Deconstructing iOS 7

The speed of the internet can be exhausting. Patience has become something of a lost art as we almost symbiotically go from event to event draining the life out of each and leaving it’s carcass on the side of the road. There’s a pressure to be involved in the discussion even if we have little to add to it. We’ll make sweeping assumptions based on surface level information, not giving ourselves enough time to actually think about why or what we’re saying. Contrary to popular belief, there are things that demand more than 5 minutes to digest. Some times things require you to physically use it before you can truly appreciate it. 

The unveiling of Apple’s new iPhone operating system, iOS 7 is a prime example of people forming strong opinions on something that isn’t even finished or they haven’t used. The drum beating about Apple’s mobile OS beginning to show it’s age has continually increased for over a year now. With Google’s Android finally reaching some consistency and polish in it’s design, Windows Phone 8 live tiles getting praise for being dynamic,  and even Blackberry 10’s gestures getting some love, the push for Apple to refresh the ‘oldest’ mobile OS on the market started to become deafening. So after 8 months since releasing iOS 6, Apple has released a somewhat completely redesigned operating system. 

But change is always hard, especially when designing for such a large and diverse group of users. Apple had to change the OS enough to make it meaningful but not too much as to alienate users. Being a nearly impossible task to complete I think Apple walked the line fairly well. 

Textures & Buttons

The first obvious difference is the removal of all of the signature Apple texturing within apps that usually mimicked their real life counterpart. The term is called skeuomorphism and it’s been given the axe in iOS 7, at least in the traditional sense. Gone are the gaudy textures and attempt to make them look like real world objects. Instead we have a minimalist approach to most of the apps. Lots of white space, the removal of button boarders and translucency that attempt to get out of the way as much as possible. Gone are the chrome and pinstripe blue background. Now the app goes all the way to the top of the phone, even changing the color of the status bar. The traditional bottom buttons are now mostly translucent with button colors that match the app. When apps update to iOS 7 everything should look a lot cleaner and less cluttered. 

Functional Layers

In the introduction video of iOS 7, head designer, Jony Ive talked about creating “distinct, functional layers to help establish hierarchy and order”. You don’t really grasp the meaning of that until you begin to use the operating system. The background image plays a big part on the aesthetic of the OS when not in apps. Since the layers (Notification Center, Control Center) that slide on top of the home screen are translucent, the colors in the background bleed through to the foreground, including app icons. This is part of the reason for some of the outcry that iOS 7 was too “bright” or “childish”. The color palette of the icons are indeed a bit brighter add the rainbow colored background and it could be a bit much. Apple probably should’ve chosen a more neutral background or shown examples with different background colors to show how adaptive the OS becomes. 

It’s worth mentioning both the Notification and Control Center generate their transparency in real time over whatever is currently on the screen. Both menus can be accessed anywhere within the OS. 

The 3D parallax effect that makes the app icons appear to float above the background gives the entire operating system depth. The parallax effect is also present inside app folders, the lock screen and Safari tabs. 

Even the new animations when selecting apps make the OS feel alive and give the feeling of traveling through the OS. When an app is selected the screen zooms into the location of the app and zooms back out to the home screen when finished. All of these features together give iOS more depth and fluidity than ever before adding up to a wonderful, somewhat whimsical experience to use. 

That has been the magic of iOS from the beginning, creating a user interface that is both intuitive and fun to use. iOS 7 is as unobtrusive as ever, removing the back button and relying on a swiping gesture from the side edge of the phone to go backwards and forwards. In Safari the address bar and navigation buttons automatically disappear when scrolling down and will reappear when the user scrolls up. This type of subtle yet elegant attention to detail is what separate iOS from other mobile operating systems. 

Icons

However there are some rough spots which a lot of the tech press have seemed infatuated with, the icons. A lot of the icons feel a bit disjointed and inconsistent from the rest of the experience and in some cases feel almost like placeholder images ( I’m talking to you Safari icon). Of course this is a Beta and enough hand wringing has been done about them that I’m sure they’ll be tweaked by release. 

If you only look at iOS 7 through screenshots you’ll miss the subtle charm of the operating system that is evident when you use it. With that said, using the OS also makes it incredibly clear that Apple was under pressure to get a working Beta out the door as entire apps aren’t even functional. There is still a lot of work to be done, but the foundation of iOS 7 is a great start. Unfortunately most of the discussion regarding the OS has been surface deep knit picking from tech reporters and some designers that seem to have more of a problem with Ive designing software as they do with software itself. With over 1500 new API’s hopefully going forward we can raise the level of discourse a little higher than what color the freaking icons are. 

Did The Xbox One or PS4 Make A Case For The Next-Generation Of Gaming?

E3 has drawn to a close and the dust is beginning to settle from Sony and Microsoft’s big events. Both set out to show why their console was the one gamers should choose this holiday season but did either make a strong enough case? Was there enough shown at either event that made gamers want to rush out and spend $500+ on a new console and games this fall? 

Microsoft

Much has been written about the Microsoft DRM/internet requirement and how Sony used that to their advantage to win the hearts and minds of a lot of gamers at E3. However gamers are very forgiving and have incredibly short memories and depending how Xbox handles this over the next few months they could rebound. After all, Microsoft got through the ‘Red Ring of Death” debacle early in the Xbox 360 life and some how convinced people it was ok to pay a yearly subscription for access to services like Netlfix and Hulu they were already paying for. 

Microsoft’s E3 presser had a few interesting announcements like Quantum Break, a video game and TV show that will supposedly both have an impact on each other. Developer Remedy says, “how you play the game impacts the show, and the show informs how you play the game.” It all sounds promising but we don’t know much about the project yet. Another interesting game showed was “Project Spark” that blends the XBox One with the Kinect and SmartGlass and allows you to make 3D worlds using voice commands and touch controls on your tablet.

Microsoft also showed a teaser for the next Halo, the racing game Forza, Metal Gear 5 (which looked amazing) and the former Kinect game Ryse: Son of Rome. The highlight of the show was the Xbox One/Xbox 360/PC exclusive game “TitanFall” from Respawn Entertainment, the former Call of Duty: Modern Warfare creators. It’s a first-person shooter similar to Call of Duty but the twist is there are giant mechs and rocket boosters that are attached to each player. Yeah I know, another shooter on XBox, how predictable, but it actually looks fun even if it does kind of look very familar. Respawn announced the game will use cloud computing but didn’t go into much detail into how that will enhance the game.

Which leads me to my biggest problem with Microsoft’s event. Most of these games seemed like just prettier versions of games we’re already playing on our Xbox 360’s. I was looking for Microsoft to show the benefits of having a console always connected to the internet and the use of that magical “cloud computing” they keep talking about. Instead I was showed games that didn’t look or feel much different than what I’m currently playing, especially on the PC. Microsoft missed an opportunity to not only address the concerns about used games, DRM, and constant internet connection but show gamers the benefits that come along with some of those restrictions. If they want to win back gamers that are on the fence this generation they need to make a case why being always connected is a positive. Another stick point is the XBox One will cost $499, $100 more than the slightly more powerful PS4. Microsoft needs to convince consumers that their games and entertainment features are worth spending the extra $100 on.

SONY

While Sony came out of E3 looking like the white knight that will save gaming, if you take away Microsoft’s missteps (DRM & Price) Sony’s press conference was kind of mediocre. Sure they did a lot of fan service showing Final Fantasy Versus…I mean Final Fantasy XV and Kingdom Hearts 3 (hell yeah!), but neither of those games are PS4 exclusives. They did manage to snag the Online MMO, Final Fantasy XIV, which will be on the PC and PS4, but it doesn’t mean much to the larger audience of Final Fantasy fans that aren’t willing to pay the monthly fees of an MMO. With the largest stable of first-party studios in the industry (13) I was looking for Sony to show a few more exclusives at E3 after showing Killzone, Infamous and Knack in February. Instead we got tons of indie games, which was great, don’t get me wrong but most, if not all of them could be ran on the PS3. 

Sony did however manage to show a new exclusive IP that was one of the more interesting games of the entire convention, The Order: 1886. 

The Order: 1886 takes place in an alternate universe with steam punk guns, horse carriages, blimps and what appears to be werewolf’s in a fictitious London. The game was beautiful but little was shared about gameplay or story. 

After that there was little meat left on the bones, at least from a first-party or exclusive perspective. From the midway point to the end, Sony trotted out 3rd party developers, one after another and announced some vague partnership that usually meant nothing more than  character skins or collectables that were “exclusive” to the PS4. Most of it was meaningless and did little to convince me that the PS4 was a better console or had better games than the XBox One. I expected to see something from either the God of War team (Santa Monica), Naughty Dog, Sony London, and I was really crossing my fingers hoping they would announce Team ICO’s “The Last Guardian”. But no such thing happened. They did however show an amazing tech demo (Dark Sorcerer) from the talented studio, Quantic Dream, responsible for the cinematic PS3 hit, “Heavy Rain” and the upcoming “Beyond Two Souls”. But it was after all a tech demo with no plans of it becoming an actual game in the near future. Finally they closed the event with a long and somewhat boring demo of of the persistant online first-person shooter, “Destiny” which again will be a cross platform title. 

If it wasn’t for the announcements of no new DRM restrictions and the surprise price of $399 for the PS4, gamers and media may have left the Sony press conference wanting much more. The word is Sony has all of their 1st-party studios working on PS4 games and perhaps we’ll see more of what’s to come (The Last Guardian) from the PS4 at  Gamescom in August and the Tokyo Game Show in September.  It’s worth mentioning Sony managed to sneak in the fact that online gaming will now require a PS Plus membership ($50/year) similar to XBox Live. What makes this pill easier to swallow is that PS Plus is an incredible value as Sony will give away games and discounts monthly for the PS3, PS Vita and PS4 to subscribers. Another benefit over Xbox Live is that none of their media features like Netflix and Hulu will require the subscription service to use.

Looking at both shows, 3rd-party studios were the only ones that actually brought anything interesting to the table, many of which will be available on the PC. Games like “Watch Dogs” & “The Division” showed how they would take advantage of the internet and mobile computing that create persistent worlds that feel alive while Microsoft & Sony are continuing to trot out more sequels. Sure Forza had their “driveatars” but what game was shown by either Sony or Microsoft that couldn’t be made for the current generation? Yeah I know it takes time to get familiar with the new hardware, new engines, and create something unique but if anyone would be able to do it in a timely manner you would think it would be the people who are actually making the hardware. Game sales have consistently dropped for the past few years as people have found other things to do with their time.

Will Sony or Microsoft have a problem selling out of consoles this holiday season? Of course not, the die-hards that have been waiting for this spec bump will surely purchase without question. But if they don’t have anything more interesting to show a few months after release than shinier versions of the same games, people may decide to sit this generation out for a while or make the switch over to PC and Steam. This may be the first generation where the reason to instantly upgrade consoles isn’t so easily apparent. Both companies still need to present a compelling argument why the Xbox One and PS4 should be under your television this holiday.

Did either company show anything that makes you want to rush out a buy a new console in November?

For the record I’m one of those die-hards and have already pre-ordered the PS4….still contemplating the Xbox One.

iOS 7: Good Artist Copy, Great Artist Steal

Apple is often criticized for not actually inventing anything, but taking other people’s ideas and refining them.  What those people fail to realize is that refinement can be innovation in itself. Sure there were smartphones with touch screens before the iPhone existed but most people didn’t use them. Why? Because they were mostly unusable. Apple refined some existing technologies while inventing some of their own and created a user interface that was functional, easy to learn and fun to use. It wasn’t perfect, but it laid a foundation for what was to come. This is how I feel about iOS 7.

Apple has been getting lots of flack as of late for it’s aging OS. When the iPhone first launched in 2007, Steve Jobs boasted that it was at least 5 years ahead of any phone on the market, he was almost exactly right. Even though Apple consistently added new features every year, their competitors had caught up by 2012 in many ways, even past them in some. So it was only right that in it’s 6th year Apple rebooted the look and in a few ways, the feel of iOS. Now this new direction doesn’t put them ahead again for 5 years, in fact a lot of the big features touted yesterday at WWDC can be found on phones now or in older mobile operating systems like the failed Maemo and WebOS. 

As the famous Picasso quote goes “Good artist copy great artist steal”. Steve Jobs is often cited for using that quote and for good reason. The essence of that quote is something I think Apple takes to heart still today. Doing something exactly the way someone else does something may be an impressive feat but won’t put you in the history books. However taking everything that is great about something and improving it allows you to steal the idea in a way. Another one of the reasons some people dislike Apple is because of what other people think about them. When they present their spin on a technology to the public that has already existed, Apple haters will scream that they didn’t invent it and it’s been around in some obscure form for years. That’s how Apple “steals” instead of “copies” and they continue to do it in iOS 7.

Control Center

This has been a feature Android phones have had for a while and iPhone power users have been begging for, for just as long. Quick access to features that are commonly used will not be easily accessed in iOS 7. It’s a relatively basic feature that is extremely useful. Instead of taking 2-4 gestures to turn on/off Wifi, Bluetooth or screen brightness can be done in one simple swipe and tap.

Multitasking

In iOS 4 Apple announced a somewhat limited version of “multitasking”. Instead of allowing any app to constantly run in the background Apple choose specific functioning apps that could continue to run like music, location, Airplay, VoIP and notifications. In some cases, apps that don’t fall into those categories are allowed 10 minutes to complete a task before being put in a suspended state until reopened. The reasoning for this was to preserve performance and battery life and Jobs’s belief that if the user sees a task manager the creator “blew it”.

Android on the other hand allowed multitasking pretty much from the beginning with improved iterations over time. In iOS 7 “true” multitasking will now be possible. However if you thought iOS was going to do it the way Android does it, you haven’t been paying attention. They’ve basically taken what they’ve learned from the Power Nap feature on MacBooks and applied it to iOS. The OS will “intelligently” update apps in the background at opportune times by learning how you use your iPhone. Apple says this will still preserve battery life but prevent you from having to wait for your Facebook feed to download and update when you open it. Some will say that Apple is “copying” Android with this feature but that would be technically and historically inaccurate. WebOS was actually the first mobile operating system with the app card system.

The different ways Android and iOS handle this one feature is a perfect metaphor for the philosophical differences of the two operating systems. Android gives you all the tools available and puts the burden on the user to figure them out and to decide how to best use them. Apple on the other hand meticulously curates the experience for the user, often times coming late to the party with features that could compromise that experience. Neither approach is inherently wrong or right, it comes down to personal preferences. 

AirDrop

Moving files from an iOS device has been a pain since the beginning. Without a files system users are forced to used the dreaded iTunes to import/export files or resort to emailing or texting files and images. iOS 6 brought photo sharing that made it incredibly easy to send other iOS devices pictures but neglected every other type of file. AirDrop, originally introduced in OSX has been brought to iOS and it’s about time. It allows you to set up an ad-hoc wireless connection with any other iOS device in your area and allows you to send and receive files, pictures and videos after an invite is accepted. A relatively simple but useful feature that further pushes mobile into a post-PC world. 

iTunes Radio

iTunes Radio is a Pandora style internet radio service that has been included into the Music App. It’s simple, beautiful and works great (even in Beta). It is ad-supported but if you pay the $25/year for iTunes Match, iTunes Radio is ad-free. Pretty sweet deal. 

Other Features

Notification Center, Calendar, Game Center, Passport Photos, Camera, Safari, and Siri all got redesigns. All sport a much more elegant, clean look with tweaks here and there in the functionality department. None of these new features are anything that will sale more iPhones but collectively it comes together in a nice package. 

Final Thoughts

When I first saw iOS 7 I wasn’t sure what to think of it. I initially hated most of the revamped icons but was pleased with the overall look. After using it for a full day, the icons feel less disjointed and I get the overall asthetic of the OS (although I still hate the Safari icon). Yesterday, Apple pundit and developer John Gruber wrote about Jony Ive seeing the design of software as an extension of the hardware and making them both harmonious. Using it for a while you begin see how the “functional layers” Ive’s talked about in the promo video work well together and make sense. The Beta 1 is still kind of rough around the edges, as Beta’s by name naturally are but I definitely see the design teams vision and i’m excited know where they go from here. iOS 7 truly feels like a reboot for iOS, like something entirely new yet very familiar.

What Microsoft Needs To Show At E3 To Get Gamers Excited About The Xbox One

I have a confession to make, I like TV. I also almost never buy used games and my internet connection is (mostly) always on with 30 Mbps down and 5 Mbps up. But reading some of the heavy-handed policies Microsoft laid out regarding the Xbox One didn’t sit right with me, for a few reasons. I’m not the only one, gamers have been furious about the impending changes that are happening to video game licensing this next generation. After multiple half-hearted attempts to gain control of the narrative, Microsoft finally released a page on their website with all of the new licensing changes. They aren’t as bad as some feared initially but they do tighten up control publishers have with regards to who gets to play the game and how compared to prior consoles. With that said lets go over what Microsoft can do to bring some excitement back to the XBox One.

Games

If there is anything Microsoft needs to do more than anything is talk about games! I’m not talking about games from Activision & EA that both consoles will get anyway, I’m talking exclusives. Show gamers why they would be missing out if they didn’t purchase an Xbox One. The word is Microsoft is investing $1Billion into their 1st Party studios for this generation. Let’s hope so because outside of Halo, Fable, Gears or War, and Forza their 1st Party titles have been pretty lackluster in the past few years on the XBox 360. 

In their first event they showed off an interesting game titled Quantum Break that looked very interesting. It seemed to be a mix of a live action TV show and a video game, could be promising. I’m also expecting to see more of Forza and something regarding a new Halo would definitely do a lot to soothe those used game wounds. There has been talk of Rare working on a new title as well, Killer Instinct? Banjo Kazooie? We also know the guys that started and left Infiniti Ward to start Respawn Games are making an Mech-shooter called “TitanFall” that’s exclusive to Xbox One. Microsoft said they have 15 exclusive titles coming Xbox One in the next year, 8 of those being new IP’s. I don’t expect to see all of those at E3, but if they were to show gameplay of a couple new games that are farther in development while teasing a few others, I think it would energize a lot of the faithful and get them back on board.

Used/Borrowed/Trading/Reselling Games

I don’t believe Microsoft should open their event talking about this but maybe somewhere in the middle they should address the DRM, 24 hr internet check issue. It doesn’t have to be extremely apologetic, just a clear understanding on why they felt the need to do it and what, if any benefits would come from it. PC games has been this way for years and no one complains. Mainly because older games can be found on sale for great prices so the benefits of buying used games kind of goes away. All users have access to the games installed on your console and you can sign into any Xbox One and play any of your games, just like Steam. In the info Microsoft put out about licensing there was a mention of having up to 10 family members capable of accessing all of your games from any Xbox One as well. This could be an interesting loop hole to letting friends borrow games, hopefully we’ll get some specifics on that as well.

In regards to the Xbox One needing to be online, this is one of my biggest complaints with the system. It automatically excludes a large swath of people around the world out of gaming. Robust internet connections are not prevalent or reliable everywhere, especially in rural areas and a lot of parts of the world. I’m sure Microsoft ran the numbers and determined that a majority of their customers were online and those that weren’t were expendable. That kind of logic is a bit worrisome, being that there are a number of use cases where a user won’t have access to the internet all the time but wants to play that $60 single player game they bought. The main reason for the 24 hr checks is to stop piracy and to enforce the new licensing restrictions that have been put in place. With that said, cheating/hacking has been a problem for the Xbox 360 in some popular online titles and it will be nice to have that squashed. If Microsoft can explain all of this clearly while laying out the benefits it could do a lot to calm some of the negative feedback they’ve got in the past 2 weeks.

RELATED: What Sony Needs To Show At E3 To Keep PS4 Momentum

Cloud Computing

Speaking of being online, Microsoft mentioned that developers will have the opportunity to use their servers to process some of their games physics and AI. I’d like to hear more of that and maybe even be shown some examples of how this would work. The problem I see is that most 3rd party developers won’t dedicate the time to use it unless the results are easily achievable with little work on the dev side. It may be relegated to 1st party titles only, which wouldn’t be such a bad thing if Microsoft really brings those 15 new exclusives in a year.

Xbox Live

I’d like to know how much Xbox Live will cost monthly/yearly as well as what does that subscription come with. Will Microsoft make basic online play free this generation? Not likely, as that is part of the allure of Xbox Live in the first place. Will I still be able to take advantage of all of the TV features if I don’t subscribe to Xbox Live. Do I have to have a cable subscription to take advantage of the TV features and are there any deals in place with cable providers to ensure I have a cable box with HDMI-CEC support? There has been rumors for over a year that Microsoft would bring a Platinum Xbox Live membership, maybe we’ll see something announced that correlates to the “premium” TV content they’re bringing to XBox like the new Halo TV series. 

I was really excited about the XBox One prior to their first press conference, I’m hoping their E3 event can convince me to buy one. Sony has a lot of momentum going into to E3 but all of that could go away if they announce a similar DRM strategy for the PS4. There are very high stakes for both companies this generation as both are counting on their new consoles to bring energy and excitement to their other products. 

What can Microsoft do to win you over at E3 this year? What are you expecting?

What Sony Has To Show At E3 To Keep PS4 Momentum

Since E3 kicks off on Monday I wanted to take a second and take note of the things I (and probably you) would like to see from both Microsoft and Sony at their press conferences. 

 Going into this E3 Sony has a lot of momentum. They’ve now officially sold more PS3’s than Microsoft has sold Xbox 360’s in the world (both a little over 77 Million units). They’re about to release the highest reviewed game of the year (so far) with Last of Us next week and Microsoft has a minor PR nightmare on their hands at the moment. All of this is casting the PS4 in a very favorable light among core gamers. It’s Sony’s to win, all they have to do is listen to me…

The Console

Show us the box Sony. I know I’d be greedy to ask for something sleek and high-end looking while still wanting it under $500 but I’ll do it anyway. In the end, I really don’t care what it looks like as long as it plays games.

Streaming Games/UI/ Community Features

They promised a lot of lofty ideas about downloading games and being to play them almost instantly, being able to stream games (PS1, PS2, PS3), or watching our friends play games. None of that was actually shown in real-time so I’d like to see at least some of this stuff in action. I know they recently bought the streaming company Gaikai and they’re probably still integrating and optimizing it but they have to show something. They showed us bits of information about sharing and community features that looked very interesting, but I’d like to see a little more, especially the interface. 

PSN/PS Plus

Everyone is waiting to see if Sony decides to charge this generation for online gaming. Microsoft made a lot of money off of Xbox Live subscriptions but also turned off a lot of gamers. It’s a fine line to walk, but something I think they nailed with PS Plus. It’s not clear if Sony will carry over PS Plus but without backwards compatibility it’ll be of little use for a while. That is unless they are able to get their streaming service up and running and introduce that as part of a PS Plus membership. That would be awesome, but I’m not holding my breath.

Used Games/Always Connected

Sony has to come out and CLEARLY explain their position on how game licensing will work on the PS4 if it’s any different than the PS3. They’ve been quiet during Microsoft’s fumble to the truth and they can’t make the same mistake. If it’s similar to Microsoft’s policies they need to let consumers know explicitly and show how this could benefit gamers. Cheaper older digital copies of games on PSN like Steam? However if they announce something less restrictive (and confusing) than Microsoft then I they’re half-way home to a great console launch. 

Media Integration

I know everyone ragged on Microsoft for talking only about TV the majority of their press conference but a lot of us do care about TV/media. Granted a lot of us are increasingly getting our video content from the web instead of cable but we still want an elegant way to curate and watch it all. Sony has always provide high quality hardware but their software has alway been mediocre at best. I’m curious to see how the PS4 will handle media. 

PS EYE

What will it do? Are there any games for it? Can I use it for navigation & voice ala Kinect? Do I have to have it hooked up to play games that don’t use it? I’m not that excited about the PS Eye but glad it’s there, I guess. If developers do figure out great uses for it then everyone will have one and it’s great. However if it’s going to be as used as often as the other PS Eye’s before it than they could keep it and charge me less for a console bundle. Prove me wrong Sony…. 

Exclusives

This is Sony’s strongest hand to play as they’ve dominated this generation in this area by consistently delivering high quality first and second-party titles (God of War, Uncharted, Last of Us, Infamous). Sony has at least 12 studios around the world and a strong line up of second party indie-developers that have brought some incredible titles to PSN (Flower, Journey, Super Stardust HD). Sony fans will be looking to see something from Sony Santa Monica, Naughty Dog, Pixel Junk, ThatGameCompany, and of course the now mythical, The Last Guardian from Team ICO/Sony Japan. There’s also rumors that the once exclusive Square may be bring it back to Sony making the next-gen Final Fantasy (Versus XIII/FFXV) a PS4 exclusive. Sony knows how to get their fans excited so I’m anxious to see what kind of surprises they have up their sleeves. 

Hey Sony, good luck trying to talk about all of this in 2 hours. I’m bullish on exclusives, bearish on streaming oriented services being ready at launch.

Unifying A Wall of App Channels: The Apple TV Guide App

Call me crazy, but I’m hoping for a surprise announcement from Apple on Monday that iOS 7 will bring an App Store to the little set-top box that could, the Apple TV. I know, I know, not again but I believe now is the right time.

Negotiating The Future

Everyone has wondered why Apple hasn’t released an App Store for the Apple TV for the past two years, it seems like such an obvious thing to do. However if Apple was trying to convince networks to climb aboard their crazy over-the-top internet TV service then releasing an App store would’ve just confused things. Once those talks with the networks stalled, either because of existing contracts that wouldn’t allow them, or the networks not wanting to stir the pot with cable providers, it was on to the next option.

There were rumors that Apple was in talks with different cable operators about some type of partnership, but they probably didn’t take it too kindly that Apple tried to erase them from the equation by going to the networks first. It now seems either those talks have stalled as well or Apple decided to forgo being the cable box and take a more modern approach that gives them more control and flexibility.  

Would Apple rather have a service similar to what they’re setting up with music? Having control of how the content is delivered and displayed while the user pays a subscription or listens/watches ads via their iAd service. Sure. But at the moment, the TV industry isn’t as desperate as the music industry was when iTunes was created, in fact, the TV industry is booming. Even though we all see the writing on the wall, why be the first company to take the inevitable hit in revenues during the transition. 

What about the cable providers, surely they’d want to play ball right? They’re the easiest part of the equation to live without. Like many have pointed out before, the cable industry isn’t as much of an oligopoly as the phone companies are. There are a number of big fish like Comcast, Time-Warner, Charter, AT&T, Verizon, DirecTV, and Dish, then there are at least a dozen smaller companies that operate all over the country and that’s just the United States. Apple can’t just partner with one or two cable providers and get a large swath of the country like they could in the cell phone industry. 

So without the right pressures to push the TV industry into the future, Apple has to figure out a way to continue to encourage the transition. They also have to remain flexible and not paint themselves into a corner functionally, if/when attitudes change with content owners.

Unifying The Wall Of Apps

So that leaves the easiest and most obvious solution, create an App Store specifically for the TV. Currently the iPad has dozens of TV, cable and video related apps while the Apple TV currently has only a few. In order to watch apps like HBO Go, ABC, or CNN on your TV you must use Airplay to beam them to your Apple TV. Airplay was a really good stop gap to getting content outside of what the current Apple TV offered on your TV. But relying on the wireless protocol to be the primary way for video to be delivered from apps to the TV would be ridiculous. Not only are you telling people without iOS devices to not even consider the Apple TV but using it for more than watching a quick video or two starts to become a pain, especially if you’re using multiple apps. 

But clicking on individual silos of content wrapped in apps, even on the TV, can still be a bit of a chore after a while. Could Apple come up with a software solution to solve the discoverability problem? There has been talk of Apple allowing more synergy between apps, maybe this begins in iOS 7. If Apple created API’s that allowed apps to see certain meta data from other apps, they could in theory create a guide that could scrape the content from all the apps it’s told to look through. This “Apple TV Guide” could list all of the available content, LIVE or on-demand and organize it. Clicking a specific show could instantly launch said show immediately, directly from the app. The user could also cue up other content on a iOS device while still watching the current video/TV show. As Apple so famously does, I could imagine them releasing this killer app as a way to showcase the new app store as well as show off the API’s. 

Taking The Long Road

This slower approach allows networks to continue to add content at their own pace and terms while giving users a user-friendly way to enjoy all of their content in a unified experience. This still allows apps to be authenticated if need be but also opens the door for a per app subscription service at some point in the future. Even if cable providers wanted to put apps on the Apple TV (Time Warner just might) it could be integrated into the “Apple TV Guide App”. Granted I’d imagine networks taking issue with users not having to launch their apps directly, but having the guide launch another app before showing the video you want to watch could get really old, fast. Hopefully they could find a solution that makes networks happy without breaking usability.

In his 3 part series on the future of TV, former Apple employee Ben Thompson makes excellent points on why a la carte channels are a fantasy and un-bundling channels would only lead to specialty content like ESPN or HBO being incredibly expensive if they wanted to retain their current revenue. 

In his most recent post he talks about the roles that television fill in our lives. He looks at which areas television still excels at (Live sports, story-telling, escapism) and where the internet has been doing a better job (Keeping us informed, Education). He talks about how escapism could be won by making the Apple TV a gaming console, something I’ve discussed numerous times here before. Selling the Apple TV for $99 and an official Apple game controller for $49 and an App Store could change the entire landscape of the video game industry. With more than just touch controls, developers could create more complex and challenging games that could make the Apple TV the greatest indie gaming device ever created that’s not a PC. The Apple TV offering a moderate to causal gaming experience would put a death nail in Nintendo and put Microsoft and Sony on alert. 

There is no telling what Apple will do with the Apple TV, but the writing is on the wall, content and access are what every new set-top box announced lacks. Apple has the leverage and user base to get out ahead of competitors like Roku and the Xbox One by  using their army of developers to create experiences that are unmatched, like they did with iPad apps. 

Will The Apple TV Finally Get An App Store At WWDC?

Will this be the WWDC where Apple finally releases an SDK for developers to create Apple TV apps? For the past two years there have been rumors and speculation that Apple was going to make a serious play for the living room.  Last year the buzz about an Apple made television reached an almost annoying level then drastically dialed down towards the end of the year. 

Apple hasn’t said much recently in regards to the Apple TV except that it was still an area of “great interest”. Meanwhile sales of their set-top box have been growing exponentially in the past year. Last week at the D11 conference Tim Cook said the Apple TV has now sold 13 million units total, half of which were in the last year. 

COMPETITION

It’s clear that the call for a better TV experience is a growing sentiment among everyone who has ever used a cable box. It’s also clear that Apple has been working on creating their vision of what TV should look like in the 21st Century. There are many existing competitors in this arena like the Roku and Google TV, whose open philosophy allows almost anyone to create an app for their set-top boxes. While they both have a decent selection of Apps for video content, they haven’t been able to bring in some of the major networks the way Apple has on iOS, most of which can be sent to the Apple TV via Airplay. Instead of trying to pull the networks into the future, Microsoft’s Xbox One plans to meet them where they are. It appears the latest Xbox will be working more directly with cable providers by using an HDMI pass-through that allows you to control your cable through the Xbox, similar to Google TV. 

​None of those solutions sound like fixes to anything, not even Apple’s. In fact they may even sound over complicated to the average person. ​Which is one of the reasons the set-top hasn’t taken off. The Apple TV is the most easiest to setup and navigate but it’s also one of the most empty in regards to content. Relying on a iOS device to airplay content is fine when it’s convenient, an annoyance when you have to use it because the app isn’t on the Apple TV. 

​

WHY THE WAIT?​

But if Apple is just going to create an Apple TV app store, and not some over-the-top TV subscription model why wait until now?

In typical Apple fashion, they never come when you call, but they’re always on time (at least most of the time). People have been calling for a dedicated App store for the Apple TV for years now. It seems like such a no-brainer for Apple to do, so why haven’t they? I believe they were waiting to see what they could work out with the networks and when that failed they moved to the cable providers. In the meantime, they’ve sold more Apple TV’s than ever, increased awareness of the product (without spending a dime) and insured developer support if and when it was announced. Yes, the App Store for the Apple TV was probably a backup plan of sorts. It’s not a bad backup plan to have, don’t get me wrong but it makes sense that Apple would like to create more of a service than just a store. But if they can’t totally reform the TV experience in their image like they did with music, that doesn’t mean they still can’t create a compelling product. 

SOFTWARE

iOS 7 could come with lots of new features for the Apple TV SDK to better handle the increase in Apps. Voice search via iPhone/iPad, allowing Live Streaming Apps, and new ways to organize Apps on screen, maybe a completely new UI made for TV viewing via apps. There has been debate on whether having an app for every channel is what people want or if we need to create the ability to surf like on traditional TV. Either way, Apple could use this method as a stop gap until a true over-the-top strategy is realistic. They already have cable and satellite apps on iOS that enable playback. These can easily be ported to the Apple TV for those with cable subscriptions. Individual channels could charge subscriptions for access to those that don’t have cable. 

BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME

A small issue for developers would be their iPad apps can’t just be thrown on the TV store. Since the resolution of HDTV’s are (1280 X 720) and (1920 X 1080), they will have to be reformatted for TV as neither are the resolutions of any iOS device. This is in fact a good thing for Apple. It ensures that a flood of iPad apps that have no business on TV aren’t ported over. It also makes developers re-think how their app should be presented on the big screen. 

HARDWARE

It’s unclear if an entirely new Apple TV would be needed to run a store on it. Arguably the size for most apps would be relatively small as video content is streamed, not stored locally. Most of the TV apps on my iPad are less than 100 MB. However for gaming, app size and controls are both a concern. Current Apple TV’s come with about 8GB of memory for streaming and buffering. That’s more than enough for streaming and a few GB’s could be used to store apps on. They could then sale new Apple TV’s with larger size memories for those that want them. 

GAMING CONSOLE

Everyone has mentioned how awesome the Apple TV could be as a casual gaming console, including the co-creator of the Xbox, Nat Brown. Brown opines that Apple could “simply kill PlayStation, Wii U, and Xbox by introducing an open 30% cut app/game ecosystem for Apple TV”.  I wholeheartedly agree that Apple would knock the legs out of Nintendo’s fan base and cause a large amount of price conscience parents to consider the Apple TV as a gaming console for their kids instead of the PS3 or Xbox 360 which will be closer to it’s price range come the holidays. Cheaper software, and low barrier of entry for game developers are other advantages Apple has on traditional game consoles. 

While most causal Apple fans feel iOS devices are suitable controllers for games, I couldn’t disagree more. Sure for some games, gestures, swipes and gyroscope controls are good enough. But for any games that require some type of precision or higher complexity than Angry Birds, nothing beats buttons and a control stick. With the increasingly powerful chips being upgraded on a yearly basis it’s not hard to imagine the Apple TV getting close to even the newest console’s performance in a few years time. Under Steve Jobs, Apple never took gaming on iOS that seriously but hopefully Tim Cook will set a different tone going forward. (In my wildest dreams, Apple buys Nintendo)

​

Tim Cook Interview At D11 Conference (Video)

Yesterday Tim Cook sat down for an interview with Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher at the D11 conference. He talked about Apple’s perception in the media and Wall Street, Android’s latest success, and the future of the Apple TV. He also spoke about the possibility of a larger iPhone, Jony Ive’s hand in iOS 7’s overhaul as well the mobile OS becoming more open to 3rd party apps. ​

As usual Cook doesn’t give up much as far as information about Apple or there future plans but hints that new things are coming both in hardware and software.​

Microsoft’s Xbox One Reveal Played Right Into Sony’s PS4 Plans

It’s no secret that Microsoft has had it’s eye on more than just gamers as customers for the future of the Xbox for quite some time.  Throughout the XBox 360’s life they’ve continued to add multimedia apps, channels and features to the console’s Xbox Live subscription service. The strategy has brought in more causal gamers over time, especially in the United States. Sony’s Playstation 3 had a Blu-Ray player as it’s main attraction that also brought in it’s fair share of casual and non-gamers as well but they never bit the hand that fed them. Continuously providing a diverse library of critically acclaimed exclusive titles every year that kept serious gamers of all types enthralled and loyal.

Microsoft on the other hand focused on a few core exclusives (Halo, Forza, Fable, Gears of War) while trying to buy content exclusivity from popular 3rd party titles like Call of Duty. Both companies hoped on the motion control gaming bandwagon with Microsoft’s bet on Kinect and it’s media integration payed off big time and created more overall excitement. Selling over 10 million Kinects, Microsoft shifted a lot of it’s 1st party developer muscle behind the device selling software yet creating another chasm between the companies financial goals and the needs of it’s most die-hard fans.

Each of the companies differing strategies have worked well for both companies depending on who you ask and how “success” is measured. Xbox came out in 2005, a year earlier than the PS3 but Sony has managed to outsell the Xbox 360 nearly every year worldwide. Closing the gap created by the year head start Microsoft had and now both consoles have sold roughly 77.3 Million consoles apiece. Not counting the millions of consoles Microsoft had to replace or were replaced by users during the “Red Ring of Death” disaster during the early years of the Xbox 360. On the contrary, Sony’s Entertainment division has lost billions of dollars due to the initial high cost of the console and the lack of 3rd party game sales that troubled the system in the beginning due to the difficult development learning curve. Microsoft on the other hand has made tons of money from the revenues of their Xbox Live subscription service and the ability to get the price of the Xbox 360 down quickly. Even though Sony managed to sell just as many PS3’s as Xbox’s worldwide, Microsoft clearly holds the mind share lead in the U.S. as the XBox 360 has outsold it almost 2:1.

It was clear this generation Microsoft was going to go all-in on turning the XBox brand into a full-fledged entertainment hub that encompassed more than just video games. With a goal to ultimately unify their Windows 8, Windows Phone 8, and Windows 8 Tablet businesses with the popularity of Xbox. Sony (and many others) anticipated this move and doubled down on games and gamers with the Playstation 4. If you ask PS3 fans, Sony has the best 1st party line up of games out of any system since the console launched. Franchises like Uncharted, God of War, Gran Turismo, Infamous and art-house titles like Journey, Flower and Heavy Rain not only push the graphical capabilities of the system but are critically acclaimed as well. Sony has a proud heritage of delivering great games and that doesn’t seem to be changing with the next generation of consoles. 

Sony’s Playstation 4’s reveal was part mea culpa for the mistakes made with the Playstation 3 around difficulties with development and online network missteps that plagued Sony during the early years of the PS3. The other part was a progressive vision of gaming in a world now dominated now by smartphones, tablets and social media. At the reveal, Sony spoke passionately about talking with developers (large and independent) and getting a sense of what they wanted and needed out of a next generation gaming machine. They talked about the importance of community and sharing in gaming and showed ways they will enable gamers to be able to share their experiences easily with each other seamlessly. They touched on the importance of instantaneous access to games by eliminating loading in games and download times by streaming, and most importantly they showed games. They not only showed people actually playing games, they brought out some of their most creative game developers to show off lofty ideas of what would be possible on the Playstation 4.

Contrast that to the Xbox One reveal that took place on Tuesday. Microsoft didn’t even mention that their device played games until over halfway through the event. Instead they decided to focus on Xbox One’s integration with (live) television, a concept that’s increasingly becoming foreign to young people today. They oddly spent a lot of time trumpeting a delivery system (cable) many believe has worn out it’s welcome and will soon be replaced by IPTV. They showed how the Kinect will be an essential part of this strategy that included, voice commands, gestures and Skype integration.  Microsoft warned before the event they would talk more about games at E3 in 3 weeks, but gamers didn’t get the memo. This event was an obvious play at those that may not be hardcore gamers but still may want an Xbox One as a media device. Hey, I get that, and on paper it makes sense, but who exactly did Microsoft think would be watching an Xbox press conference at 10AM PST? Sure they may have gotten a few stories ran by CNN and Wall Street Journal but the trade-off of alienating your core base was not worth the risk.

Microsoft had 3 extra months than Sony to prepare for this and holding a relatively short hour-long press conference there definitely was room to show off a bit more to whet the appetite. Showing some actual gameplay or even trailers of key franchises would’ve done a lot to appease their rabid fans and balance out the almost none stop media announcements. Instead they showed a pre-rendered video from EA Sports, and trailer for the new racing game Forza and another trailer of the new Call of Duty: Ghosts. In typically Microsoft fashion they relied heavily on 3rd party publishers to fill in the gaming gaps.

If having a lackluster game showing wasn’t enough to damper the excitement of Xbox fans, a candid interview with the Vice President of XBox, Phil Harrison by Wired went online shortly after the event. In the interview Harrison spoke about players having to download games to the XBox One and entering an activation code that locks the game to the players account/console. The player then wouldn’t need the disc to play the game but if the game was placed into another Xbox One (a friends) they would have to pay an undisclosed fee to be granted access. Essentially not allowing Xbox One games to be traded, borrowed or sold. Reporters pounced on this information and tried to get clarification but were told different answers depending on who in Microsoft they talked to. The post coverage quickly turned into a PR disaster. Even now, days after the event, no one is sure exactly how this all functions, including Microsoft themselves. They do however ensure there will be a way to resell your games but won’t clarify how this will be achieved. Needless to say this left gamers feeling uneasy and the speculation begin to spread like wildfire online.

Frustration turned into outrage that began to bubble in gaming forums and blogs around the internet Tuesday afternoon. Numerous sarcastic and angry YouTube videos are now circulating the web, some now in the millions of views talking about how Microsoft blew the XBox One reveal and turned their backs on their most loyal fans. Many die-hard XBox fans have threaten to switch allegiances to Playstation 4 if Microsoft doesn’t change the pending used game policy. Another issue causing uneasiness was the need to always have your system connected to the internet. This rumor has be around since earlier in the year but was substantiated again by the Vice President of XBox when he told Kotaku that the system had to be connected to the internet at least every 24 hrs in order for it to continue to function. Microsoft has since responded that they haven’t fully committed to that and the details were still being worked out. Multiple gaming websites like IGN and Gamespot and Kotaku have taken polls to get a feeling on which console gamers felt more favorably towards and if I was Microsoft I would be a little worried. The polls ranged from around 64-88% of people saying they would purchase a PS4 over the Xbox One.

Sony no doubt had to be getting a kick out of seeing Microsoft getting hammered amongst the gaming community and press but they remained silent. This silence has led some to believe that Sony may too be mulling around the idea of restricting used games on the Playstation 4 as well. When asked after their press conference in February, Sony’s Worldwide Studio head denied such restrictions would be put on PS4 games. I guess we’ll have to wait until E3 to know for sure on both systems. Beyond that, Sony has it’s own issues to worry about. In their February reveal they promised a lot but showed very little when it came to services and features for the PS4. The online game streaming company they bought over a year ago, Gaikai seems to be the backbone to the streaming service and features promised but no working demo was showed nor was a lot of the user-interface that would be used for the PS4. While Sony warned that all of the streaming services won’t be completed by launch and it will be a continual process, they will have to make good on some of those promises or they could receive a blowback of their own come E3.

​

As things stand now the XBox One has had a disastrous few days among the gaming crowd while few mainstream news outlets have picked up on the backlash. Microsoft is going to have to come out swinging during the E3 press event on June 10th, showing loyal Xbox gamers why the XBox One is still the console for them. Microsoft did promise 15 exclusive titles, 8 all-new IP’s within the first year of the life of the XBox One and a renewed investment in 1st party titles ($1 Billion). The proof will be in the pudding as they will have to show off a lot of those games including some fan favorites like Halo as well as some interesting new IP’s that hopefully spark interest.

​Sony on the other hand has never had a problem in the game department. They showed off a couple 1st party titles in February and fans are anticipating a lot more to be shown at E3 from their most respected studios. The first year of a console’s life depends largely on the die-hard, early adopters that will line up outside of stores to be the first to get their hands on the new devices. If Sony continues to hit all the right notes with gamers and can deliver on most of what they promised in their reveal, there might be some Xbox 360 owners lining up for the PS4 this holiday season.