One Minute 24 - Tea from Chris Pinnock on Vimeo.
People I’m Pleased to Know – Part 2
1 day ago
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Web Video on the iPhone and iPad
Ever since the iPhone (and iPod touch) has been available, it has been criticised for not having a Flash player. It's not entirely clear what Apple's reason is for not including Adobe Flash player in the iPhone software. However if you are a Mac user (particularly a white Macbook user) you will have noticed that the cooling fan comes on when a there is a lot of Flash usage. So my suspicion is that it is down to performance - the iPhone probably cannot do it.
And this is probably the reason Flash will not be on the iPad. But does it matter for web video? Probably not in the long term, because HTML5 (a new version of the markup language that web sites are written in) has facilities for video. Vimeo has just started delivering video on the iPhone and I suspect it is no coincidence that they have started experimenting publicly with HTML5.
HTML5 has tag for specifying video content. It is already supported by Firefox, Google Chrome and Safari but not Internet Explorer until a future release. Using this tag, a web page can include video in it and the browser handles the video. The only disadvantage I can see is that the web site owner is responsible for making sure their video can play on all the browsers out there. But guess what - they are responsible for making sure all browsers out there can view their site, so this is not really a big deal.
By using this facility, it is possible to make videos available for many devices. For example, an MPEG4 video format for Safari and Apple devices, an OGG format for Firefox, Google Chrome and so on. And I believe this will be the solution to video on the iPhone/iPad.
There is a nice writeup at diveintohtml5.org about using HTML5 and falling back to Flash for browsers that do not support the video tag.
And this is probably the reason Flash will not be on the iPad. But does it matter for web video? Probably not in the long term, because HTML5 (a new version of the markup language that web sites are written in) has facilities for video. Vimeo has just started delivering video on the iPhone and I suspect it is no coincidence that they have started experimenting publicly with HTML5.
HTML5 has tag for specifying video content. It is already supported by Firefox, Google Chrome and Safari but not Internet Explorer until a future release. Using this tag, a web page can include video in it and the browser handles the video. The only disadvantage I can see is that the web site owner is responsible for making sure their video can play on all the browsers out there. But guess what - they are responsible for making sure all browsers out there can view their site, so this is not really a big deal.
By using this facility, it is possible to make videos available for many devices. For example, an MPEG4 video format for Safari and Apple devices, an OGG format for Firefox, Google Chrome and so on. And I believe this will be the solution to video on the iPhone/iPad.
There is a nice writeup at diveintohtml5.org about using HTML5 and falling back to Flash for browsers that do not support the video tag.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
iPad - initial thoughts
Several of us watched the iPad Apple Event in a hotel in Prague this week and unfortunately we could not get onto a live video feed. A textual feed had to do (there were pictures but it's annoying not to have video in the 21st century...). When you read this, consider that I haven't seen the full video feed yet - it's queued on my Apple TV ready…
The first impression of the home screen of the iPad is that it is mostly empty. There are a few applications "missing" that are on the iPod. It looks bare. However the New York Times images are good and illustrates what the device is capable of.
The essential problem I have with the device is how to use it. I'm a little sceptical it will be of use to me. I've had two netbooks - the first I quickly sold due to lack of use, not knowing I would be spending the next year travelling every week. The second was bought so that I could work on an airplane. I still don't use it nearly enough to justify having it because it is underpowered (at least with Windows - it might get a NetBSD makeover soon). I cannot think of a reason to buy an iPad yet other than maybe for an e-book reader.
Also the Pad is running the iPhone OS. There is nothing wrong with this at all, but the current software base for it is the iPhone applications. There are a lot of cool applications out there, but there is also a lot of dross. Mac OS X would have opened the platform up to more commercial applications (e.g. Office).
The reason I haven't bought an e-book reader so far is that I have been waiting for this device. And to be fair the iPad will make a good e-book reader, provided they haven't used a glossy screen. If they have, it will be hard to read outside - viewing a video on the iPhone can be difficult if one is in a brightly lit location. One significant disadvantage of the iPad against an e-book reader is the battery life. Apple list 10 hours of battery life for the iPad (when using video) but an e-book reader lasts considerably longer.
And then there is the content. Apple have chosen to do their own bookstore. In my view, they should have partnered with Amazon. And here's the thing - Amazon already have an application on the iPhone which will run on the iPad. I can share my books with a PC and a Mac using the Kindle software. Apple need to do this with iBooks too, even if it comes later on.
Then there is the productivity applications. There is nothing wrong with using iWorks - it is a good application suite. Apple should have considered bundling it with the iPad to add further incentives to buy the iPad. The question is will these applications be enough to make the iPad work for the business user?
There is no doubt about it - the iPad will fill a gap for some users but at the moment I don't know whether I will be buying one. The pricing is exceptionally attractive at the low end for a first cut at an Apple product and also considering what one gets for it. I'll probably be waiting until the 2nd generation comes out.
Apple have a tendency of changing the way the market thinks about products (e.g. Mac and computing, iPod and Music) so maybe I've just missed what the next idea is.
The first impression of the home screen of the iPad is that it is mostly empty. There are a few applications "missing" that are on the iPod. It looks bare. However the New York Times images are good and illustrates what the device is capable of.
The essential problem I have with the device is how to use it. I'm a little sceptical it will be of use to me. I've had two netbooks - the first I quickly sold due to lack of use, not knowing I would be spending the next year travelling every week. The second was bought so that I could work on an airplane. I still don't use it nearly enough to justify having it because it is underpowered (at least with Windows - it might get a NetBSD makeover soon). I cannot think of a reason to buy an iPad yet other than maybe for an e-book reader.
Also the Pad is running the iPhone OS. There is nothing wrong with this at all, but the current software base for it is the iPhone applications. There are a lot of cool applications out there, but there is also a lot of dross. Mac OS X would have opened the platform up to more commercial applications (e.g. Office).
The reason I haven't bought an e-book reader so far is that I have been waiting for this device. And to be fair the iPad will make a good e-book reader, provided they haven't used a glossy screen. If they have, it will be hard to read outside - viewing a video on the iPhone can be difficult if one is in a brightly lit location. One significant disadvantage of the iPad against an e-book reader is the battery life. Apple list 10 hours of battery life for the iPad (when using video) but an e-book reader lasts considerably longer.
And then there is the content. Apple have chosen to do their own bookstore. In my view, they should have partnered with Amazon. And here's the thing - Amazon already have an application on the iPhone which will run on the iPad. I can share my books with a PC and a Mac using the Kindle software. Apple need to do this with iBooks too, even if it comes later on.
Then there is the productivity applications. There is nothing wrong with using iWorks - it is a good application suite. Apple should have considered bundling it with the iPad to add further incentives to buy the iPad. The question is will these applications be enough to make the iPad work for the business user?
There is no doubt about it - the iPad will fill a gap for some users but at the moment I don't know whether I will be buying one. The pricing is exceptionally attractive at the low end for a first cut at an Apple product and also considering what one gets for it. I'll probably be waiting until the 2nd generation comes out.
Apple have a tendency of changing the way the market thinks about products (e.g. Mac and computing, iPod and Music) so maybe I've just missed what the next idea is.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
What Apple need to do to the Apple TV
The Apple TV is a set top box which integrates with the Apple iTunes Store and the iTunes application running on a Mac or PC on your local network. It can play movies, music, view photographs and has limited Internet connectivity with YouTube, Flickr and MobileMe. Here is what I think Apple should do with the Apple TV concept:
1. They absolutely have to do more on the Internet. Plex and XBMC are media centres that run on the Mac and PC. They provide access to BBC's iPlayer, Vimeo's videos and Netflix amongst many other available plugins. By producing a similar system with the ability for 3rd parties to supply plugins to their sites, the Apple TV could become a serious contender for an all-in-one Internet TV box.
2. Be able to manipulate the settings on the AppleTV from the master iTunes instance, much in the same way that is possible for iPhones. It is frustrating to have to put in all your settings for Flickr accounts and MobileMe using an Apple Remote. Make it easy and allow them to be set from iTunes.
3. Sync settings to all your AppleTVs. Not many people have more than one AppleTV (I do…) but this would not be hard to do and would make the experience better.
4. They need to support 1080p soon - I believe the current hardware is not capable but I could be wrong.
Apple could, however, absorb the Apple TV into the Macintosh range very easily by:
1. Abandoning the current hardware and replace it with a MacMini form factor. The current hardware has the occasional performance problem (usually when syncing with iTunes) and could probably do with a boost.
2. Abandoning FrontRow on the Macintosh and consolidate it with the Apple TV software - having one code base has to be better.
3. Allow other Macs to use remote iTunes libraries in the same way that Apple TV's do today - so play counts get updated properly and one iTunes library is considered the "master".
By doing this, the MacMini would become a media centre product (of course it is, sort of, already) with a DVD drive. I know several people doing this already but they are using Plex or other software to view their videos and media.
Apple are resisting the urge to put Blu-ray drives in their products and I suspect this is because they believe Blu-ray will be killed by downloads very soon. I think they are probably right.
Anyway anything like above is unlikely to happen soon - everyone is waiting for the new product announcement next week and it is, speculatively, going to be a tablet personal computer. We'll see.
1. They absolutely have to do more on the Internet. Plex and XBMC are media centres that run on the Mac and PC. They provide access to BBC's iPlayer, Vimeo's videos and Netflix amongst many other available plugins. By producing a similar system with the ability for 3rd parties to supply plugins to their sites, the Apple TV could become a serious contender for an all-in-one Internet TV box.
2. Be able to manipulate the settings on the AppleTV from the master iTunes instance, much in the same way that is possible for iPhones. It is frustrating to have to put in all your settings for Flickr accounts and MobileMe using an Apple Remote. Make it easy and allow them to be set from iTunes.
3. Sync settings to all your AppleTVs. Not many people have more than one AppleTV (I do…) but this would not be hard to do and would make the experience better.
4. They need to support 1080p soon - I believe the current hardware is not capable but I could be wrong.
Apple could, however, absorb the Apple TV into the Macintosh range very easily by:
1. Abandoning the current hardware and replace it with a MacMini form factor. The current hardware has the occasional performance problem (usually when syncing with iTunes) and could probably do with a boost.
2. Abandoning FrontRow on the Macintosh and consolidate it with the Apple TV software - having one code base has to be better.
3. Allow other Macs to use remote iTunes libraries in the same way that Apple TV's do today - so play counts get updated properly and one iTunes library is considered the "master".
By doing this, the MacMini would become a media centre product (of course it is, sort of, already) with a DVD drive. I know several people doing this already but they are using Plex or other software to view their videos and media.
Apple are resisting the urge to put Blu-ray drives in their products and I suspect this is because they believe Blu-ray will be killed by downloads very soon. I think they are probably right.
Anyway anything like above is unlikely to happen soon - everyone is waiting for the new product announcement next week and it is, speculatively, going to be a tablet personal computer. We'll see.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Where to find One Minute
One Minute is an experimental video cast to force me to do something other than work on my computers! I've recently trimmed the number of places I publish the video cast - you will no longer find it on blip.tv or podomatic or libsyn. Mevio is meeting my needs for syndication with Vimeo exceeding my needs for a flash streaming home. And I'll continue using YouTube too.
See chrispinnock.com/oneminute for details.
See chrispinnock.com/oneminute for details.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Monday, January 4, 2010
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Ping FM bookmark button
I'm obviously being dense because I cannot find the ping.fm bookmark button today. Maybe there isn't one. Anyway, here is one I knocked up. Drag the link to your bookmark bar.
Ping it!
Ping it!
Thursday, December 31, 2009
That was a long year
This year has been a year of travelling. In brief:
Been to Prague 39 times and built a software development team there.
Been to Germany 3 times including a stop in Aachen and a trip to Oktoberfest. The Oktoberfest trip was particularly good as I met 4 of my friends from across Europe who I'd never seen in the same room together until the trip.
Drove to Prague through France, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany (video).
Went to Rome to see the Sistine Chapel and Tivoli to see a large villa.
Popped up to Glasgow for a wedding and spent a couple of seconds unconscious (cf. September's post).
Went to France 6 times including the road trip above. Also popped across to Dunkirk, popped across to Calais twice and popped into Paris for a work day trip.
Went to Bruges bringing the total number of times of being in Belgium in 2009 to 3. Had a quick look in Brussels but didn't do it justice.
Retreated to Brighton for some downtime on two occasions.
Taken over 40 flights with Easyjet and BA. I prefer BA.
It has not all been good however. My good friend and former colleague Kevin Beurle died in a ballooning accident.
It has not all been good however. My good friend and former colleague Kevin Beurle died in a ballooning accident.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)