Physical Cards, eCards, and Apple Cards

+Jesse Wojdylo asked an interesting question on Google+ this morning that I really hadn't given much thought to previously: How do people prefer to send out Mother's Day cards?

While the usual question centers around physical cards vs eCards, I actually realized that I've been getting the best of both worlds ever since Apple came out with its "Cards" app for iOS a couple of years ago.

As a technology person, physical cards have not only always seemed a bit "low-tech" for me, but also require me to actually do things in the real world such as going to a store and buying one, and then finding a postage stamp and actually getting it into a mailbox. For somebody who rarely has to deal with sending out physical mail, this is actually a more complicated process than it sounds -- there have been times in the past that a card has actually sat on my desk for a week simply waiting for me to go to the post office to buy a stamp.

Further, physical cards have an impersonal component to them. You're basically going to the Hallmark store and trying to choose from among a series of trite sayings written by some team of folks at a card company. It's rare that I find a card that precisely expresses what I want to actually say, so I usually end up buying either a blank card or something very basic and then chicken-scratching my own thoughts in penmanship that only my mother can read.

eCards of course solve much of these issues, especially those you can customize. However, they lack much of the traditional sentiment associated with sending out an actual physical card that can be displayed on the mantle or hung on the Christmas tree.

Enter the Apple Cards app. This provides an elegant "hybrid" solution that provides the best of both worlds. I can choose from several general design templates and get a professional looking Letterpress card that I'm able to customize with my own photos and text. I then supply a mailing address and pay $5 to have the card printed and mailed directly to the recipient. In the end, my mother gets a very nice physical card that she can display and keep and I get to say exactly what I want to say while avoiding the logistical hassle of shopping for, deciding upon, and mailing out a physical card. The only slight downside is that delivery outside of the U.S. can take a couple of weeks, so a bit of advance planning is required if you want the card to arrive on time.

So, what is the point of Google Glass again?

Jolie O'Dell, VentureBeat:

In my moral universe, Google Glass for consumers can only serve to distract us, not truly help us any more, better, or faster than the other tools we already use. For example, you already have Google Maps to guide you around your city with turn-by-turn audio navigation. That tool doesn’t get any better when it’s smack-dab against your eyeball. Neither does your email or your Instagram feed or your Facebook account.

While Jolie O'Dell's full article is definitely worth a read as one of the first interesting counterpoints to all of the hype around Google Glass, I felt this one quote was a particularly good point that many in the tech blogosphere have missed in their effort to sing the praises of Google Glass and dream up real-world consumer uses for it. While the potential for practical professional uses are myriad, as a consumer product Google Glass seems like the proverbial solution in desperate search of solving some real-world problem that average people are actually having.

I can't think of a single instance where I've ever thought, "Gee, pulling out my iPhone is far too inconvenient. I wish I could just have my Facebook feed or e-mail right in my eyeball." In fact, for me the opposite is far more true -- I actually like the fact that my iPhone is in my pocket when I don't want to be distracted by whatever may be happening on the Internet.  Such as when I'm playing with my daughter, or having dinner out with my wife or friends, or perhaps just doing something like watching a movie.

In fact, one could argue that this is the same design logic that goes into things like Google TV. Some tech enthusiasts may love the idea of being able to access their social media stream or look something up on Wikipedia or IMDb during their favourite movie. However, from my own -- admittedly anecdotal -- sample of friends and family I suspect that these folks are in the minority.  In my world I generally prefer to actually watch the movie without distractions. On rare occasions I may want to look something up, such as an actor's bio, but my smartphone is usually within reach and provides a more appropriate context by allowing me to pick it up, find what I need, and then put it away and return to the movie. Having that information available "in my face" might be more convenient in that particular moment, but ultimately it becomes too accessible and takes me away from what I'm actually doing.

Pulling out your smartphone is an important contextual shift, both psychologically and as a social signal to others. It clearly communicates both to your own mind and to others around you that you're going into a different "mode" allowing you to effectively separate your interaction with the real world from your interaction with your mobile device. The same applies with most other physical items such as reading a book or newspaper or simply looking at photographs. Google Glass promises -- or threatens, depending on your point of view -- to remove that contextual distinction, blending the real world and the virtual world into a single, unified consciousness. There are definitely those who see this as a good thing, but ultimately I believe that it will create a newer and more dangerous kind of distraction -- people being distracted without even realizing that they're being distracted.

Switching to Blogger, courtesy of the Google+ Halo Effect

So I've decided to switch over to Blogger, driven mostly by the "halo" effect of Google+.

Let me start by being perfectly frank: I don't do much "blogging" per se. My day job writing for iLounge keeps me pretty busy on that side, not to mention the trials and tribulations of being a stay-at-home dad in the midst of it all.  In addition, when I feel I might have something particularly interesting to say, I generally simply turn to Google+ and post it directly there.

Despite this, however, for some reason I've always still felt the need to have a blog. Maybe it's just because that's what the cool kids are all doing, or maybe it's just that it's more of my own personal space to write my musings in the off chance that anybody ever wants to read them. To be fair, my blog also pre-dates the modern evolution of social media, so there's been an impetus to keep it alive for legacy reasons.

My blog has found its way from a couple of non-CMS web page iterations in the very early days, over to a self-hosted WordPress site, and then from there over to Tumblr, which is where it has lived for the past couple of years. I moved away from WordPress largely because I didn't do enough blogging to justify the headaches involved in keeping it up to date, and although I could have gone with a hosted WordPress solution, I chose Tumblr at the time because it seemed like it was more integrated with social media, and had its own sort of pseudo-social network thing going on. I had also looked at Posterous and Blogger at the time, and I'm kind of glad I dodged the Posterous bullet, and Blogger just seemed a bit too basic back then.

That said, my interest in Tumblr was never strong as it really was a silo until itself in many ways, and I found myself visiting it less and less -- especially after Google+ arrived a couple of years ago. Tumblr has done some nice things with its iOS apps and site, especially recently, but in the end it continues to feel like yet-another-place-to-visit.  I already spend my time hanging out on Google+, Facebook and Twitter (not always in that order), so to keep Tumblr on that list just doesn't make much sense, and if I"m not really going there, I'm not really benefiting from having a blog over there.

So, with the recent arrival of Google+ integrated comments, it seemed that it was time to take another look at Blogger. I consider G+ to be my primary social network these days, so the idea that I could have a blog with tighter integration seemed to make a lot of sense. Not that I ever get that many (any?) comments on my stuff, but G+ seems like a much better solution for this than Disqus ever was.

It seems Blogger has grown up a bit since the last time I looked, with not only G+ comments, but some nice themes and customizations available that don't require getting into HTML and CSS coding.  Tighter integration with Google+, social sharing buttons (I had to code those manually in Tumblr), and better analytics also round out the list of nice features. The only downside is that there doesn't appear to be any easy path for migration from Tumblr -- the few that I could find either don't exist any more, or don't work properly, requiring more messing around such as going at it via WordPress. Fortunately, I have few enough posts that I don't mind doing so manually, and have already moved a good portion over just last night.

Ultimately, it will be interesting to see if this move actually encourages me to blog a bit more. I definitely find the interface easier to work in for traditional writing, and the "newness" of a different platform may encourage me to visit more and therefore write more.  I'm also hoping the G+ integration will provide a bit more exposure, thereby providing some opportunities for feedback and actual conversation -- I'm looking forward to seeing what the integrated nature of the comments actually offers in the long run.

Does a cheaper iPhone really mean Apple is doomed?

Peter Cohan, Forbes:

A cheaper iPhone marks a fundamental shift in strategy to Low Cost Producer. And it is highly unlikely that Apple — with its enormous fixed costs including a $5 billion headquarters complex under construction in Cupertino – will be able to lower its costs below competitors’ in order to win as the industry’s low cost producer.

I think many analysts and pundits are making far too much of the "cheap iPhone" as if it's a leading product that Apple expects to somehow save the iPhone or make it relevant again. They seem to forget that Apple has had a "cheap iPhone" for over two years now -- it's called the "two-year-old model." When the iPhone 4S first came out, Apple continued selling the iPhone 3GS as an entry-level unit - $0 on contract in most cases - and the iPhone 4 took up the middle position. With the release of the iPhone 5, those positions went to the iPhone 4 and 4S, respectively.

The problem is that this year, an iPhone 5S will come out. Traditionally, this would drop the iPhone 5 into the middle-tier, and the iPhone 4S would become the "cheap iPhone." Problem is that the iPhone 5 was a major shift for Apple -- it got a 4" screen and the new Lightning connector. An iPhone 5S would presumably follow the same path, leaving the iPhone 4S looking like the completely orphaned stepchild ( "One of these things is not like the others..." :) ).

In this case, a "new" cheap iPhone - let's call it the iPhone 5C - makes a lot more sense, since it could fill that bottom tier while presenting a unified product line. Suddenly, the lineup becomes 5C/5/5S instead of 4S/5/5S. 4" screens across the board, and Lightning connectors everywhere.

Further who doesn't doubt that Apple wants to kill the Dock Connector as soon as it possibly can? I think even the hastily thrown together fourth-generation iPad was a good example of that, since now Apple has a product that can easily replace the iPad 2 as the "lower-end" iPad model when the fifth-generation iPad arrives. Ditto for the iPod touch, since after all the iPhone is the only iOS product that Apple continues to sell three models of. Suddenly, every product Apple is selling uses their shiny new Lightning connector and the old 30-pin connector becomes a distant memory.

Day One with a Chromebook

So after spending the better part of yesterday, last night, and this morning working primarly on my new Chromebook rather than my desktop Mac, I'm quite enjoying the experience, although it does take some getting used to in certain subtle ways.

Getting used to it

---

Probably my biggest concern right out of the gate was the keyboard on this particular Samsung model. For whatever reason, the return key is at the extreme right, and the left shift key is at the extreme left -- both smaller than they would otherwise be on most keyboards I've used. This isn't an uncommon sort of adjustment when using any new laptop, to be fair, but I regularly find myself adding a slash character when I'm trying to press enter or the left shift, which is particularly annoying when keying in passwords. I also can't quite understand why anybody would have thought that this keyboard needed two slash keys instead of, say, making a larger enter or shift key. Just a strange design, but not too hard to adjust to once you get used to it.

Being a Mac user, I also fairly quickly reversed the CTRL and ALT keys -- something that Chrome OS mercifully allows for, since of course I'm used to using CMD for most of the functions that CTRL is used for on the Chromebook, from switching tabs to copying and pasting. Similarly, I turned on "Australian" scrolling (as Google calls it) as soon as I found that setting as well.

The touchpad also feels a little less smooth than the Macs I'm used to, both in texture as well as in responsiveness. It's not terribly bad, but it's an adjustment as well, as are some of the more advanced trackpad gestures that are slightly different from what I'm used to (e.g. no three-finger drag-and-drop).

On the upside, however, the battery life on this thing is very impressive, and it seems that I'll be able to easily get about 5 hours out of it without breaking a sweat, and maybe even more in a pinch. This Chromebook also seemed a bit sluggish at first, but as I saw somebody else point out regarding theirs, I think that was due to the software update processes. By later last night it had become much smoother and more responsive. Startup time is also lightning fast, especially waking from sleep -- it's ready to go before I can even get the cover all the way open.

Design

---

In terms of design, it definitely has a cheaper plastic "toy" feel, which I'm not all that surprised by, coming from Samsung (I didn't like the Nexus S or Galaxy Nexus in that regard either). However, I'm also not bothered by this, considering it's a quarter of the cost of a nice aluminium MacBook Air. I really wasn't expecting much more in that regard, so I'm totally cool with that, however.

It's light and portable and still feels like something you could easily toss in a bag (or an eVest pocket :) ). In fact, much like my feelings on my Kindle vs iPad, this Chromebook feels like something I'm less worried about damaging or scratching up.

Chrome OS

---

In terms of the OS, there weren't any big surprises for me, as I tried out Chromium on a MacBook Air last summer. Since I live almost entirely on the web these days with Google Apps and writing work, it ends up being a good fit for 99% of what I do. Considering I did all of my reporting from CES using an iPad with an Adonit Writer keyboard case, I suspect this will be a perfect fit for that sort of on-the-go work as well. Chrome OS still has the "desktop" type advantages that one really can't replicate on an iOS or Android tablet, such as a multi-window interface and quick access to flipping between screens and tabs. Just a better tool for the job, IMHO.

One thing that was absolutely brilliant was the ability to just log into my Google Account and have everything set up automatically, including all of my extensions from Chrome on my Mac. I was ready to go with a familiar user experience right out of the box, with the only changes being the keyboard and trackpad tweaks mentioned above.

About the only thing missing from this experience for me is iChat, which is sadly still used for video-conferencing and direct chats with colleagues, although we've fortunately switched over to the web-based Campfire service for our team discussions, so that fits quite well (I'm still working on getting my team-mates over to Google+ Hangouts, but they're firmly entrenched in Apple technology, and my EiC still prefers to send files via Messages than even using Dropbox [sigh] ).

The other thing that will still keep me going back to my desk is full-featured photo apps like Lightroom and Photoshop. I'm pleasantly surprised that the Chrome OS has a basic photo editing tool included (although it seems to lack resizing), and of course online options like Aviary are available, but they're obviously nowhere near a replacement for Lightroom. However, that's not an "on-the-go" thing for me, so I can totally live without it on my actual notebook. Similarly, I still use iTunes on my Mac to support my primary media library, but I've also uploaded all of my music to Google Music which works fine for allowing me to access my music while on-the-go, and there's also Rdio which works great on the Chromebook as well.

All in all, I'm enjoying the Chromebook experience. It beats using a tablet when I'm trying to do real work, and will offer me more flexibility without having to replicate an entire Mac OS X experience on a second computer.

A Perfect Gin & Tonic

John Gruber positively nails it in his comments regarding the new CGI Audrey Hepburn:

Audrey Hepburn was one of the great talents in cinema history, and they’ve turned her into Ronald McDonald, an animated cartoon peddling junk food.