When Microsoft set its sights on a market, it would squeeze the life out of the market leader like an anconda wrapping itself around its prey. Before it was done, the company struck numerous segments, including personal computing (Apple and IBM), word processing (WordPerfect), spreadsheets (Lotus), databases (Borland and Sybase), networking (Novell) and Internet browsers (Netscape).
It’s not hyperbole to say that Apple’s phoenix-like rise and Google’s ascent are directly and positively correlated with Gates’ decision to step away from running his company as CEO in 2000.
A remarkably prescient look at Apple and Google’s recent strategies compared with Microsoft’s in times now past.
I’m delighted to announce that on May 2nd, I will be relocating full-time back to Paris and joining the Pompidou Centre, one of the world’s most original cultural institutions, dedicated to contemporary art and the encouragement of artistic creation in all its forms
My annual celebration of various materialist things this year includes loincloths, shoes with holes in them and, of course, the full list of super-hype software that any Apple fanboy must use at this point in time on pain of being ridiculous.
We launch about 500 changes to search a year, more than a change a day. So if you look at search like a complicated machine, like a giant jumbo jet—although it’s probably, in some ways, more complex than that – this is sort of like changing the engines in flight before you land.
It’s been fashionable dissing Google recently. Their search has actually been getting massively better since I pinpointed a low point last year. This must-read article explains why.
I haven’t ever felt so positive about an iPhone app: Sparrow for iPhone is out today and comes as close to perfection as I believe was possible, especially in a field (email) which comes with quite a steep technical learning curve and in which the competition—especially Google with their laughably bad attempt at an iPhone Gmail client—have all failed. The design is superb, the interface user-friendly, quick and natively thought out for Gmail users. Every detail has been thought of, including a powerful search function that was always lacking (or lackluster) in Mail App. This is going to be a resounding success.
I have been drafting and subsequently maintaining several style sheets using two incredibly powerful tools: SASS, a CSS preprocessor, and Compass.app, a super-automated and efficient client for SASS and Compass (a standards-neutral stylesheet authoring framework). Used in the right way this setup comes close to turning CSS into a dynamic language.
The new Readability iPhone and iPad apps are beautifully designed—but if you look under the bonnet they don’t yet stand up to comparison with Instapaper. Also, their instance on not allowing publishers to simultaneously be readers is bizarre. They seem to be a responsible company, though, so these issues could easily be fixed.
Amazing how many people, even—especially—tech journalists, have been getting it wrong. Twitter and Facebook aren’t targeting the same audience. What made Twitter so phenomenally successful was a combination of two things:
the 140-character limit means you have to focus on concision, meaning your audience can quickly get the point you want to get across;
the text-only approach means it’s easy to tweet anything, anywhere—increasingly directly form your mobile phone.
I’ve just deleted Omnifocus from my Mac, iPad and iPhone today and switched all my task management to Cultured Code’s Things. After using Things for about three weeks, I find I’m not missing Omnifocus at all: far from needing the extra power, I found it actually inhibited me from doing stuff, and I’ve actually become more productive now that I’m using a GTD app that more accurately reflects the way I function. Omnifocus is still, in my opinion, the best solution if you’re methodical and good at sticking to deadlines. But Things is better suited for people, like me, who can’t live up to that ideal and constantly need to reschedule tasks
I discovered by chance today that, although Google doesn’t advertise the fact—probably to save itself embarrassment— Google+ profiles actually do have a real ‘vanity’ URL, providing you’re happy about sharing your Gmail address—with the crucial twin drawbacks that (1) it exposes your privacy in a way you may not like and (2) you still can’t change it to something other than your Gmail address.