HFUIT #3 – mailing to groups on iOS – not!

June 27th, 2011

On Mac OS X you can define groups of contacts in AddressBook, e.g.,Bridge Club or Monday night meditation group and so on. Then in the Mail.app you can send an email to all the members of the group by simply beginning to type in the To field the name of the group and Mail.app will present a list of completions and then you just click on Bridge Club and presto! all the emails of the contacts in the group are then inserted into the To field without you having to enter them one-by-one.

On the iPhone Mail.app the situation is strangely, annoyingly different. Assuming you have sync’d your contacts from your Mac then the groups are present and you can create an email and select a group to send to, but instead of Mail.app on iOS putting the email addresses of the group members into the To field it lets you select a member of the group whose email you want to add to the To field. You then have to do this repeatedly for each member of the group which is obviously a pain royale for a group of more than one or two members. This makes contact groups pretty much useless on the iPhone, iPad and all things iOS. There are grotesque work-arounds but this supposed to be an Apple ecosystem! It’s just supposed to work.

I remain ever hopeful that the upcoming iOS 5 will remedy this situation – but I’m not holding my breath.

HFUIT?

HFUIT #2 – FCP X, !P

June 24th, 2011

There’s been a lot of vitriol spilled regarding Tuesday’s release by Apple of Final Cut Pro X. Some have wondered why Apple appears to be abandoning the professional editing community, and it certainly seems that Apple has in fact done so – Final Cut 7 / Studio 3 is no longer available for sale and so no new editing stations can be purchased and licensed from Apple; the future compatibility with new versions of the Mac OS/X or OS/XI or whatever are not assured and so on.

Apple has made no statements – as is their norm – regarding these issues and many others that have been raised regarding the feature set of FCP X versus the reality of editing in newsrooms, film studios and so forth.

What has been most galling to the user base is calling the thing FCP X, implying that it is an upgrade to FCP 7. It is not! FCP X won’t even open FCP 7 projects – by design (note that iMovie ‘11 – the current version – provides an option to export Final Cut XML format which is, at present, useless with FCP X).

Clearly FCP X is not aimed at the user base that has been waiting for several years for an upgrade to FCP that would make use of 64-bit multi-core hardware; provide native support for new codecs; use cocoa and so on.

The reputation of FCP over the past ten years has been built on successes in editing highly visible commercial films such as “Social Network“, “True Grit” and so forth (see Major films edited with FCP). This has led lots of others to want to use FCP. Then there’s its widespread availability in colleges and universities in film classes and so forth. There has been considerable caché in using Apple equipment and software in creative industries – it’s hard to watch recent TV episodes or movies with scenes of laptops in them that aren’t Apple laptops and most of these likely not paid product placement spots. It’s simply the case that Apple laptops are the handiest when setting up a scene that needs a computer.

So Apple has successfully built a brand that for many years has been viewed as a boutique brand – out of the mainstream but a center of excellence for the creative arts.

Of late with the iPhone, iPad, MacBook Air, iTunes and iCloud; Apple has finally become in many respects a mainstream brand. Podcasts are called podcasts because they were originally pretty much only accessible on early iPods. A really successful construction of a brand.

It seems that Apple has succeeded in getting to a point where it simply doesn’t consider that it is in their corporate interests to continue to provide products that support the professional video / film editing market – even though that’s a significant component of how they have gotten to be successful.

It would appear that Apple has a vision of a future that just doesn’t see much benefit in professionally edited film and video. It’s a future in which many of the creative ideas of film-making will be taken over by heuristics that are embedded in the editing software and that represent some range of aesthetics but that perhaps won’t encourage so much new thinking in how to compose video and audio to make a statement or tell a story – although Motion 5 is quite an amazing app that can be used to create new features that can be injected back into FCP X. How long will it take for the current professional industry to become as obsolete as buggy whip makers isn’t clear but apparently Apple doesn’t particularly care about the likely loss in revenue on that front.

There is a vision of the cloud with its implied unlimited bandwidth (and / or perhaps reduced video quality) being available pretty much everywhere that matters – which leaves out most of the so-called 3rd world for the next decade or so, thinking optimistically. The high-end editing of video from iPhone X and so forth uploaded to iCloud Theatre is one direction that appears to be in Apple’s sight.

So none of what’s happening with FCP X is because Apple doesn’t understand the industry that has been using FCP more or less successfully over the past decade. It’s happening because Apple has a clear vision that doesn’t include catering to that industry.

It would appear that Apple calculated that the likely anger that would be vented over FCP X was worth the benefits in marketing that would accrue by using the Final Cut Pro brand instead of calling the new product iMovie Pro – which is almost certainly a more honest branding. The Final Cut Pro branding will attract new prosumers and that is what Apple will build off of going forward. There will be plenty of business for the third-party training market and so on.

Of course Apple isn’t the only force moving to the cloud – there’s Google, Amazon and Microsoft; and that is a larger issue in so many ways: availability of internet bandwidth and access; and trust in centralized management of individual’s information – to name two; and this is the most disturbing issue of which FCP X is only a symptom.

The Four Mile Circus

May 22nd, 2011

In Alfred Bester’s The Stars My Destination, Geoffrey Fourmyle creates a traveling (jaunting to be precise) fantastical extravaganza of the intelligentsia of the day. For some reason it comes to mind when I see mention of the TED or the Google Zeitgeist. I’m just saying.

HFUIT #1: Nature is NOT particularly Green

May 22nd, 2011

There are two well known prestigious weekly journals that publish mostly bio-medical articles but also enough other science and the occasional mathematics. The two are Science and Nature. Science is published in the United States by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and Nature is published in the U.K. by the Nature Publishing Group (NPG). Now I mentioned these are weekly publications – high quality, full color publications. The print edition of each of these is typically 100 – 125 pages in US Letter or European A4 size. There are typically a few articles of interest in each issue – maybe one or two. So if you get the print copy you might be tempted to tear out the one or two articles and put in your file cabinet for future reference.

Wait a minute! This is the age of the inter-webs and we should be able to file these things on our computers. Indeed we can! Both publications have online archives going back to time immemorial and it is straightforward to activate online access with a print subscription.

But what if I want to just subscribe to online access and forgoe the weekly print copy that inevitably is pretty much instant trash? There are nifty ads for mass spectrometers and PCR supplies and the like – but really the lab manager knows the sources and the inter-webs provide the information needed here as well.

While Science does offer, on its subscription web page, the option of personal online only digital edition subscriptions, Nature does not. I figured I must be overlooking the option on the Nature website so I called NPG customer service in New York and was told that there is no option to subscribe to Nature without providing a physical address to which the print copy must be delivered.

This seemed bizarre so I wrote an email to the support desk for NPG and got back a reply confirming that there is no digital only option for Nature; however, it is possible to request that NPG suspend the dispatch of the magazine but technically you still may only subscribe to the print copy and get online access as a benefit of the normal print copy subscription.

I’m not talking about subscription price breaks at all, just the issue of even being able to actually get a subscription that doesn’t require the delivery of an increasingly useless and wasteful print copy – given that everything is online and accessible via digital object identifiers and the like.

HFUIT?

Has the colossal mechanism no purpose?

December 20th, 2010

The following excerpt from Act III of Shaw’s “Man and Superman” (known as “Don Juan in Hell”) is an interesting jumping off point for reflections on the nature of emergence.

Don Juan: …has the colossal mechanism no purpose?

Devil: None my friend. You think, because you have a purpose, Nature must have one. You might as well expect it to have fingers and toes because you have them.

Don Juan: But I should not have them if they served no purpose. And I, my friend, am as much a part of Nature as my own finger is a part of me. If my finger is the organ by which I grasp the sword and the mandolin, my brain is the organ by which Nature strives to understand itself. My dog’s brain serve’s only my dog’s purposes; but my own brain labors at a knowledge which does nothing for me personally but make my body bitter to me and my decay and death a calamity. Were I not possessed with a purpose beyond my own I had better be a ploughman than a philosopher; for the ploughman lives as long as the philosopher eats more, sleeps better, and rejoices in the wife of his bosom with less misgiving. This is because the philosopher is in the grip of the Life Force. This Life Force says to him “I have done a thousand wonderful things unconsciously by merely willing to live and following the line of least resistance; now I want to know myself and my destinatiuon, and choose my path; so I have made a special brain – a philosopher’s brain – to grasp this knowledge for me as the husbandman’s hand grasps the plough for me. And this” says the Life Force to the philosopher “must thou strive to do for me until thou diest, when I will make another brain and another philosopher to carry on the work.”

Devil: What is the use of knowing?

Don Juan: Why, to be able to choose the line of greatest advantage instead of yielding in the direction of least resistance. Does a ship sail to its destination no better than a log drifts nowhither? The philosopher is Nature’s pilot.