

I fail to see this happening as such, but if connected to a larger Northern European change of currencies, it might actually make a lot of sense.

Currently, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland each have their crowns. None of these countries are in the Euro. They could fairly easily form a real economic union, learning from the mistakes of the Euro and not repeating them.

If *that* were to happen, it would be an easy choice for Finland to join in.

But it might not stop there.

Poland has been knocking on the Euro door, but not so much recently. We have joint history with wars, joint kings, all that stuff. And Poland is one of the nicely performing non-Euro economies, anyways. Call it the Baltic Union if you will.

Then there are Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia (another Nordic Euro country). Frankly, I don't expect Estonia to jump off Euro but the others might jump in the Crown.

Together with Poland, the Nordic area would have a population base roughly the same as the UK. This should be enough to have a stable, global currency.

Hopefully, the Finnish Bank (or someone) is working on this.

Disclaimer: As you can guess, I know pretty little of the banking world. Then again, so it seems the people working within the system do, as well. ;)

The Nordic Crown could take on the NOK abbreviation, or a more hip NK2.

What I feel would be great with such a monetary union is that it employs countries within and outside of the EU, as well as within and outside of the NATO.

Addendum.

The population estimates were rather correct. All the suggested countries (incl. Poland) would bring 63.6 million people into the Nordic Crown area. That is slightly more than either UK (62.8 M) or France (63.5 M).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_population

Historic exchange rates (last 2 years) of the involved currencies.

Comparison to Swiss franque tells something of the stability of the current NOK:

Addendum II

Inflation rates (May 2012):

Norway: 0.50 %
Sweden: 1.0 %
Finland: 3.1 %
Poland: 3.6 %
Denmark: 2.1 %
Iceland: 5.40 %

For comparison:

UK: 2.8 %
Euro-zone: 2.4 %
Switzerland: -1.0 %

Interest rates:

Norway: 1.50 %

Sweden: 1.50 %

Finland: 1.00 %

Poland: 4.75 %

Denmark: 0.45 %

Iceland: 5.75 %

For comparison:

UK: 0.50 %

Euro-zone: 1.0 %

Switzerland: 0.0 %

Source: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/

How Apple Maps could be better

The news birdies brought this:

http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/11/report-apple-dumping-google-for-own-maps-app-in-ios-6

I have long wondered how far it will take for Apple to want to cut any ties to Google. Since it seems they are doing this, how about adding some *useful features* to the maps app on iOS.

Online vs. offline maps

The main problem I face with the iPhone in general, is that roaming abroad is still dreadfully expensive. As I've written before, I feel "at home" when the phone works not only as a phone but as a twitter and email client, and a maps engine.

Now, Apple could somehow fix the whole thing by i.e. starting their own global 3G operations, and giving reasonable global roaming charges. Let's forget that. What they can already do with regards to the maps update/transition is make roaming less needed. Fix it at the application level.

Current situation: separate map apps

For navigating in my home country, I use iOS Google maps. Works splendid. Pulls data off 3G.

For trips abroad, I can either pre-visit such areas in the Google map, and then hope the maps remain in the application's cache. They normally do. Or I can download (and possibly pay) for separate city-wide "offline maps" apps. There are *many* of these (by vendor, by city, free / commercial).

What Apple *could* do in the iOS 6 maps upgrade is unify all this. Make the caching explicit, and cut away the need for *separate* map apps. Just one Maps.

This is how to do it...

- Add to the preferences of the Maps app a selection of cities that will be kept available "offline", i.e. cached to the phone's memory itself. Navigation and route finding within such areas should work even when data roaming is disabled.

That's... all.

I hope Apple does get to see this customer feedback. If you second this idea, please say so to them here.

- Asko

My letter to President Dilma Rousseff (of Brazil)

Dear President,

I live in Helsinki, Finland, and have little first hand exposure to rain forests.

However, I read this wonderful book on the Amazon, "The Tree of Rivers", which I wholeheartedly recommend to You.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tree-Rivers-The-Story-Amazon/dp/0500514011/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335684957&sr=1-2

Through that book, it might be I know more of the rain forests than most Brazilians. And I'm worried - for you and for all of us.

Rain forests don't make for the best cultivated land, if cut, but their effect on the larger climate for Brazil is tremendous. They help provide rains for the southern areas which are far more prosperous, ecologically. This is the farming heart lands for your economy. By cutting deeper into the Amazon, you are risking changing the climate patterns for these farm lands. You are playing with fire.

So it is not for the sake of the planet, or us foreigners that you should stop cutting the jungle and rather start restoring it. It's for your own country, and it's ecological as well as economical future.

I'm not from Green Peace. I'm a single entrepreneur in Finland, trying to turn the tide of our planet. I am not in such a decisive seat as you are, but I can understand the conflicting interests that go across your mind in such issues. Be wise, study the details - and I do recommend the above mentioned book.

Yours, sincerely,

Asko Kauppi

Helsinki, Finland

Limited data roaming (suggestion for Apple iOS)

The iPhone is more than a phone. To me, it's primarily a Twitter device. However, when I'm abroad all this functionality becomes crippled because of expensive data roaming charges.

There is something Apple can do to help. Instead of the current "all or nothing" introduce an intermediate "limited roaming data" setting, which would a) allow only selected applications to utilize data services, at all and b) allow such applications to detect the mode and fall back to "use least possible data transfer".

This would be useful for keeping such applications as Twitter, Google (or some other) maps and email working, even when outside of WLAN, but without unnecessarily eating up the precious roaming bits. It can also be combined with relatively cheap, low-bandwidth roaming contracts, where the usual 3G speeds would not be available.

Ideally, I would want basic (64k) data speeds to be available anywhere I go, without (much) added charge. They are nowadays almost as important as the calling and SMS systems are.

My list for the next XBox...

Microsoft seems to be making an "XBox 720" console, with the usual "better graphics blah blah" specs. That's great. We can do with a GPU upgrade, more RAM etc. They'll get all those wishes from the game developers.

Here's something to add to that basket, from a game (casual) end user.

- support for two monitors

Yes. Two HDMI ports. Would be awesome for games s.a. SSX snowboarding, or racing games. Instead of split screen, give each player a full high-res screen! Even for shoot ups s.a. Battlefield this would allow wider view angle.

Since current PC-level CPU's are anyways (I presume) ready for multiple monitor support, this wouldn't be such an over-the-top requirement. Most likely, it'll already be on the silicon that Microsoft works with. Just don't disable it. Use it.

When used for dual player mode (i.e. SSX or car games) each HDMI could carry their own audio, as well. This allows (maybe with earphones) to hear your own stuff.

This may sound like "really, that's the last thing this world needs". And maybe so. But at the same time, playing in company and against a human opponent is incredibly much fun! Almost all of my NHL (2008, I confess!) gaming is like that. There dual screen mode is not badly needed, since there's only one puck. With SSX and car games, splitting the screen literally takes half the fun out!

Some more things:

- get rid of the DVD. I trust you will (it's slow, noisy and... simply old-fashioned). Downloaded content of games on standard (non-writable) USB sticks.

Addendum:

Tietokone has an article today: http://www.tietokone.fi/uutiset/seuraava_xbox_ei_levyasemaa_myyntiin_ensi_vuonna

- no physical disk drive. Check.
- games will be sold on little memory cards. Hmm... okay, just make it a real USB dongle, like Autodesk does.

What they really should do is:
- make a good local caching thing (with unlimited storage on the Cloud). One can install *any*number of games, the ones not being used lately can get removed and can be re-fetched from the Cloud. All this seamlessly. Plus ability to change the local cache disk, without as much hassle as there currently is. Just disk out, disk in. If the Cloud has the primary copy, the local disk is nothing but a cache (unless you're being offline).

- Finally, smooth integration of Zune (or whatever videos are called) with XBox dashboard. Still not there. Microsoft internal organizational glitches show all over the final UI. Why don't they learn. Why?

- Bring text input to the 21st century. Actually, let me show the secret key codes (of so many games nowadays) to the Kinect camera, instead of typing them in. Have some overall thinking!

Addendum II:

Another rumor, via Finnish Pelaajalehti.com: http://www.pelaajalehti.com/uutiset/huhu-uusi-xbox-vaatii-jatkuvan-nettiyhteyden

The graphics arrangement looks promisingly capable of two-monitor usage (I hope MS is really checking this option out!). I'd leave the Blu-Ray out, or at least make it optional. With a fast network connection, who needs it (and MS would make more money selling *all* games downloadable, anyways). If they need physical media, non-writable USB sticks are *way* better for everyone (maybe USB 3.0 so even read times are blazingly fast).

Addendum III:

Power hungry. Not.

The current XBox 360's drain something in the neighborhood of 150W when playing a game. Older models probably more. And this is without the tv.

Now, an Apple TV (2nd generation) drains 6W.

See the difference? Now, *what if* the Apple TV system-on-chip actually gets good enough to run Xbox 360 level graphics. It can. That's a 20-fold difference in power consumption!

So, if I were Microsoft I would be highly concerned with the power envelope of the new (if ever) XBox 720. It's not only the features. Cut down the moving parts (no DVD, hard disk etc.). Cut down the size. Cut down the power need. Try to get close to the Apple TV while still being a great ass-kicking game machine.

Actually.

Make an XBox almost as small as the Apple TV. With Kinect. With existing XBox 360 features only.

Then make the "XBox 720" with upgraded performance, but only about twice the size and power envelope of the little brother. Continue selling both. Kinect games are fine with the existing graphics.