I've been pondering this for a few weeks now. FaceTime is a potentially a great open standard but only if it's taken up by enough devices and companies.
We all know that eventually all Apple iToys will will support a version of FaceTime so we expect the iPod and iPad to get access within the next twelve months. We'd also hope iChat will get a update so that the Mac community are automatically FaceTime users.
We'd hope companies like Skype will take this new format on board bringing their reach further. I however have a different idea in the form of Ustream.
For those of you who don't know about Ustream its essentially a live video broadcast website. It broadcast live events, a lot of red carpets or conferences whilst also recording them for playback later. This isn't the important part I think the reason for Ustream being set up is.
Founded by John Ham, Brad Hunstable, and Dr. Gyula Feher, these men had a simple goal. To enable their friend in the Army, posted overseas to communicate with their families at home. Especially when time was limited in a war zone these soldiers could communicate to all their family.
I see the use of Ustream and FaceTime together doing what they both set out to do. That is bringing families together through video chats.
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
Monday, 23 August 2010
Wave Bye to Google Wave
Google Wave was announced in May 2009 as an email today. Their theory was email was about thirty years old, it hadn't changed much in that time but the digital world around it had. So the thought was what would email look like if it was invented today, the answer was Google Wave, a realtime instant messaging meets email known as waves. By the beginning of August 2010 Google decided it was time to pull the plug on this experiment.
Where did it all go wrong.
In first instance Email is the center of all our lives and is better in my opinion than Fax and even email hasn't killed off that. Second if email was invented toady it wouldn't be Google Wave in its current form, it would be Google Wave developed further down the line. Thirdly, email should be developed not a new technology so why wasn't email on steroids developed.
I'm a big fan of Google Wave, I use it for a number of different tasks and I'd even started moving a lot of long term planning conversations with colleagues to it. I was finding more and more ways to use it for my work.
What I found the biggest problem with Wave though, was the fact it didn't have a subject box, even an optional one. If I send an email it always has a subject box. It's the way I sort my message and search for them and I so wanted that in wave.
Though the extensions in Wave brought great expansion to its use, many of them didn't work as described. What I found though is many of the extensions I wanted available native in wave's. I wanted things like import and export documents. Countdowns to open and close wave discussions. Audio and video conversations that were recorded live then the recordings embedded like Ustream does for later review. Drawing boards, embedding waves in each other and externally, and even password protect part of waves. There could have been type what you say functionality or visual representations of links.
All of these functions would have made Google Wave what it was supposed to be and further more are already available technology, either used by Google or being developed by them.
Google became so much more towards the end, there were types of Wave such as meetings, brainstorming, to do lists, plus more. Each bringing a clear vision of what Google Wave could do and for someone who used it, I can say it did it better than most, but not perfect and not what we'd expect from Google.That was a big problem for me.
Wave began to show widgets that allowed for conversations or mini wave like forums to be attached to websites and was tested to a live Ustream Broadcast. This really began to show off the potential of the system and if Wave wasn't closing I'd have been trying that.
So what was its biggest problems, the answer. Scale. The scale of the project was big but also required to be small at the same time. Google were the only provider of Wave, meaning you had to be a Google member with a Gmail account that limits the amount of people willing to replace many email like tasks with wave. This stopped many people who would probably experiment or benefit using waves but not signup.
Second is the smallness of Wave, it's big and bulky but it works. I'd use it on a phone but it's too big. I'd use it on a tablet for work but only for task lists, brain storming basically the business functionality. I'd use it on my computer for meetings. That's the problem I couldn't use an aspect of it on one device or the whole Wave technology on something small like a phone, and belive me I've tried. The project just needed to be scaled like email has been across devices.
So I will wave goodbye to Google Wave, it was amazing and I hope its technologies do end up in my future email clients but as a straight replacement for my email I'm sorry the world just wants it to develop email not be replace it.
Where did it all go wrong.
In first instance Email is the center of all our lives and is better in my opinion than Fax and even email hasn't killed off that. Second if email was invented toady it wouldn't be Google Wave in its current form, it would be Google Wave developed further down the line. Thirdly, email should be developed not a new technology so why wasn't email on steroids developed.
I'm a big fan of Google Wave, I use it for a number of different tasks and I'd even started moving a lot of long term planning conversations with colleagues to it. I was finding more and more ways to use it for my work.
What I found the biggest problem with Wave though, was the fact it didn't have a subject box, even an optional one. If I send an email it always has a subject box. It's the way I sort my message and search for them and I so wanted that in wave.
Though the extensions in Wave brought great expansion to its use, many of them didn't work as described. What I found though is many of the extensions I wanted available native in wave's. I wanted things like import and export documents. Countdowns to open and close wave discussions. Audio and video conversations that were recorded live then the recordings embedded like Ustream does for later review. Drawing boards, embedding waves in each other and externally, and even password protect part of waves. There could have been type what you say functionality or visual representations of links.
All of these functions would have made Google Wave what it was supposed to be and further more are already available technology, either used by Google or being developed by them.
Google became so much more towards the end, there were types of Wave such as meetings, brainstorming, to do lists, plus more. Each bringing a clear vision of what Google Wave could do and for someone who used it, I can say it did it better than most, but not perfect and not what we'd expect from Google.That was a big problem for me.
Wave began to show widgets that allowed for conversations or mini wave like forums to be attached to websites and was tested to a live Ustream Broadcast. This really began to show off the potential of the system and if Wave wasn't closing I'd have been trying that.
So what was its biggest problems, the answer. Scale. The scale of the project was big but also required to be small at the same time. Google were the only provider of Wave, meaning you had to be a Google member with a Gmail account that limits the amount of people willing to replace many email like tasks with wave. This stopped many people who would probably experiment or benefit using waves but not signup.
Second is the smallness of Wave, it's big and bulky but it works. I'd use it on a phone but it's too big. I'd use it on a tablet for work but only for task lists, brain storming basically the business functionality. I'd use it on my computer for meetings. That's the problem I couldn't use an aspect of it on one device or the whole Wave technology on something small like a phone, and belive me I've tried. The project just needed to be scaled like email has been across devices.
So I will wave goodbye to Google Wave, it was amazing and I hope its technologies do end up in my future email clients but as a straight replacement for my email I'm sorry the world just wants it to develop email not be replace it.
Thursday, 12 August 2010
Apple Apps I want to see on iOS
I am a big Apple fan and I am fast falling into the hardcore category, I work on a mac, I own a mac, I have an iPhone, an iPod. I spend most of my time working on apple products or software and I'm trying to save for an iPad as I want one to ease my working day.
This got me thinking of the Apps available on the iOS and what I'd like to see in future.
So I looked at what's currently available:
Mobile Me Related apps - iDisk, Find My iPhone, Gallery
iWorks Related - Pages, Keynote, Numbers, Keynote remote
iLife Related - iMovie
Remote (iTunes controller), iBooks
That's not to mention Mail, iTunes, App Store, Notes, Photos, Calculatore, Contacts that are built in iOS but also appear on my Mac.
So what could we see appear in the future, that i personally would like Apple to make.
I think that we will start with iLife applications, obviously iMovie has made the transfer and iPhoto is represented as Photos but what else.
First I think that the new release of iLife that's rumored to have a mystery application, will see an iOS flavor, whether that's something on the iOS already on Mac or a app release iwe will have to wait and see. I'm expecting an encoding/sharing software like compressor for creating iTunes content such as videos or audio maybe even iTunes LP's.
Next I'd expect iWeb to make an appearance in the apps store. This web building tool is for blogging, podcasting, updating my website so I'd expect to be able to blog on the road with the iPad or podcast on the iPhone and it sync with my Mac version especially if I'm publishing to Mobile me.
Garage Band is the program I think would be the most interesting to turn into a series of apps. It's so big but has three distinct sections I'd love to see as separate apps.
First is the most recent addition of 'Learn to Play" I can see this being a very advanced app, where it's a store for downloading lessons like the artist lessons already available, but extends the range of instruments and artists available, i'd also think it appropriate to provide sheet music via this store. Really breaking away the learning at the computer and opening up even more creativity.
Second, is the podcasting capabilities of Garageband and how that integrates with Podcast Producer another Mac program. This could become an amazingly useful app that could integrate with the iWeb app and social networks to bring something quite unique.
Thirdly the heart of Garage band is to create music so an app to allow music notation or basic music creation would be beatifically to any musician who finds the creative juice take hold.
These apps would complement what I currently use on my computer and bring my creativity with me always. For me though there are still things missing and these are found by more advanced users of Apple products.
ARD or Apple Remote Desktop is an application for administering computers among other tasks. Many of the features available in ARD are available in apps already but I'd like to have access to my ARD on an iPad when I'm away from my computer because that's always when I need access to ARD's functions.
Pro Apps - These applications are for the advanced photographers, filmmakers and musicians now I'm sure every application has some features that would be ideal for the iOS, for me though it falls into Final Cut Server. Though the program needs lots of work as a whole, what it does well I'd like to have access to as an app. Such as using the client app on my mac to look through files, play video and add meta-data to be able to do this on the move would be great. My ultimate wish would be to use my iOS device to send the data via a Final Cut Server App to my server, whether that's just the meta data notes or the actual files, all of it would befit the filmmaker. This I think will have to wait for the technology to catch up.
So by looks of it there are still potential for a lot of programs to become apps in the future its only our imaginations that can stop us.
This got me thinking of the Apps available on the iOS and what I'd like to see in future.
So I looked at what's currently available:
Mobile Me Related apps - iDisk, Find My iPhone, Gallery
iWorks Related - Pages, Keynote, Numbers, Keynote remote
iLife Related - iMovie
Remote (iTunes controller), iBooks
That's not to mention Mail, iTunes, App Store, Notes, Photos, Calculatore, Contacts that are built in iOS but also appear on my Mac.
So what could we see appear in the future, that i personally would like Apple to make.
I think that we will start with iLife applications, obviously iMovie has made the transfer and iPhoto is represented as Photos but what else.
First I think that the new release of iLife that's rumored to have a mystery application, will see an iOS flavor, whether that's something on the iOS already on Mac or a app release iwe will have to wait and see. I'm expecting an encoding/sharing software like compressor for creating iTunes content such as videos or audio maybe even iTunes LP's.
Next I'd expect iWeb to make an appearance in the apps store. This web building tool is for blogging, podcasting, updating my website so I'd expect to be able to blog on the road with the iPad or podcast on the iPhone and it sync with my Mac version especially if I'm publishing to Mobile me.
Garage Band is the program I think would be the most interesting to turn into a series of apps. It's so big but has three distinct sections I'd love to see as separate apps.
First is the most recent addition of 'Learn to Play" I can see this being a very advanced app, where it's a store for downloading lessons like the artist lessons already available, but extends the range of instruments and artists available, i'd also think it appropriate to provide sheet music via this store. Really breaking away the learning at the computer and opening up even more creativity.
Second, is the podcasting capabilities of Garageband and how that integrates with Podcast Producer another Mac program. This could become an amazingly useful app that could integrate with the iWeb app and social networks to bring something quite unique.
Thirdly the heart of Garage band is to create music so an app to allow music notation or basic music creation would be beatifically to any musician who finds the creative juice take hold.
These apps would complement what I currently use on my computer and bring my creativity with me always. For me though there are still things missing and these are found by more advanced users of Apple products.
ARD or Apple Remote Desktop is an application for administering computers among other tasks. Many of the features available in ARD are available in apps already but I'd like to have access to my ARD on an iPad when I'm away from my computer because that's always when I need access to ARD's functions.
Pro Apps - These applications are for the advanced photographers, filmmakers and musicians now I'm sure every application has some features that would be ideal for the iOS, for me though it falls into Final Cut Server. Though the program needs lots of work as a whole, what it does well I'd like to have access to as an app. Such as using the client app on my mac to look through files, play video and add meta-data to be able to do this on the move would be great. My ultimate wish would be to use my iOS device to send the data via a Final Cut Server App to my server, whether that's just the meta data notes or the actual files, all of it would befit the filmmaker. This I think will have to wait for the technology to catch up.
So by looks of it there are still potential for a lot of programs to become apps in the future its only our imaginations that can stop us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)