Hypercritical

63: Talking to the Bear

 

  [Music] [TS]

  this is hypercritical [TS]

  a weekly talkshow ruminating on exactly [TS]

  what is wrong in the world of Apple [TS]

  related technologies and businesses [TS]

  nothing is so perfect that it cannot be [TS]

  complained about by my co-host John [TS]

  siracusa I am Dan Benjamin today is [TS]

  Friday April 13th Friday the 13th this [TS]

  is episode number 63 we have two [TS]

  sponsors we'd like to thank both of them [TS]

  every me.com get harvest calm we will [TS]

  tell you more about them as the show [TS]

  goes on as always we also want to say [TS]

  thank you very very much to join Khan [TS]

  who provides the bandwidth for this and [TS]

  many far episodes we host with them you [TS]

  should too joint come on you live from [TS]

  Skype 5 Skype 5 yes I don't know of them [TS]

  all my settings are right I unchecked [TS]

  the thing that said like automatically [TS]

  adjust microphone something or other [TS]

  good automatically adjust microphone [TS]

  settings I unchecked that good but [TS]

  otherwise I haven't tweaked it coz I [TS]

  just got sick of the other skype so I [TS]

  know I gotta find where the mute button [TS]

  is in this interface it's probably the [TS]

  little microphone thing mute your [TS]

  microphone all right here we go let's [TS]

  see hey it worked and I can actually see [TS]

  when I muted oh wow yeah you were [TS]

  struggling with that other one weren't [TS]

  you yeah as a sec of it not working and [TS]

  so now I'm dealing with this gigantic [TS]

  interface that it I don't know whatever [TS]

  but if it works we'll go with it so I [TS]

  sound the same uh yeah it's a little [TS]

  different and I'm tweaking your audio [TS]

  right now I didn't make any other [TS]

  changes to settings like I just in the [TS]

  school installed Skype live and uncheck [TS]

  that checkbox nothing else I touched [TS]

  yeah but who knows what they're doing [TS]

  different I know I mean that checkbox [TS]

  wasn't even there in the old version so [TS]

  you're right who knows knows new codecs [TS]

  new other things whatever now doesn't [TS]

  matter talking all right do you want [TS]

  that to be part of the show or should we [TS]

  start right now I'll leave it up to you [TS]

  I'll leave it in all right how are you [TS]

  doing fine good [TS]

  sorry we're late getting a getting [TS]

  started thank you for your patience no [TS]

  problem how are things up there in [TS]

  Newton Massachusetts they're just dandy [TS]

  I'm looking at my notes for the show and [TS]

  it looks it like exactly the same as [TS]

  last week's show [TS]

  then that's well knowing knowing full [TS]

  well that last week was the perfect show [TS]

  I expect another perfect show so for [TS]

  people who weren't interested in the [TS]

  topics last week as a reminder we talked [TS]

  about Mac App Store upgrades and [TS]

  readability I expect you also not like [TS]

  this week's topics because it's going to [TS]

  be a lot more stuff on Mac App Store [TS]

  upgrades and readability and then at the [TS]

  very very end I do have s we talked [TS]

  about the flashback thing a little bit [TS]

  maybe Instagram a little bit but who [TS]

  knows if we'll even get to those so [TS]

  that's my plan for today's show I like [TS]

  that sounds good to me and the sums up [TS]

  despite me saying that I didn't want any [TS]

  more car follow-up it continues to [TS]

  stream in I'm cutting most of it all I [TS]

  just put it one or two little items of [TS]

  car follow-up quick ones okay first one [TS]

  is about parking in Paris this is three [TS]

  shows ago talking about the cars not [TS]

  touching right and some people said that [TS]

  they you know they bump bumpers when [TS]

  they're parking cars in Paris and then I [TS]

  invited foolishly French people to [TS]

  respond to me and tell me if this is [TS]

  something that actually happens very [TS]

  large volume of responses from people [TS]

  the aisle these are the two themes that [TS]

  I brought away from this feedback the [TS]

  first theme is that the vast vast vast [TS]

  majority of people who responded said [TS]

  yes they really happens cars really do [TS]

  push the bumpers against each other when [TS]

  they're parking in Paris like I got [TS]

  thing I only can remember one maybe two [TS]

  people who said oh that doesn't happen [TS]

  that person's crazy [TS]

  and they're always sandwich by like [TS]

  three other emails they came within the [TS]

  same minute saying the opposite so I'm [TS]

  assuming all these people who claim to [TS]

  have either visited France or lived in [TS]

  France for years or be French be French [TS]

  citizens I'm trusting them and saying [TS]

  yes this really does happen in France [TS]

  and the other big theme that everybody [TS]

  volunteered that I didn't ask about at [TS]

  all was that the other thing to do in [TS]

  Paris [TS]

  specifically apparently maybe in all of [TS]

  France but they all everyone kept saying [TS]

  Paris is to leave the parking brake off [TS]

  on your car mmm and you do this so that [TS]

  when the cars try to squeeze in the [TS]

  spots that they can like push your car [TS]

  forward a little bit [TS]

  not quite enough room with your parking [TS]

  brake is off they'll just kind of nudge [TS]

  your car forward to make room for [TS]

  himself right and everybody volunteered [TS]

  the spontaneous they don't know about [TS]

  each other you know giving his [TS]

  information we never mentioned it on the [TS]

  show but like a good 60 or 70 percent of [TS]

  the people who said yes cars do touch [TS]

  felt compelled to add this bit about the [TS]

  parking brake and it makes me think like [TS]

  are there no Hills in Paris I've never [TS]

  been to France I don't know maybe it's [TS]

  very flat but it's just it's all it's [TS]

  just like Florida in that way it's [TS]

  totally flat there's no mountains [TS]

  there's no curvature even to the road [TS]

  it's all straight roads well the roads [TS]

  are winding but it's like even if it's a [TS]

  slight slope if you leave your car in [TS]

  gear I guess it won't roll away but if [TS]

  it's in gear can you push it with [TS]

  another car easily to get the parking [TS]

  brake I don't know I'm talking about a [TS]

  stick shift car I don't know anyway [TS]

  this this is apparently a thing so we'll [TS]

  just leave that as it is someday I'll go [TS]

  to France and I will investigate this in [TS]

  person by trying to shove Park cars with [TS]

  my hand and see if they really do roll I [TS]

  can ask I get it my uncle is is French [TS]

  from you know spent many years in Paris [TS]

  and Brittany from there and he and my [TS]

  aunt go back frequently I could ask them [TS]

  if that's true yeah maybe it's changing [TS]

  although some people did provide photo [TS]

  evidence of like minis who have a second [TS]

  bumper mounted higher to better meet [TS]

  with the bumpers of the car because the [TS]

  minis rear bumpers apparently very low [TS]

  and doesn't really meet up well with [TS]

  other cars bumpers so there was one [TS]

  picture of a Mini with a second bumper [TS]

  attached to it so that it had something [TS]

  to properly meet with the other the [TS]

  bumpers of the other cars okay that's [TS]

  when someone sent me a link to a Google [TS]

  Maps thing showing where all the car [TS]

  manufacturing plants are and had and car [TS]

  company headquarters and stuff in [TS]

  Germany with like little pins dropped on [TS]

  all of them neat so I'll put that in the [TS]

  show notes because I figured that person [TS]

  spent a while to make that little map I [TS]

  had also some follow-up I remember we [TS]

  were discussing the that you can go and [TS]

  pick up your BMW and have the BMW [TS]

  experience in North Carolina where they [TS]

  have some kind of special plant it's [TS]

  actually in South Carolina [TS]

  yeah the Carolina people don't like it [TS]

  when you get that mixed up right I lived [TS]

  in North Carolina for a year or so and I [TS]

  love North Carolina and I I did I was [TS]

  aware at one point that it was in South [TS]

  Carolina [TS]

  but I I like North Carolina a little bit [TS]

  better so I'm sorry I'm not a mistake [TS]

  all right yes many people sent that [TS]

  correction it is in South Carolina I [TS]

  should have caught that too but like [TS]

  they do tend to blend in my mind yeah as [TS]

  they should they should all be called [TS]

  North Carolina they just that's you know [TS]

  better basketball I drove through both [TS]

  those states multiple times but never [TS]

  stopped except for gas all right so and [TS]

  this was a follow-up to the after dark [TS]

  to last show for some reason when we're [TS]

  putting the link we in the after dark we [TS]

  talked a little bit about PlayStation [TS]

  games there was a bunch of links to [TS]

  PlayStation bundles and they ended up in [TS]

  the show and not in the after dark and [TS]

  then people said what's with these [TS]

  PlayStation links in the show notes did [TS]

  you even talk about PlayStation on the [TS]

  show so no I apologize for that though [TS]

  that was actually discussed in the after [TS]

  dark which you can find if you're [TS]

  interested but related to that one [TS]

  person sent me some information because [TS]

  I mentioned the after dark that I was [TS]

  reluctant to give Sony my credit card [TS]

  number on the PlayStation Network [TS]

  because of all the security problems [TS]

  they've had and Gabriel pagan wrote in [TS]

  to say that you don't have to give Sony [TS]

  your credit card number you can buy a [TS]

  gift card from Amazon and then enter the [TS]

  gift card number into the PlayStation [TS]

  Network so if you're not spooling to it [TS]

  if you've decided not to spend $400 on a [TS]

  PlayStation so you can play Shadow of [TS]

  the Colossus eco The Last Guardian and [TS]

  journey and the only thing stopping you [TS]

  is that you didn't want to give your [TS]

  credit card number to buy journey on PSN [TS]

  now you don't have that problem you can [TS]

  go to Amazon and buy the gift card and [TS]

  the hilarious thing about this I put the [TS]

  link in the show instead the gift card [TS]

  that link that was provided by Gabriel [TS]

  is that if you go and you buy a $10 gift [TS]

  card it cost you $16.88 really yes it [TS]

  does I'm looking at it right now [TS]

  playstation network card subscription [TS]

  length $10 format card prize 1688 and [TS]

  it's not like Xbox like points or Wii [TS]

  Points with some sort of conversion this [TS]

  is just regular dollars you were only [TS]

  getting $10 a value out of the $16 card [TS]

  that's weird why does it cost more than [TS]

  $10 maybe it's just supply and demand [TS]

  and nobody wants to give their credit [TS]

  card to Playstations [TS]

  we have a captive audience these people [TS]

  are so scared to enter their credit card [TS]

  into the PlayStation Network that we can [TS]

  actually charge them sixteen dollars for [TS]

  a ten dollar card and they'll still do [TS]

  it because that six dollars is worth [TS]

  stir nothing to give Sony credit I [TS]

  already gave Sony my credit card so I'm [TS]

  already doomed but save yourself if you [TS]

  want to send this extra six bucks maybe [TS]

  you could find these cards are cheap you [TS]

  know what you could also do is another [TS]

  idea you could get a credit card that [TS]

  you use exclusively or just the [TS]

  PlayStation and or something you know [TS]

  things that you really don't trust the [TS]

  way that many of us have like a [TS]

  throwaway email address you could have [TS]

  essentially a card that you could watch [TS]

  very very closely and if you see [TS]

  anything strange ease immediately cancel [TS]

  the card or or you know charge back [TS]

  whatever it is I still have bad memories [TS]

  of implementing credit card processing [TS]

  I'm the first ecommerce store that I [TS]

  that I broke myself [TS]

  dealing with single-use credit card [TS]

  numbers that used to be really popular [TS]

  back and like the late 90s early 2000s [TS]

  to remember those not really what were [TS]

  they just like what they saw in [TS]

  single-use yeah they would they would [TS]

  issue you I don't know how it worked [TS]

  like a card or like you went to a [TS]

  website or something and you got a [TS]

  credit card number that can only be used [TS]

  one time and we like to generate you a [TS]

  new credit card number so you wouldn't [TS]

  have to worry about you number being [TS]

  stolen but these one-time use numbers [TS]

  didn't conform to the same standards as [TS]

  the other numbers all your detection [TS]

  algorithms are figuring out if it's a [TS]

  Visa or whatever and they had different [TS]

  processing requirements didn't behave [TS]

  like regular cards and you had to be [TS]

  careful and know if they were single-use [TS]

  was that meant you couldn't charge them [TS]

  a second time if you wanted to you know [TS]

  use the same card number over again you [TS]

  shouldn't store it and it was a big mess [TS]

  but I they don't seem to be that popular [TS]

  anymore I guess they're probably [TS]

  annoying for customers but that would be [TS]

  a similar example if they still have [TS]

  these or if you still have one user the [TS]

  one-time use number for your PSN thing [TS]

  all right enough of that that me nobody [TS]

  see talked about every day we see alerts [TS]

  that service thing sends you a text and [TS]

  we speculated about I said I was [TS]

  wondering what their numbers were like [TS]

  and the reason I was wondering is [TS]

  besides seeing a tweet by Casey lists [TS]

  sometime that day earlier and I couldn't [TS]

  remember the numbers from it so quickly [TS]

  after the show Casey reminded me of what [TS]

  those tweets were and then after that [TS]

  the WWC alerts Twitter account updated [TS]

  tweeted updated numbers so as of [TS]

  sometime around last week [TS]

  Debbi day we see alerts claimed that [TS]

  there are around 5,000 tickets available [TS]

  ho WT we see that's an assumption I [TS]

  guess because nobody knows except for [TS]

  Apple but based on historical sales [TS]

  that's how much they're expected to be [TS]

  and wec alerts has 9000 subscribers so [TS]

  far and that could be you know increased [TS]

  by now so there you have it we also [TS]

  should mention that some rumors about [TS]

  dates had been posted one of them here [TS]

  that I just talked about on amplified [TS]

  show with with with Jim Dalrymple [TS]

  I'll put it listen up oh you it was a [TS]

  good one I'll put this into our show [TS]

  notes as well but it's an article [TS]

  actually came out February 2nd from Mac [TS]

  rumors that simply has a screenshot of [TS]

  the I believe this is the masconi's [TS]

  event calendar and I'll put a link to [TS]

  that if I can yeah there it is that [TS]

  shows there is what is simply called a [TS]

  corporate meeting which is code for WWDC [TS]

  for June 11th through June 15th that's [TS]

  been there forever though that's been [TS]

  there for months right absolutely and [TS]

  that is the only yeah I mean at least [TS]

  since February if not longer but that is [TS]

  the only law you know float levels one [TS]

  through three are blocked off for a [TS]

  convention slash trade show during that [TS]

  time period and and as long as Apple [TS]

  plans to have it at Moscone which why [TS]

  wouldn't they but maybe they're not but [TS]

  if they are that would seem like the [TS]

  only time know that it would possibly do [TS]

  it so I think those are the dates that [TS]

  if you're planning on booking you know [TS]

  on an early hotel or something you could [TS]

  always cancel it but that seems like the [TS]

  right time to do it I've had that in my [TS]

  calendar since yeah I guess the [TS]

  beginning of the year when we first saw [TS]

  that but I'm not willing to make the [TS]

  risk of actually starting to buy stuff I [TS]

  mean even if you like balla stuff and [TS]

  you were right what if you don't get a [TS]

  ticket then well I won't be buying a [TS]

  ticket but for you I think that would be [TS]

  a trouble because you're very you have [TS]

  made it clear on the show that you're [TS]

  very interested in attending the [TS]

  sessions I I have no interest in [TS]

  attending it the sessions but I think I [TS]

  will will likely be there because if for [TS]

  no other reason this is the only time in [TS]

  place where we will be in a city in town [TS]

  where pretty much everybody who has a [TS]

  show [TS]

  on 5x5 or at least the shows if not [TS]

  everybody at least it shows that I [TS]

  co-host people with this the only time [TS]

  we'll all be together so it makes sense [TS]

  to go and I do do a 5x5 thing out there [TS]

  what are you gonna do that we're all [TS]

  going to be in WT received dutifully [TS]

  attending session yeah but the the [TS]

  sessions don't go very late into the [TS]

  evenings they tenderly tend to end [TS]

  before dinner [TS]

  so having a having a dinner would be a [TS]

  wonderful thing yeah we could do that [TS]

  you're treating everybody right of [TS]

  course [TS]

  alright are you that concerned I mean [TS]

  yes I of course I am but are you are you [TS]

  that concerned well you might have to [TS]

  chip 15 bucks into a dinner I mean I'll [TS]

  yes I'm buying your dinner but [TS]

  everybody's dinner but yeah it depends [TS]

  on how much I end up paying for hotel [TS]

  and everything like I managed to get a [TS]

  pretty good deal last time but that's [TS]

  especially you know if you're waiting [TS]

  until after you get tickets to book your [TS]

  hotel you know it's not at that point [TS]

  what if they announce that the tickets [TS]

  to go for sale like two weeks before it [TS]

  happens and these these hotels I'll jack [TS]

  up their prices as soon as they know [TS]

  that there's some big event coming it's [TS]

  just supply and demand of getting people [TS]

  are demanding rooms yeah so I don't know [TS]

  how much it was all going to run me it [TS]

  could be expensive yeah you don't have [TS]

  to worry about so I got an email this is [TS]

  unrelated to anything but falls in the [TS]

  follow up because it's I guess it relate [TS]

  to the Mac App Store NIC Dirk wrote in [TS]

  to tell me that he had this problem on [TS]

  the national Dirk and ek first name dr k [TS]

  last night that sounds like a really [TS]

  cool movie villain name yes and he had [TS]

  this problem that I've thought about a [TS]

  few times when looking at app store [TS]

  pages where he was looking at a game and [TS]

  you know when you're on the App Store I [TS]

  think this is an iOS game but it doesn't [TS]

  matter though the stores look similar [TS]

  and there on the left side is this [TS]

  requirement section that tells you yeah [TS]

  this is an iOS game is a requirement [TS]

  section that tells you what this game [TS]

  runs on and so there's some text there [TS]

  and I assume that text is a good [TS]

  question for Marco but I assume that [TS]

  text is generated from the person who [TS]

  puts up the app like check in a bunch of [TS]

  checkboxes or somehow indicating what [TS]

  devices the thing runs on maybe you can [TS]

  even bake it into your application by [TS]

  setting some things in Xcode or whatever [TS]

  but the example from this game it says [TS]

  requirements [TS]

  compatible compatible with iphone ipod [TS]

  touch and ipad requires iOS 3.1.3 or [TS]

  later so that seems like you know that's [TS]

  not something to develop a rope that's [TS]

  just like the metadata along the left [TS]

  side along with like title and rating [TS]

  and all you know release date and [TS]

  whatever right uh and he bought this [TS]

  game because he has an iphone 3g running [TS]

  iOS 4.2 which seems like it fulfills the [TS]

  requirements do says iphone ipod touch [TS]

  ipad and then the OS version is three [TS]

  point one point three year later and [TS]

  four point two is greater than that and [TS]

  he's got an iphone 3g so it should be [TS]

  fine so he bought it and it didn't run [TS]

  in his phone and he complained about [TS]

  Apple and the Apple refunded his [TS]

  purchase which was nice and then he said [TS]

  well you know why does your store tell [TS]

  me that this should run and but it [TS]

  doesn't and and he complained to the [TS]

  developer tooling developers like oh [TS]

  well if you look at the description for [TS]

  the game this is the thing the developer [TS]

  writes that's collapsed by default you [TS]

  know it's under the click here and then [TS]

  the more link and it expands down the [TS]

  description the developer rights says [TS]

  it's a game for the iPhone for iPad [TS]

  iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch and the [TS]

  developer wrote that and that is [TS]

  accurate but why is that not reflected [TS]

  in the requirements section and so Apple [TS]

  said they would flag this for review and [TS]

  try to figure out what's going on there [TS]

  but I'm always suspicious of those [TS]

  requirements and that's why I always [TS]

  expand a little more link to read the [TS]

  description and read the reviews and I [TS]

  encourage everybody who's working who's [TS]

  looking in the App Store to read the [TS]

  descriptions and read some of the [TS]

  reviews like sort by most critical or [TS]

  something to figure out what the thing [TS]

  this thing is really going to run on [TS]

  your device or not especially for games [TS]

  and stuff because sometimes they require [TS]

  a particular CPU or GPU speed and stuff [TS]

  like that so this is an area of the [TS]

  store that Apple could stand to improve [TS]

  and and I don't know how long ago this [TS]

  example was but I looked up the game and [TS]

  it's still like this like the thing on [TS]

  the left side says something different [TS]

  than the description which you can't see [TS]

  because this claps by default so shame [TS]

  on Apple there all right now finally Mac [TS]

  App Store upgrades lots and lots of [TS]

  feedback on oh yeah also lots of [TS]

  feedback and readability too but we're [TS]

  going to do a Mac App Store upgrades [TS]

  first because I think I have more to say [TS]

  about that [TS]

  maybe we'll see Oh some of the chat room [TS]

  said the requirements you're taking from [TS]

  build settings and input appeal is for [TS]

  device requirements oh by the way I miss [TS]

  is great new I think everybody's going [TS]

  be relieved to hear that in the chat [TS]

  room I heard that but then I don't say [TS]

  you're saying I think you're just [TS]

  lurking I'm reading all right you make [TS]

  news of a new skd feature what is skd [TS]

  SDK all right typos anyway I can't [TS]

  believe that people in the Chairman have [TS]

  typos and I'm leaving again I don't sit [TS]

  and yes I yeah yeah now that's it dude [TS]

  that anyone is over so I tried to sort [TS]

  the Mac App Store upgrades feedback into [TS]

  themes I'll see how well I did here one [TS]

  of the themes and a lot of the email [TS]

  that I got was the idea that it seems [TS]

  like Apple is acknowledging the [TS]

  potential existence of upgrades in their [TS]

  wording for the user interface and [TS]

  particularly people point out in the [TS]

  iTunes application for iOS apps where [TS]

  the button that lets you update all your [TS]

  applications it says download all free [TS]

  updates and the fact that the word free [TS]

  is there is like its distinguishing [TS]

  between free updates and non free [TS]

  updates now iTunes being the typical UI [TS]

  mess that it is when you click on the [TS]

  button next to download all free updates [TS]

  the dialog box that appears that prompts [TS]

  you for your password the button that [TS]

  lets you continue doing the thing you [TS]

  want to do is labeled by so that doesn't [TS]

  make much sense to me use click the [TS]

  button says free then you're enter your [TS]

  pass when you click buy and I know if it [TS]

  was my parents or something they would [TS]

  be saying huh is this gonna charge me [TS]

  more money for something I clicked on [TS]

  and said free but the button says buy [TS]

  you have to go yeah it's just hit by I [TS]

  know it says buy is just the standard [TS]

  dial at whatever so that's kind of a [TS]

  mess but I'd notice that as well but I [TS]

  don't how much you could read into that [TS]

  maybe they're just trying to reassure [TS]

  people that they're free and not trying [TS]

  to distinguish between free updates and [TS]

  a potential future non free update [TS]

  I don't know but lots lots of people [TS]

  latched on to that as their hope that [TS]

  someday paid upgrades would be coming to [TS]

  the store sheer a wild wrote in with a [TS]

  good meta question he says our upgrades [TS]

  widely understood a widely understood [TS]

  notion for consumers that's something we [TS]

  didn't talk about like for non nerds for [TS]

  people who have never really bought [TS]

  software before getting an iOS device or [TS]

  before having a Mac with the Mac App [TS]

  Store do they even understand [TS]

  and what a paid upgrade is or an upgrade [TS]

  at all like maybe their notion maybe the [TS]

  notion of software actually does match [TS]

  what Apple has been doing where you pay [TS]

  some money or not for a thing that makes [TS]

  an icon appear on your thing right and [TS]

  if they understand that when the little [TS]

  other little picture thing has a number [TS]

  on it that it tells you there's updates [TS]

  to your applications and you get a newer [TS]

  version of thing and maybe you notice [TS]

  like oh it looks a little different now [TS]

  like they added stuff to work with [TS]

  friends or there's you know really more [TS]

  ads all over it or whatever like the [TS]

  idea that newer versions are available I [TS]

  think Apple makes that easy enough that [TS]

  you could figure out how to make that [TS]

  happen you know on your phone or on your [TS]

  Mac or whatever but clearly nowhere in [TS]

  that process is more payment taking [TS]

  place and like you just get an updated [TS]

  version of that app I don't even know if [TS]

  people understand that especially in the [TS]

  case where like if you do an upgrade and [TS]

  like oh I like the old version better [TS]

  they move buttons around or something [TS]

  you know you do have to pay for it but [TS]

  you wish you had the old version of [TS]

  course an apple with the App Store [TS]

  provides no way for you to say no easy [TS]

  way our regular consumers say unknown [TS]

  and I'm bringing me back to the old [TS]

  version I guess they could restore from [TS]

  a backup but even that I think it's too [TS]

  complicated for the average person for [TS]

  the average person if you figure out the [TS]

  upgrades thing and get a new version of [TS]

  the friends and you don't like it and [TS]

  you wish you had the previous version [TS]

  back I think you're immediately beyond [TS]

  your capacity to get that done without [TS]

  doing a little bit of research or [TS]

  learning something and that might be [TS]

  frustrating but certainly no part of [TS]

  that experiences that you have to pay [TS]

  again for this application and he points [TS]

  out that on iOS you have this problem [TS]

  where if you were to buy a second [TS]

  version and you had data associated with [TS]

  the application it's not easy for the [TS]

  new version of the application to share [TS]

  the data with the old one because [TS]

  they're sandbox and everything so that's [TS]

  a confusing thing as well but like by [TS]

  not having paid upgrades it you know the [TS]

  impression that you're giving users on [TS]

  these platforms is that you buy an app [TS]

  once and it's yours forever there's a [TS]

  later feedback that gets that gets more [TS]

  into this thing but I think that's a [TS]

  good question of like lose this thing we [TS]

  keep talking about grades because we're [TS]

  all Mac users and we know about like [TS]

  paying paying for a new version of [TS]

  Photoshop [TS]

  paying less than you would pay if you're [TS]

  buying for the first time that upgrade [TS]

  pricing I don't think that concept [TS]

  exists in the mind of most consumers who [TS]

  are like buying iPhones or whatever so [TS]

  that's a good point [TS]

  Steve Craig points out that paid [TS]

  upgrades in the Mac App Store or the iOS [TS]

  App Store would certainly be a big [TS]

  crowd-pleaser to announce the WotC I [TS]

  think it would be but I don't think that [TS]

  makes it any more or less likely that's [TS]

  really not how Apple Apple operates and [TS]

  people like the idea that apples like [TS]

  carefully planning something and like [TS]

  all they're intentionally not giving us [TS]

  paid upgrade because they want to [TS]

  announce a B C and have it be exciting [TS]

  it's not really the way they work I mean [TS]

  they'll hold something back if they have [TS]

  to of like a week or so or a month or so [TS]

  and then maybe they'll announce it a [TS]

  little early if it's landing on an event [TS]

  like WTC but Apple decides when WotC is [TS]

  and they certainly haven't been holding [TS]

  for years this feature so they could [TS]

  have something to announce at WABC it's [TS]

  not the way that work once you get a WWC [TS]

  is a new phone in iOS 6 preview but [TS]

  probably you know that's not why we [TS]

  don't hit it's not centered around [TS]

  events that's not how that works [TS]

  Chris Clark wrote in to tell me that the [TS]

  the concept of one low price for [TS]

  everything and no upgrades his making [TS]

  him adjust his buying habits so he's an [TS]

  aperture customer and so aperture used [TS]

  to be like this $200 app or whatever it [TS]

  was and then when I went into the App [TS]

  Store the like hey it's 70 bucks and [TS]

  there's no more upgrades it's just 70 or [TS]

  80 bucks for everybody and so that [TS]

  eliminates this by initially at a high [TS]

  price and then get the upgrade to the [TS]

  next version the lower price thing [TS]

  everything is the lower price so yeah [TS]

  welcome everybody make more people buy [TS]

  software but now he's in a situation [TS]

  where aperture 3 is already pretty old [TS]

  this is like 2 years old and he's [TS]

  reluctant to buy it because he knows [TS]

  that if aperture 4 comes out like you [TS]

  know in a couple months or something [TS]

  which he thinks it's soon to be just [TS]

  around the corner he's gonna have to buy [TS]

  it all over again whereas if aperture 3 [TS]

  was you know $200 but he knew he could [TS]

  get an upgrade to aperture for 420 he [TS]

  would buy aperture 3 now to get onboard [TS]

  the upgrade train then paid a lower [TS]

  price later so now he's kind of like [TS]

  hesitant to buy because it's like if you [TS]

  buy the old version the day before the [TS]

  new version comes out there's you have [TS]

  no recourse you don't get the new [TS]

  version for a discounted price or free [TS]

  or anything like that is like oh well [TS]

  flex to be you right [TS]

  whereas in the old model if you buy [TS]

  Photoshop cs5 the day before CSX comes [TS]

  out you can upgrade to CSX for a much [TS]

  reduced price instead of having to pay [TS]

  the full price for cs6 again and again I [TS]

  think apples idea is well okay so lower [TS]

  all your prices so that it's not painful [TS]

  to get the new version no matter what [TS]

  like lower your prices so that it's even [TS]

  lower than the upgrade price would be [TS]

  and isn't that doesn't make everybody [TS]

  happy but people used to the old way [TS]

  have new things to worry about there he [TS]

  points out that maybe it's because he's [TS]

  an Apple nerd and watch for upgrades and [TS]

  things about this type of thing and [TS]

  maybe it's not relevant at all to a [TS]

  regular consumer and that's probably [TS]

  true too but this is another example of [TS]

  people who are used to one model of [TS]

  software even just this is a consumer if [TS]

  not as a developer might have trouble [TS]

  adjusting to whatever the heck apples [TS]

  trying to do especially since they seem [TS]

  so reluctant to fully articulate what it [TS]

  is they're trying to do had some [TS]

  questions last time but in-app purchase [TS]

  and how that relates to the Mac App [TS]

  Store and I said it you know I didn't [TS]

  know if it was in that gap store and you [TS]

  said it was and it isn't in the Mac App [TS]

  Store but subsequent feedback in me [TS]

  actually looking at the documentation [TS]

  afterwards has shown me that in-app [TS]

  purchase isn't really a way to handle [TS]

  paid upgrades at all there's two ways [TS]

  you could do in-app purchase in the Mac [TS]

  App Store the first one is where you're [TS]

  unlocking features so you give them an [TS]

  application and everything that that [TS]

  application can do is already built into [TS]

  the application and within in-app [TS]

  purchase you could unlock functionality [TS]

  right so you can have like the plain [TS]

  version and then pay extra and it [TS]

  unlocks all the pro features for [TS]

  something isn't that like a paid upgrade [TS]

  well no not really because the paid [TS]

  upgrade is like you release a piece of [TS]

  software and then you work for six more [TS]

  months on version 2 of that software and [TS]

  then you want to get some incremental [TS]

  revenue from the people who've already [TS]

  bought version 1 and if you're working [TS]

  for 6 months that means the stuff you [TS]

  finished at the end of those 6 months [TS]

  isn't in the executable that the version [TS]

  1 people have and I suppose you could [TS]

  release a new version of version 1 and [TS]

  with all these features locked into it [TS]

  and then charge them to unlock it ah but [TS]

  I don't I don't know how that like what [TS]

  if your application is radically [TS]

  different right then you give them [TS]

  version 2 and our city got version 1 and [TS]

  they've unlocked features in version 1 [TS]

  then you give them version 2 but you [TS]

  don't change the name of the application [TS]

  so you get version 2 but it looks [TS]

  totally different but now stuff is [TS]

  locked again it's a strange [TS]

  I don't think that's what Apple intends [TS]

  in-app purchases to to be like as a [TS]

  replacement upgrades and maybe they do [TS]

  it's hard to tell again they don't [TS]

  really express their intent with these [TS]

  features but it's hard to tell like is [TS]

  this how you expect to stop great or [TS]

  applications to keep giving people new [TS]

  executables with successively larger [TS]

  portions of it hidden as locked away [TS]

  things and then you pay inside the [TS]

  application to unlock those new things [TS]

  and then we give you a new version that [TS]

  has I guess has even more stuff locked [TS]

  and then you pay to unlock those things [TS]

  what about the things you're unlocking [TS]

  revisions to the current features I'm [TS]

  just thinking as an app developer like [TS]

  how would you manage this set of [TS]

  features that have been progressively [TS]

  unlocked because you're not always [TS]

  adding feature sometimes you're refining [TS]

  the old ones [TS]

  so I don't quite see how that works and [TS]

  especially if you're going to radically [TS]

  alter your product like version 2 is [TS]

  like a major overhaul from version 1 you [TS]

  can't keep releasing to the same product [TS]

  because you're kind of stomping on the [TS]

  version 1 people's toes you know I'm [TS]

  talk more about that a little bit too [TS]

  the whole idea of letting people keep [TS]

  using what they'd like to use instead of [TS]

  being forced to upgrade and the second [TS]

  model is where you for in-app purchase [TS]

  you just provide content so you can't [TS]

  provide executables you can't modify [TS]

  your applications bundle as that book [TS]

  calls it you can just provide like [TS]

  levels or data that you can put them a [TS]

  Documents folder and that obviously [TS]

  doesn't really apply to doing an upgrade [TS]

  to an application [TS]

  I can't alter the executable or any part [TS]

  of it I can just provide your data for [TS]

  games and stuff that might work if [TS]

  you're just giving you levels but for an [TS]

  application you really need to alter the [TS]

  executable to provide new features huh [TS]

  some musings on wilshire please blog [TS]

  which I have again put in the show notes [TS]

  is a Mac App Store needs paid upgrades [TS]

  thinking about it more afterwards and [TS]

  reading all the feedback it creasing Lee [TS]

  looks to me kind of like you know about [TS]

  talking to the bear that sounds like [TS]

  something you would know about talking [TS]

  to the bear like smoking the bear thing [TS]

  or that you never heard of that it's [TS]

  like when you talk to a stuffed animal [TS]

  bear yeah to work something out you're [TS]

  talking to an inanimate object because [TS]

  the act of explaining it helps you work [TS]

  out but this is for people who don't [TS]

  have like radio internet radio shows [TS]

  yeah okay I haven't done that I don't [TS]

  know if it's a stuffed bear or even know [TS]

  if is the right thing but it's it's done [TS]

  I don't recommend going to talking - [TS]

  bear calm don't do that all right [TS]

  actually do it I'll put it into the into [TS]

  the show notes so getting away from the [TS]

  well-known saying that I apparently [TS]

  don't remember very well [TS]

  looking at the blog it's kind of like [TS]

  we'll Shipley's having a conversation [TS]

  with himself about how he has to change [TS]

  his business right like the act of [TS]

  writing down it's kind of like when [TS]

  you're going to complain to somebody [TS]

  about something or writing a long email [TS]

  to complain to them and as you write it [TS]

  as you try to articulate and justify [TS]

  your position you lead yourself to the [TS]

  things you can do to get around it [TS]

  uh and that this thing kind of reads [TS]

  like that like here's how my business [TS]

  works here's how the new model makes my [TS]

  business not work the same way and [TS]

  here's how I can't make money the same [TS]

  way I used to he doesn't quite get to [TS]

  and therefore a call he does a little [TS]

  bit and therefore I would have to change [TS]

  my business an x y&z way to continue to [TS]

  make money I would not be able to [TS]

  provide upgrades ongoing and have to [TS]

  make new products because you know he [TS]

  kind of touches on that a little bit but [TS]

  that's that's how I'm starting to view [TS]

  this and that's a lot of the people who [TS]

  are don't really have much stake and it [TS]

  developed like they're just consumers [TS]

  they say well yeah I don't really care [TS]

  if it's tough for consumers maybe Apple [TS]

  doesn't either they're just saying not [TS]

  you know just adjust Apple decides this [TS]

  is what we're going to do and if [TS]

  developers who just have to adjust to it [TS]

  and that big blog post like that from [TS]

  ville Shipley is kind of like him coming [TS]

  to terms with how the old model is not [TS]

  going to work for him and possible ways [TS]

  that he can adjust to it he's also [TS]

  complaining and saying look Apple if you [TS]

  would just provide this feature then I [TS]

  wouldn't have to adjust in this way and [TS]

  we could continue to make money the [TS]

  normal way we did and he also argues for [TS]

  why he thinks the way he used to make [TS]

  money is actually good for consumers in [TS]

  terms of being able to make a major new [TS]

  versions of a product instead of just [TS]

  making one product and then quickly [TS]

  moving on and saying well that's done [TS]

  I'm never going to look at that product [TS]

  again I don't care if there's obvious [TS]

  areas where it can be enhanced you know [TS]

  and it'll never get any better maybe [TS]

  I'll just do bug fixes and moving on [TS]

  because it's the only way I can [TS]

  Oh another random point from the [TS]

  interwebs Adam Hyland tweeted that both [TS]

  me and Mark a lot of people addressing [TS]

  both of us in a group on this topic are [TS]

  missing the main distinction between the [TS]

  iOS and the Mac App Store's volume [TS]

  growth in the platform and I tweeted [TS]

  back to him that I thought I understood [TS]

  what he was getting at but then he made [TS]

  another tweet that made me think that we [TS]

  were talking about different things so [TS]

  I'm still not sure exactly what he was [TS]

  talking about but here's what I took [TS]

  from that tweet uh and it's true that we [TS]

  didn't talk about it when the platform [TS]

  is growing rapidly new customers can far [TS]

  outweigh upgrading customers so for [TS]

  example on iOS who cares if the [TS]

  customers you sold version one of your [TS]

  product if you can't get any more money [TS]

  from them just release a new version of [TS]

  your product that all the original [TS]

  pressures get for free that's a massive [TS]

  you know awesome rewrite because the [TS]

  amount of new people you're going to [TS]

  sell to is so much bigger than the [TS]

  amount of people use because it like a [TS]

  hockey stick type growth graph so I [TS]

  don't care if I don't get any money from [TS]

  any existing customers my new customers [TS]

  are where it's at is there's so many [TS]

  more of them and if your platform is [TS]

  growing with a hockey step hockey stick [TS]

  type growth curve that works out fine [TS]

  but the Mac platform even though it's [TS]

  growing and it's growing faster than the [TS]

  rest of the PC market is not a hockey [TS]

  stick quite yet and so now existing [TS]

  customers are a much more significant [TS]

  portion of your customer base there [TS]

  aren't 10 times as many new customers [TS]

  ready and ready and waiting out there to [TS]

  buy your product maybe it's only like 50 [TS]

  percent more or 100 percent more [TS]

  customers but not a thousand or ten [TS]

  thousand and so you have to consider [TS]

  like look I would really like to get [TS]

  some incremental revenue for this six [TS]

  months or years worth of work I did in [TS]

  this application from the people who [TS]

  already bought version 1 because I'm [TS]

  delivering lots of value in if I give it [TS]

  to them for free I'm how do i recoup my [TS]

  costs are there enough new users to make [TS]

  my money back and I think that is [TS]

  important distinction and I don't think [TS]

  it's lost on Apple but it's a kind of [TS]

  it's kind of the reason you don't hear [TS]

  iOS devs complaining quite as much about [TS]

  this because on iOS especially in the [TS]

  beginning this really was true so what [TS]

  if you can't make money off the people [TS]

  who already bought your app so many more [TS]

  people buy iPhones every year like [TS]

  scrolling like crazy that the existing [TS]

  customers are just lost in the noise [TS]

  whereas in the Mac platform it's much [TS]

  more mature and not growing [TS]

  fast at least so far and the Mac devs [TS]

  are much harder hit by this type of [TS]

  phenomenon and that's kind of why I [TS]

  think you see them complaining about it [TS]

  more than the iOS devs at this point [TS]

  the Iowa steps complained like in theory [TS]

  but in practice it like once they saw [TS]

  that okay well like the new customers [TS]

  are dominating anyway so I guess I can [TS]

  just continue to go along and it'll be [TS]

  okay on Marco show this week he [TS]

  mentioned something that I meant to get [TS]

  to in my discussion which is the Joel [TS]

  Spolsky strategy letter five Roman [TS]

  numeral five from way back when he talks [TS]

  about commoditizing your compliments [TS]

  which i think is not a concept that he [TS]

  came up with but in typical Joel fashion [TS]

  he's just explaining something from [TS]

  economics or whatever or is a past [TS]

  experience and sending it out to a wider [TS]

  audience and Marco talked about this on [TS]

  his show and I think it's a good point [TS]

  about one of the things that Apple could [TS]

  be trying to do I grabbed a few passages [TS]

  from it so I can read it here because [TS]

  Marco mentioned it but for people who [TS]

  haven't read this article this is what [TS]

  monetizing your confluence is about so [TS]

  first a compliment is a product that I'm [TS]

  quoting from Joel's thing here a [TS]

  compliment is a product that you usually [TS]

  buy together with another product gas [TS]

  and cars or complements computer [TS]

  hardware as a classic complement of [TS]

  computer operating system babysitter's [TS]

  are a complement of a dinner at fine [TS]

  restaurant that's typical Joel humor [TS]

  there so that's what a compliment is and [TS]

  he says demand for a product increases [TS]

  when the prices of prices of its [TS]

  complements decrease for example flights [TS]

  to Miami become cheaper demand for hotel [TS]

  rooms in Miami goes up because more [TS]

  people are flying to Miami in need of [TS]

  room so in general a company's strategic [TS]

  interest is going to be to get the price [TS]

  of their compliments as low as possible [TS]

  at the lowest theoretical sustainable [TS]

  price would be commodity price the price [TS]

  arises when you have a bunch of [TS]

  competitors offering indistinguishable [TS]

  goods so smart companies tried to [TS]

  commoditize their products complements [TS]

  right so if you look at Apple's stance [TS]

  on software with that view and you [TS]

  realize by just somebody looking Apple's [TS]

  balance sheet that they make their money [TS]

  selling hardware the obvious compliment [TS]

  to hardware is software and according to [TS]

  this theory it's an apples best interest [TS]

  to commoditize software to make it as [TS]

  low cost as [TS]

  but because the MOR software its [TS]

  customers can afford to buy and the more [TS]

  software that's available the more [TS]

  useful its hardware becomes so they [TS]

  don't want every software product cost [TS]

  hundreds of dollars because it makes [TS]

  their hardware much less useful they [TS]

  would like their complement software to [TS]

  be a commodity super cheap really easy [TS]

  to buy because the cheaper software is [TS]

  the more useful their hardware products [TS]

  are and therefore like the bigger profit [TS]

  margins they can get on their hardware [TS]

  or the more demand that will be for the [TS]

  hardware because had to run the software [TS]

  you need this piece of hardware so they [TS]

  want to make the big fat profit margins [TS]

  and they want once you get this piece of [TS]

  hardware their customers to be able to [TS]

  get all the compliments this hardware [TS]

  really cheaply right the same way convoy [TS]

  manufacturers was gas was like two cents [TS]

  a gallon because that would make them [TS]

  sell a hell of a lot more cars right [TS]

  if the complement to cars was you know [TS]

  like car insurance or gas was super [TS]

  duper cheap they can sell a lot more [TS]

  cars this is the basic economics right [TS]

  now the the part that joel says at the [TS]

  end here is that the idea you want the [TS]

  you want the pricier accomplice to go as [TS]

  low as possible to become a commodity [TS]

  price and his definition of a commodity [TS]

  price is when you have a bunch of [TS]

  competitors offering indistinguishable [TS]

  goods like you know oranges or commodity [TS]

  or the because what's the difference in [TS]

  one orange and other aren't just [TS]

  something you're not talking about [TS]

  artisanal hand massage hippie grown [TS]

  oranges like for the most part you know [TS]

  it's a commodity right there you know [TS]

  that you're not distinguishing based on [TS]

  and when i read this i think okay so [TS]

  this can monetize in your competence [TS]

  thing as an explanation of why apple [TS]

  wants to drive down software prices and [TS]

  all this business huh my question is is [TS]

  this really how Apple sees third-party [TS]

  developers can software ever be a [TS]

  commodity because software is not [TS]

  oranges it's not like oranges at all [TS]

  that they're the goods are not [TS]

  indistinguishable in fact I would say [TS]

  the the range and variability of [TS]

  software quality you know one [TS]

  application compare the other is [TS]

  tremendous it's bigger than perhaps in [TS]

  any other endeavor like it's certainly [TS]

  larger than the difference between the [TS]

  best television you can buy and the [TS]

  worst television you can buy the [TS]

  difference between the worst app on the [TS]

  App Store and the best app on the App [TS]

  Store is tremendous like orders of [TS]

  magnitude software is just simply not a [TS]

  commodity so I don't think you can ever [TS]

  get it down to commodity pricing and the [TS]

  danger of driving the price of software [TS]

  down to get more people to buy apps and [TS]

  so they can derive more value from Apple [TS]

  hardware there's lots of dangers in that [TS]

  like for example if you keep driving the [TS]

  price down to the point where your best [TS]

  developers either don't survive or at [TS]

  least don't thrive like because you're [TS]

  taking away all their profits by trying [TS]

  to drive the prices down then you're [TS]

  lowering the average quality of the [TS]

  applications available on the App Store [TS]

  and that's bad for you is a hardware [TS]

  vendor you want like Apple Rewards like [TS]

  with the Apple Design Awards and what's [TS]

  up they're trying to say they highlight [TS]

  their best apps they've you know they [TS]

  show like buy our hardware you can use [TS]

  all these awesome applications well if [TS]

  the people who make the awesomest of the [TS]

  awesome applications can't make enough [TS]

  money to keep making applications that [TS]

  awesome and they have to like turn [TS]

  things down and try to make them not [TS]

  quite as good or make them not quite [TS]

  have as many features or what that's bad [TS]

  for Apple I don't think you can ever [TS]

  software is not gasoline it's that you [TS]

  know it may be the complement to their [TS]

  hardware but it's not you can never get [TS]

  it down to commodity pricing I think [TS]

  it's really dangerous to even attempt to [TS]

  get it down to like like there's a line [TS]

  you can't just keep pushing the price of [TS]

  that down through competition and so on [TS]

  and so forth because Apple is trying I [TS]

  think with Apple that's efforts to [TS]

  highlight the best software products [TS]

  that's Apple's effort to highlight the [TS]

  good and to give the best competitors [TS]

  ability the best software makers and [TS]

  ability to make money but the other side [TS]

  of those coin is all the other things [TS]

  they seem to be doing to push prices [TS]

  down and make it more difficult for [TS]

  software vendors to be to continue to [TS]

  sustain their businesses without [TS]

  altering the way they do things to [TS]

  reduce quality or reduce feature set or [TS]

  both and as I said last show even if the [TS]

  developers can survive and learn to [TS]

  thrive the long-term effect may be the [TS]

  complex feature-rich applications start [TS]

  to dwindle replace kind of with like [TS]

  single serving applications like wimpy [TS]

  little apps because the developer said [TS]

  well there's no money in continuing to [TS]

  iterate on this application to make [TS]

  version 2 much better and add these [TS]

  features because we can't get we don't [TS]

  have a good way to make new revenue yet [TS]

  so let's just start a new application [TS]

  there's something entirely different and [TS]

  you end up with this long trail of kind [TS]

  of applications that were made in a year [TS]

  or two and sold for awhile and a bug fix [TS]

  a little bit but never really got any [TS]

  better and then you got to move on to [TS]

  the next one because you can't make any [TS]

  money off the long term commitment of [TS]

  that app Marco tweeted today about it's [TS]

  in a series of tweets and I highlighted [TS]

  one of them here [TS]

  I think he was responding to someone [TS]

  else's said it's not a race to the [TS]

  bottom talking about the prices you know [TS]

  like how everyone's price is going down [TS]

  down down it's a shift towards simpler [TS]

  apps a la carte so instead of having one [TS]

  big honkin complicated application has [TS]

  continually revised which again Elijah [TS]

  we talked about how Apple may be trying [TS]

  to discourage the idea of companies [TS]

  building built around a single app that [TS]

  an app to just get bigger and more [TS]

  feature-rich as time goes on Marco says [TS]

  is to shift toward simpler apps on the [TS]

  Alucard idea I think is that you buy [TS]

  multiple smaller apps instead of buying [TS]

  one thing Hawking app that keeps getting [TS]

  revised in the UK do keep upgrading that [TS]

  that's another way of saying the same [TS]

  thing but I my position is that the [TS]

  complicated apps is a place for them [TS]

  shift old simpler is good but especially [TS]

  on a platform like iOS where if you have [TS]

  a bunch of small applications getting [TS]

  them to interoperate and communicate [TS]

  with each other is not particularly easy [TS]

  not easy to get things to share data [TS]

  this is a longtime complaint about iOS [TS]

  presumably iOS 6 will address this in [TS]

  some way uh it's not like UNIX where you [TS]

  have a bunch of single simple single [TS]

  purpose tools that all work together I [TS]

  because it's very difficult to make [TS]

  individual applications work together [TS]

  because their sandbox that I don't have [TS]

  a good way to share data there's no [TS]

  shared location for documents right so [TS]

  if that's apple's plan they're executing [TS]

  it poorly they are getting simpler [TS]

  single serving apps they're not getting [TS]

  the benefits of them working together [TS]

  god this goes on forever I have more do [TS]

  you want to do a sponsor before I go on [TS]

  done with this yeah you know we probably [TS]

  should it's about that time forty [TS]

  minutes in we'll do our 20 minutes [TS]

  sponsor break now harvest painless time [TS]

  tracking talked about these guys before [TS]

  they're back and they're they're just as [TS]

  awesome we use these guys too for all of [TS]

  our time tracking stuff and they really [TS]

  are great and the main thing the main [TS]

  word I've been emphasizing when you [TS]

  think of these guys is painless they [TS]

  make time tracking painless because [TS]

  nobody likes to do it nobody wants to [TS]

  track their time but you want to be fair [TS]

  about it whether you're an employer who [TS]

  has people reporting time for you or [TS]

  whether you're an employee or somebody [TS]

  who has too [TS]

  bill they're clients this is a great [TS]

  solution for doing those things and more [TS]

  a given example and this the angle I [TS]

  haven't really talked about that much [TS]

  but I have people who work for me when I [TS]

  want to track their time I give them an [TS]

  account on my harvest setup they go in [TS]

  they track their time I create a project [TS]

  I create the billable hours I can keep [TS]

  track of everything and then I know at [TS]

  any given time exactly what the people [TS]

  have been working on how much time [TS]

  they've spent on it and how much that's [TS]

  going to cost me and from their side [TS]

  they know what they're billing for and [TS]

  there are tons of great apps that [TS]

  harvest has made to make this even [TS]

  easier [TS]

  there's the iPhone app you put that on [TS]

  your iPhone you can track time right [TS]

  there all connects to the website [TS]

  Android app for that too sure of course [TS]

  they have their main interface has [TS]

  always been via the web now they've got [TS]

  a new native Mac App harvest format I've [TS]

  told you about this before but it's [TS]

  really smart you start working on [TS]

  something you get interrupted you have [TS]

  to take a phone call you go downstairs [TS]

  to lunch whatever it is and you realize [TS]

  oh I left that thing running I can't [TS]

  build for that thirty minutes while I [TS]

  was gone the apps smart it knows you've [TS]

  been idle same with your eye chat client [TS]

  knows you've been idle and subtract that [TS]

  time and not wrongfully bill it to your [TS]

  customer tons of great stuff like that [TS]

  they've thought of everything so all of [TS]

  this is you get a free 30-day trial with [TS]

  it so go to get harvest comm slash 5x5 [TS]

  that's where you go to sign up after [TS]

  your trial periods up thirty days later [TS]

  you want to keep using it you want to [TS]

  sign up excellent do it use a code five [TS]

  by five at checkout and you get 50% off [TS]

  your first month not bad so go check it [TS]

  out get harvest comm slash 5x5 50% off [TS]

  50% off the big percent yeah that's [TS]

  almost half almost continuing this so I [TS]

  left this one for last this big feedback [TS]

  because I think it sums up a lot of [TS]

  issues we just talked about this is from [TS]

  Adam drew and I think it just came in [TS]

  just before the show he says the way I [TS]

  see it Apple is trying to reshape the is [TS]

  V slash developer world whenever C is V [TS]

  I think this is a PC guy because that's [TS]

  what they call and indie developers over [TS]

  on the PC side independent software [TS]

  vendor reshaping the is V slash [TS]

  developer world to be more [TS]

  the more centric fact is the old system [TS]

  is very good for developers not but not [TS]

  very good for customers it leads to [TS]

  large expensive software projects that [TS]

  are slow to change slow to evolve and [TS]

  are hard to use the old model of high [TS]

  initial price and medium to high upgrade [TS]

  price encourages developers to write and [TS]

  curate large decades-old software like [TS]

  Pro Tools MS Office and Photoshop that's [TS]

  true uh I'm not quite sure I agree with [TS]

  his well continued reading here he's [TS]

  saying their price far too high for [TS]

  individuals they're slow to innovate [TS]

  slow to adapt to changes in our [TS]

  outclassed by smaller more nimble [TS]

  projects like GarageBand I life--and [TS]

  Pixelmator they're older than things [TS]

  like GarageBand iLife and Pixelmator but [TS]

  when I think about something like [TS]

  Photoshop in particular here it's old [TS]

  because it's been around forever but at [TS]

  one point I was like I don't know in the [TS]

  early 90s late 80s it's really old [TS]

  application but compared Photoshop 1.0 [TS]

  to Photoshop cs6 like you the fact that [TS]

  they both are called Photoshop and you [TS]

  might see some common tools in the [TS]

  palette it's the only thing really [TS]

  joining those things together [TS]

  they're worlds apart I don't think the [TS]

  the idea that like Photoshop can make [TS]

  the 1.0 and they just have to bribe free [TS]

  upgrades that for that forever or they [TS]

  have to produce Photoshop 2.0 and make [TS]

  people buy it as a separate product and [TS]

  deal with the confusion that's entailed [TS]

  with having both those things available [TS]

  at the same time and so on and so forth [TS]

  if you can't build a company around like [TS]

  building up expertise getting the best [TS]

  image processing software developers [TS]

  that you can hire and building a company [TS]

  around making an awesome image [TS]

  application and providing paid upgrades [TS]

  to it that's what makes you get from 1.0 [TS]

  to cs6 I don't know if you can get from [TS]

  one point over to CSX if every time you [TS]

  want to add to add a major feature like [TS]

  oh I don't know adding layers in [TS]

  Photoshop 3 or something or whatever [TS]

  version that came out and do you have to [TS]

  say ok well we're just going to put an [TS]

  additional product up called Photoshop [TS]

  three but Photoshop 2 is available when [TS]

  you search for Photoshop on the shore [TS]

  store we hope that Apple will sort them [TS]

  correctly and we hope you won't [TS]

  accidentally buy Photoshop 2 and then be [TS]

  upset and demand a refund because we [TS]

  have to pay for the 30% on the refunds [TS]

  and you know it's it's kind of a mess [TS]

  there and it I like the idea [TS]

  software products evolving over years [TS]

  and years and decades and decades and [TS]

  getting better because it allows the [TS]

  company making them to to specialize and [TS]

  to hire the best kind of developers for [TS]

  that kind of application I don't think [TS]

  you arrive at cs6 you know just by a [TS]

  company other than Adobe saying we're [TS]

  going to make something is better than [TS]

  Photoshop we're going to make something [TS]

  it's better than Photoshop cs6 and we're [TS]

  just going to come with it out with it [TS]

  out of the blue even Pixelmator which [TS]

  owes a lot to Photoshop didn't come out [TS]

  of the blue it's has several major [TS]

  versions it just so happens that the Mac [TS]

  App Store came along like kind of in the [TS]

  middle of its life and it just made the [TS]

  Mac App Store version like a paid [TS]

  upgrade you know it's not a paid upgrade [TS]

  it's like well you had the old version [TS]

  before the Mac App Store existed well [TS]

  now the Mac App Store exists to buy our [TS]

  version but Ken Pixelmator continued to [TS]

  rev its application so that Pixelmator [TS]

  you know 10 20 years from now is to [TS]

  Pixelmator 1.0 as photoshop 1.0 is to [TS]

  Photoshop cs6 I don't know if they can [TS]

  sustain that kind of development and I [TS]

  don't think the kind of development is [TS]

  necessarily bad the idea that it makes [TS]

  that they're slow to evolve and hard to [TS]

  use any legacy code base has problems [TS]

  like it took you know Adobe had those [TS]

  dark years where it was hadn't gone it [TS]

  was still carving and they didn't want [TS]

  to go Coco and they had all these these [TS]

  problems with it right but you know I [TS]

  look at the end points and I say I don't [TS]

  know if there are any slower to evolve [TS]

  in anybody else's cs6 compared to like [TS]

  Photoshop CS if you look at any other [TS]

  application that same time span do you [TS]

  see a similar amount of improvement [TS]

  there because maybe people will say that [TS]

  well Photoshop was so hideous that [TS]

  that's why we like it so much better now [TS]

  that it was so slow and had so many bugs [TS]

  and it was all gross and now they've [TS]

  gotten rid of those and were just so [TS]

  happy that it's better but I think that [TS]

  type of change is funded by the ability [TS]

  to get upgrade fees from people many [TS]

  people in chat room are saying that it's [TS]

  totally possible for a Pixelmator to [TS]

  follow the same path and do it even [TS]

  better but they're just a younger [TS]

  company it's like I mean my life is a [TS]

  good example I let the current version [TS]

  of my life compared to the first version [TS]

  of my life there's a tremendous [TS]

  difference then obviously Apple is [TS]

  subsidizing AI life with its hardware [TS]

  sales and giving it away for free [TS]

  they don't have upgrade pricing if you [TS]

  want the new version of my life you buy [TS]

  it outright so that I think is a bad [TS]

  example but if they were an independent [TS]

  software company and had they had to [TS]

  develop iLife and sell it on its own [TS]

  they could not sell it for the price [TS]

  they sell like it's subsidized it's [TS]

  subsidized software so I don't think [TS]

  it's fair to compare AI life to [TS]

  something like Photoshop or word and say [TS]

  see Apple can go but apples got massive [TS]

  profits from its hardware to dump into [TS]

  AI life and GarageBand all that other [TS]

  stuff that's out there so he continues [TS]

  instead of coming up with new apps that [TS]

  are focused and streamlined when a new [TS]

  use case for rents itself these [TS]

  developers and many others find a way to [TS]

  cram features into their flagship [TS]

  flagship prop this is bad for consumers [TS]

  because it keeps prices artificially [TS]

  high and software bloated enough using [TS]

  many people wanted me to talk about [TS]

  iTunes but you want to talk about [TS]

  cramming features into a flagship [TS]

  product instead of making a new product [TS]

  iTunes would be a great example there [TS]

  and that's free for everybody and never [TS]

  cost any money so I don't think that [TS]

  practice is solved by a new business [TS]

  model people do that because that's [TS]

  something that they like to do and it [TS]

  upsets us but it happens even in free [TS]

  software that has nothing to do with [TS]

  upgrade pricing or anything you know [TS]

  iTunes is the best example of that but [TS]

  again this is a real phenomenon a big [TS]

  applications I mean use the last time [TS]

  like adding every possible button to the [TS]

  word toolbar making word this big [TS]

  monster application every year you got [TS]

  to think of something else to add to [TS]

  word and then you come up with the [TS]

  ribbon you like o has rearranged all the [TS]

  buttons and make it totally different [TS]

  then revise it but it becomes like a [TS]

  treadmill where this is your cash cow [TS]

  and you have to find some way to make a [TS]

  new version that is the anti-pattern of [TS]

  long term software but I think getting [TS]

  is saying therefore we have to get rid [TS]

  of that model is throwing out the debut [TS]

  of the bathwater probably not the best [TS]

  idea see what else we've got here [TS]

  Photoshop 1.0 released in 1994 Macintosh [TS]

  exclusively there you go so andrew says [TS]

  I find it likely the Apple knows exactly [TS]

  what they're doing they're telling the [TS]

  Adobe's Microsoft's and digit designs of [TS]

  the world that things are different now [TS]

  price your apps so regular people can [TS]

  buy them and make them more focused on [TS]

  coherent or go elsewhere I think that's [TS]

  a great thing I've never even considered [TS]

  purchasing Photoshop due to the [TS]

  obviously over to the top price but I [TS]

  gladly purchase Pixelmator I'll never [TS]

  buy Pro Tools but I love GarageBand I'll [TS]

  never buy microsoft office but I own [TS]

  Pages and Numbers if you don't need a [TS]

  big powerful application and you can get [TS]

  by with a lesser one and of course you [TS]

  like lower pricing but doesn't mean that [TS]

  people don't have you told everyone is [TS]

  using Photoshop now that Photoshop is [TS]

  gone and for now on you have to use some [TS]

  alternative that's half the price of [TS]

  which there are many not these are bad [TS]

  applications but this kind of a reason [TS]

  that Photoshop has most of the features [TS]

  in it that it has and if you told all [TS]

  the people in the world using Photoshop [TS]

  right now they have to use Pixelmator [TS]

  many of them would have extreme [TS]

  difficulty getting their jobs done and [TS]

  not just because they don't know how [TS]

  about exclamative works it just doesn't [TS]

  have all the features of Photoshop [TS]

  if Pixelmator had all the features of [TS]

  Photoshop I don't think it would it [TS]

  could be the same price things you need [TS]

  many many more developers even if one of [TS]

  the features is runs on a platform [TS]

  rather than Mac OS 10 you know so I [TS]

  don't think that's an apples to apples [TS]

  comparison i i think the Pixelmator and [TS]

  applications like acorn and stuff are [TS]

  filling a role that wasn't filled by [TS]

  Photoshop it was never arguably filled [TS]

  by Photoshop which is an application for [TS]

  someone who's not a professional graphic [TS]

  designer who just wants to do some [TS]

  graphic stuff and that's a good role for [TS]

  that but it doesn't mean that [TS]

  applications like Photoshop have no [TS]

  longer have a purpose in this new world [TS]

  and therefore we don't care what happens [TS]

  to them they could just go away for all [TS]

  we care [TS]

  and Pixelmator is the new way to go it's [TS]

  just a different type of application [TS]

  it's not it's not they're not failing [TS]

  the same role for the same people so [TS]

  pricing issues aside oh actually I [TS]

  should finish up his thing was he has a [TS]

  conclusion here he says the developers [TS]

  need to stop thinking about what will [TS]

  quickly net them the most sales and [TS]

  start thinking about what will best [TS]

  serve customers the sales will follow I [TS]

  think the Apple success has proven that [TS]

  I don't think their developers are [TS]

  trying to net a quick profit they were [TS]

  trying to do that it'd be a totally on [TS]

  board with making a single serving act [TS]

  that six months it develops you cash [TS]

  Anna and you move on to the next thing [TS]

  you just abandon it it's maybe it'll get [TS]

  bug fix upgrades that's it it'll never [TS]

  get significantly better that's it's the [TS]

  opposite of what you know that's that's [TS]

  if they just wanted to get a quick buck [TS]

  they'd be all on board with that but [TS]

  they don't want to do that they want to [TS]

  make version one of their app and then [TS]

  see the obvious features that need to be [TS]

  added for version two and accept [TS]

  feedback from people who never make an [TS]

  awesome version too and they want to [TS]

  spend like a year or six months making [TS]

  an awesome version too at the end of [TS]

  that they don't want to have to rely on [TS]

  hockey stick growth of the platform to [TS]

  give them any money they want to be able [TS]

  to get they don't I should the customers [TS]

  get that version for free this is [TS]

  something that lots of people I guess [TS]

  who aren't nerds or developers [TS]

  like they think it's the same product [TS]

  they think well I bought this product [TS]

  and now people should toil endlessly as [TS]

  their full-time job to improve this [TS]

  product for me forever for free that [TS]

  doesn't make any sense that doesn't work [TS]

  it like when I buy a 2002 Honda Civic I [TS]

  don't get the 2003 Honda Civic for free [TS]

  I don't get to bring my Civic in and [TS]

  have them retrofit it and upgrade it to [TS]

  it yeah all but I just bought a 2002 [TS]

  Civic another 2003 s came out can I get [TS]

  the 2003 Civic you don't you're not [TS]

  entitled to free updates forever and [TS]

  doesn't matter that it's not a physical [TS]

  product someone is working full-time as [TS]

  their job to make new versions of this [TS]

  product how can they work that way if [TS]

  they can't get any money like you're not [TS]

  entitled to their future work forever [TS]

  just because it all is under the [TS]

  umbrella of a particular name alright [TS]

  and I think many people think that's the [TS]

  way it is with applications where you [TS]

  buy an app on your iPhone and you got a [TS]

  little icon on there and you should be [TS]

  entitled to the future work of all [TS]

  people working on anything that uses [TS]

  that icon for the rest of your life [TS]

  that's just not how it works right it's [TS]

  not a sustainable business model so [TS]

  unless you're going with the Android [TS]

  thing where things ahead support it or [TS]

  whatever so pricing aside even ignoring [TS]

  the pricing thing of how to get more [TS]

  money for those people you still have [TS]

  the confusion issue where if you just [TS]

  put up a new version you can you have [TS]

  multiple versions in the store you have [TS]

  the danger of people finding the wrong [TS]

  version or you have to rely on an apple [TS]

  sorting or them being smart and then if [TS]

  they get refunds you're out the 30% [TS]

  which you don't get back ah but if you [TS]

  only have one version on the store you [TS]

  yank the old version and you can provide [TS]

  bug fixes and there's many possible [TS]

  solutions to this many people wrote in [TS]

  like oh all Apple needs to do is X and [TS]

  all Apple needs to do is Y and then the [TS]

  won't be confusion and they won't have [TS]

  any problems and if they buy the wrong [TS]

  one this won't help yes there are many [TS]

  many things Apple to do to fix its many [TS]

  obvious simple things they can do anyone [TS]

  can come up with a simple scheme whereby [TS]

  all these problems are eliminated but [TS]

  Apple hasn't done any of those things [TS]

  and the problem for developers and [TS]

  consumers I think is we don't know which [TS]

  one of those things Apple is likely to [TS]

  do so you can't say okay we have to plan [TS]

  a future development do we make version [TS]

  2 of this product and spend an entire [TS]

  you're working on it knowing full well [TS]

  but the only way we can get any money [TS]

  for version 2 this product is by selling [TS]

  it to people who didn't buy version 1 do [TS]

  we make version 2 and put it on the [TS]

  store knowing full well that version 1 [TS]

  could be there alongside it do we yank [TS]

  version 1 do we assume apples [TS]

  to provide some way to help us which [TS]

  ways will they provide will they let it [TS]

  you know it's all just guesswork [TS]

  everyone's in the dark how do you plan [TS]

  your business on that and so it creates [TS]

  uncertainty and fear and the safest [TS]

  thing to do is say we're not going to [TS]

  work on version 2 of this product we're [TS]

  going to make a brand new product that [TS]

  no one has bought yet that everyone who [TS]

  buys will get money from and we'll just [TS]

  put that other product in maintenance [TS]

  mode [TS]

  that's what Apple that's the shape Apple [TS]

  is turning this business into but [TS]

  intentionally or not and I think that's [TS]

  a bad a bad shape I like developers to [TS]

  provide major upgrades to versions of my [TS]

  applications because many applications I [TS]

  buy and I say boy this is a great [TS]

  version 1 version 2 will be even better [TS]

  I want the people to be able to make me [TS]

  a version 2 and I'm willing to pay some [TS]

  additional money for that version - I [TS]

  don't feel entitled to it because I got [TS]

  a version 1 so uncertainty about what [TS]

  Apple will do here is is bad uncertainty [TS]

  in most markets is bad one of the [TS]

  suggestions people come up with was [TS]

  subscription instead of paying for a [TS]

  piece of software and quote-unquote [TS]

  owning it even though you have like a [TS]

  license to use it or whatever how about [TS]

  doing a subscription thing where you pay [TS]

  some fee over some period of time a [TS]

  monthly fee a weekly fee a yearly fee [TS]

  which presumably will be cheaper than [TS]

  the cost of buying the thing out right [TS]

  and it doesn't that fun future [TS]

  developments then you could be like on [TS]

  the train of like as long as I keep [TS]

  paying as paying a subscription free I [TS]

  get it every new version of Photoshop [TS]

  that comes out or whatever [TS]

  Microsoft tried doing this I think in [TS]

  late 90s was where they were big on it [TS]

  like Microsoft Office you won't be able [TS]

  to buy it it'll be a subscription and [TS]

  enterprises like subscriptions because [TS]

  they get really big volume discounts and [TS]

  it really easy to convince the guy in [TS]

  charge of enterprise purchasing you know [TS]

  pass this fee every year and you get [TS]

  access to and they give you this huge [TS]

  laundry list of like everything [TS]

  Microsoft makes and all of our [TS]

  development tools and all of our [TS]

  software and our SuperDuper fancy [TS]

  version of office and unlimited seat [TS]

  license - Windows NT blah blah blah blah [TS]

  you know those are really easy to sell [TS]

  to enterprises because they they think [TS]

  they're getting a big deal when in [TS]

  reality the people in their company use [TS]

  like two applications and three features [TS]

  and those two applications I would have [TS]

  been cheaper just buying individual [TS]

  seats for them but anyway that's coming [TS]

  into the enterprise issue uh but for [TS]

  apps with the purchase price that's so [TS]

  low like already [TS]

  both stores the purchase prices are [TS]

  really slow subscriptions don't really [TS]

  make much sense for an individual user [TS]

  some companies have them now like I [TS]

  believe you can rent or whatever you [TS]

  want to call it Adobe Photoshop for [TS]

  example Adobe will sell you you know I [TS]

  don't buy Photoshop outright just pay us [TS]

  some fee of a certain period of time as [TS]

  long as you keep paying that fee you can [TS]

  use a thing then when you stop paying [TS]

  you don't get to use it anymore but I [TS]

  think if you if you plan to use [TS]

  Photoshop like as long as it's useful [TS]

  like if you buy Photoshop cs6 how long [TS]

  do you think that application would be [TS]

  useful like how long will be until max [TS]

  can't even run that anymore or the Mac [TS]

  that you're running it on like falls [TS]

  apart or breaks and you can't get it [TS]

  fixed like the useful light time a [TS]

  version of Photoshop is pretty darn long [TS]

  certainly you just keep using until the [TS]

  hardware runs on breaks like you talked [TS]

  about those guys for the Mac SES or [TS]

  whatever running HyperCard in some [TS]

  office and you know some desktop [TS]

  publishing place and if it still works [TS]

  you know it still works like so you can [TS]

  just use it on the original hardware as [TS]

  it was for a long time as a tool but [TS]

  even if you keep upgrading your hardware [TS]

  that software has a very long useful [TS]

  lifetime like right up until I upgraded [TS]

  to Lion I was using a copy of Photoshop [TS]

  CS because that's the last one I had and [TS]

  it was PowerPC but then I used that for [TS]

  years and years ten years I think I use [TS]

  Photoshop CS and you know until oh so [TS]

  you know time moves on I could have kept [TS]

  my PowerPC Mac out and continued to use [TS]

  Photoshop CS but now I can no longer use [TS]

  it because Rosetta is gone and what a [TS]

  bummer right but I get 10 years of use [TS]

  out of that well if I had been paying [TS]

  Adobe subscription rates it would have [TS]

  been very foolish for me to play those [TS]

  subscription rates for ten years it [TS]

  would be much cheaper to buy it upfront [TS]

  so unless you plan on using Photoshop [TS]

  for only a year and then never using it [TS]

  again subscriptions probably don't make [TS]

  sense at that kind of pricing and for [TS]

  iOS apps where it's like 99 cents what [TS]

  is the subscription fee for a $0.99 or [TS]

  even a five-dollar app well you can buy [TS]

  the whole app for $5 or give us ten [TS]

  cents a month you know for five years [TS]

  like it just it's kind of silly even for [TS]

  a twenty dollar app it's I could just [TS]

  just buy the app so I don't see [TS]

  subscriptions as a way to go I think [TS]

  people do like buying things and I think [TS]

  that's how it will have to be sorted out [TS]

  with the exception obviously like [TS]

  magazine subscriptions or something [TS]

  where this content where you're not [TS]

  really buying an application you're [TS]

  buying the content and the content is [TS]

  always new and is a never-ending stream [TS]

  of it [TS]

  all right and here is how he gave me a [TS]

  pronunciation guide so I need to get [TS]

  this one we always always like that when [TS]

  we get this I do but now I feel extra [TS]

  pressure max [TS]

  pressure max [TS]

  want to come I'll pick out that right [TS]

  once again this is like this is the [TS]

  mandatory prefix for all these emails [TS]

  one thing that Marco and Syracuse's seem [TS]

  to be skipping over it's always about me [TS]

  and Marco missing things why are we in [TS]

  unit here we have individual shows you [TS]

  can address us individually anyway is [TS]

  that the old-school model of buying [TS]

  software and then paying upgrades has [TS]

  long been an object of scorn for most [TS]

  people not involved in software [TS]

  development it has always been [TS]

  effectively a subscription model and the [TS]

  worst kind you pay for software and then [TS]

  some unknown time down the road you'll [TS]

  be effectively forced to pay for it [TS]

  again albeit at a discount if you don't [TS]

  pay for the upgrade your software will [TS]

  be held hostage because you know that [TS]

  very soon your software will be obsolete [TS]

  and useless if you do pay for the [TS]

  upgrade regardless of the actual costs [TS]

  and dollars as a negative experience in [TS]

  terms of wasted time hassle etc this is [TS]

  like the opposite of what I just said [TS]

  like this the reality this person is [TS]

  describing is the opposite what he's [TS]

  describing I think is a situation where [TS]

  if people can't get money from from [TS]

  upgrades then they will abandon you and [TS]

  your software will become useless but in [TS]

  the old model your software does not [TS]

  become useless first of all you don't [TS]

  have to upgrade because the old version [TS]

  of your software should continue to get [TS]

  bug fixed and you know it and kept up to [TS]

  date for a reasonable period of time and [TS]

  why can develop our forward to do that [TS]

  because they're making their money by [TS]

  selling upgrade fees to the next version [TS]

  so they can afford to give you minor bug [TS]

  fixed version to keep your old version [TS]

  running second they don't owe you [TS]

  anything after you buy it like other [TS]

  than bug fixes on the hardware that's [TS]

  running on don't upgrade your Mac keep [TS]

  that version of the operating system [TS]

  that version of your hardware that [TS]

  version of the software will continue to [TS]

  work until it breaks and you can't get [TS]

  parts to fix it right again with the car [TS]

  thing when I get a new car and they come [TS]

  up with a new version of a car that has [TS]

  like variable valve timing and lift I [TS]

  don't get that for free I don't get a [TS]

  backup grade or mic you know I use my [TS]

  car my car still drives in New York it's [TS]

  still it's not as good as the new car [TS]

  but I don't get the new version for free [TS]

  and they had no responsibility to keep [TS]

  me going on that train your stuff works [TS]

  the way it is you know when you pay for [TS]

  it you're not paying for all future work [TS]

  or even any future work from that person [TS]

  in fact it could be argued in the old [TS]

  days before the internet you didn't even [TS]

  get bug fixes or you bought it once it [TS]

  came up floppy just you put on your [TS]

  computer that's what you've got if you [TS]

  ever get anything else from a person [TS]

  without having to pay for it again it [TS]

  was like a miracle not that I'm saying [TS]

  that's the best model but if you get [TS]

  software that works you shouldn't feel [TS]

  like you you don't need to upgrade and [TS]

  you're not [TS]

  owed upgrades but [TS]

  the model of people being able to get [TS]

  incremental revenue for upgrades funds [TS]

  their ability to keep you supported for [TS]

  a longer period of time and I think if [TS]

  you take that away you will be abandoned [TS]

  much sooner your software will become [TS]

  obsolete and useless much faster because [TS]

  the developers simply can't afford to [TS]

  support you for like I said Photoshop CS [TS]

  I think I used for more than a decade [TS]

  and the only reason I can't use it now [TS]

  is because I upgraded the line if I had [TS]

  still run Snow Leopard I could still use [TS]

  that piece of software a decade worth [TS]

  use out of whatever was a couple hundred [TS]

  dollars and remember how much it cost [TS]

  back in 1990 something right that is a [TS]

  long useful life for a piece of software [TS]

  and I don't think there are even any [TS]

  point updates to it just you know kept [TS]

  running that it doesn't become obsolete [TS]

  in a second you're not held hostage [TS]

  these are the things that will happen I [TS]

  think if developers can't make money off [TS]

  upgrade revenue not the things that [TS]

  happen now and that's it's such a warped [TS]

  view of the way software works now that [TS]

  maybe it feels that way to non-technical [TS]

  people that you're forced some unknown [TS]

  time down the road to pay for it again [TS]

  why would you pay for it again you've [TS]

  already got it oh you want the new thing [TS]

  because it's better than what you have [TS]

  now because they made this awesome new [TS]

  thing and they worked for a year that [TS]

  our entire team making this new thing [TS]

  and you're forced to pay for it to get [TS]

  that again well you're not forced the [TS]

  thing you have still works the way it [TS]

  did you know and if you don't pay if [TS]

  they offer your software will be held [TS]

  hostage and soon will be obviously [TS]

  wasted they're gonna come at your house [TS]

  and break your computer with a hammer it [TS]

  still works the way it did before the [TS]

  new version came out it still works fine [TS]

  that I'm breaking it I I don't [TS]

  understand that mindset at all I don't [TS]

  know if it's an entitlement mindset a [TS]

  frustration with upgrades because he is [TS]

  true that upgrading is a hassle in terms [TS]

  of you know I upgraded all my crap [TS]

  doesn't work and people get burned by [TS]

  that but they still feel like I gotta [TS]

  have the latest thing I gotta upgrade [TS]

  like maybe that's the sickness the idea [TS]

  that there's something new or out there [TS]

  and they're not they're not in on it [TS]

  yeah you got to have it like and like [TS]

  even if what they have like you're [TS]

  saying works perfectly for them for [TS]

  their needs yeah they have it it's [TS]

  working there's something new out there [TS]

  but just because it's new doesn't mean [TS]

  it's better it's like it's the same [TS]

  whatever the psychological sickness or [TS]

  condition is where you like the the man [TS]

  blames the woman for dressing for [TS]

  dressing provocatively oh she's [TS]

  distracting me she's tempting me with [TS]

  this with her beauty and I can't resist [TS]

  the [TS]

  new software I blame them but it's not [TS]

  you know it's not my fault for choosing [TS]

  that deciding that I have to upgrade [TS]

  they made an awesome new version how can [TS]

  I resist you know that the temptress [TS]

  brings me over and a half I have to [TS]

  upgrade you don't have to upgrade if [TS]

  what you have works fine stick with it [TS]

  and you can't blame the developers for [TS]

  making this awesome tempting new thing [TS]

  so there's a second part of this one it [TS]

  says here's a couple of alternatives is [TS]

  use in-app purchase to unlock new new [TS]

  features or some virtual currency like [TS]

  coins like many of the free iOS games to [TS]

  choose from a range of features or break [TS]

  the app up into smaller pieces and sell [TS]

  them as components that the customer can [TS]

  pick and choose from based on their [TS]

  knees all these are potentially better [TS]

  than the old school model or at least no [TS]

  worse I can think of many reasons why [TS]

  they would be worse never mind that most [TS]

  of them aren't even possible because [TS]

  it'll be discussed if you're going to [TS]

  unlock features that are already there [TS]

  the pictures have to already be there [TS]

  and if you you know you have to after [TS]

  three years of that what does your [TS]

  application look like does it have is it [TS]

  three entirely different applications [TS]

  with different sets of features that get [TS]

  unlocked to produce what is effectively [TS]

  the same as photoshop cs2 three and four [TS]

  all within a single executable that's a [TS]

  debugging and support nightmare and I [TS]

  don't think that's a sustainable model [TS]

  at all and sawing in individual [TS]

  components that work together again not [TS]

  particularly easy on iOS or on Mac OS 10 [TS]

  with the new sandboxing rules and that [TS]

  model doesn't it's even more confusing [TS]

  for customers and software developers [TS]

  have shown that they're not particularly [TS]

  good at implementing that like the open [TS]

  doc deco model where you mix and match [TS]

  these components it's probably also a QA [TS]

  nightmare so I hope look at max isn't [TS]

  last name right but I disagree strongly [TS]

  with his his view of what the what the [TS]

  existing software model is like I and I [TS]

  agree on the whole idea that it does [TS]

  lead to applications like Microsoft Word [TS]

  and companies built around them where [TS]

  they're just iterating for the sake of [TS]

  iterating trying to make money that is [TS]

  something that needs to be addressed but [TS]

  I don't think you get rid of it entirely [TS]

  because it also leads you to the best of [TS]

  the best applications we have are the [TS]

  ones that are developed over many many [TS]

  years and refined and been able to give [TS]

  a BBEdit is a great example [TS]

  you know BBEdit even though it kind of [TS]

  looks like a window full of text just [TS]

  like it did 1992 it's that I doubt there [TS]

  are many lines of code that are shared [TS]

  with the original version of that [TS]

  application and how were they able to [TS]

  afford to continuously [TS]

  develop an application for 20 years it [TS]

  was their 20th anniversary recently [TS]

  because every time they made a new [TS]

  version had worked on a year or two on [TS]

  it they got money from both existing [TS]

  customers and new customers if they [TS]

  didn't they wouldn't be around anymore [TS]

  and so what would be using inside I [TS]

  guess we were using Emacs or something [TS]

  let's do a second sponsor while you [TS]

  recover good idea second sponsors every [TS]

  me go to every me comm slash download to [TS]

  download this while I'm describing it [TS]

  because it's pretty cool this is the [TS]

  thing it just launched just came out [TS]

  Tuesday a couple days ago and they came [TS]

  up with this app this is an iOS app they [TS]

  came up with a to address a problem with [TS]

  friending on social networks and that [TS]

  the problem that they identified is you [TS]

  either sharing everything with everybody [TS]

  or you're sharing nothing and there [TS]

  really isn't an in-between that's the [TS]

  problem if you make somebody your friend [TS]

  on one of these social networks then [TS]

  they get to pretty much see everything [TS]

  that you do that doesn't always work [TS]

  what if it's something personal what if [TS]

  it's something you don't want your work [TS]

  people to see or you you don't want your [TS]

  family to see who knows well they [TS]

  address this they let you create friends [TS]

  on social on their social network based [TS]

  on who they are in real life you create [TS]

  these circles you create one for your [TS]

  family create one for your co-workers [TS]

  one for your best friends one for your [TS]

  significant other whatever it is you can [TS]

  propagate these if you choose from your [TS]

  address book you can enter them in [TS]

  minute whatever it is that you want to [TS]

  do you create real life circles and they [TS]

  mirror the real way that you share [TS]

  things in the real world and it's very [TS]

  very easy to use it's an elegant awesome [TS]

  app and the whole purpose of it again is [TS]

  to mirror the way that you share things [TS]

  in real life so they're totally private [TS]

  you can enjoy the peace of mind that [TS]

  comes with that and they create these [TS]

  things called magic circles if you don't [TS]

  want to go through and do it manually [TS]

  somebody asking well what if what if I [TS]

  don't want to like go and create you can [TS]

  have it'll figure out circles based on [TS]

  the information that you give it anyway [TS]

  it's a very cool app it's a very very [TS]

  new way to think about sharing things in [TS]

  this new approach I think is going to [TS]

  catch on because more and more people [TS]

  are worried about their privacy worried [TS]

  about who can see [TS]

  what check this out every me.com slash [TS]

  download is where you go to get it [TS]

  I've linked in the show notes also and [TS]

  check it out I think you'll like it if I [TS]

  want to get the readability I got to go [TS]

  to it now so I'm pleased hopefully [TS]

  they're not gonna leave the Mac upgrade [TS]

  topic even though there's more and [TS]

  there's notes and I got the readability [TS]

  alright let's hear the readability [TS]

  readability in middle men many people [TS]

  wanted to write in about this and I [TS]

  think a lot of people didn't like your [TS]

  stance on middle men because they felt [TS]

  it was inconsistent that yeah okay yeah [TS]

  and then that's I had in my notes a [TS]

  particular middle man that I want to [TS]

  talk about which many listeners to their [TS]

  credit brought up because I pay [TS]

  attention and that middle man is the app [TS]

  store which I think I briefly mentioned [TS]

  but now I want to talk about a bit more [TS]

  just like in general talking about the [TS]

  topic of Mittleman so what I said in the [TS]

  readability episode was I didn't like [TS]

  the idea of adding a middle man I think [TS]

  things get better when you either [TS]

  eliminate middlemen or replace existing [TS]

  middleman with a better one that's more [TS]

  efficient or more hungry for more [TS]

  customer focused or not on monopoly or [TS]

  whatever and so many people brought up [TS]

  the App Store so we'll talk about the [TS]

  App Store's middleman that first Apple [TS]

  didn't add a middleman the App Store [TS]

  replaced either one middleman or [TS]

  sometimes several so examples of [TS]

  middlemen that it could replaces like if [TS]

  you were selling your software in a [TS]

  store like a retail store Apple replace [TS]

  that middleman so you took away Best Buy [TS]

  and you put an apple right if you were [TS]

  selling things through your website the [TS]

  App Store replace like your payment [TS]

  processor right and sometimes if you [TS]

  were selling in both locations the App [TS]

  Store replace both the retailers that [TS]

  used to have a relationship with and [TS]

  your payment processors for your direct [TS]

  sale so it's possible that the App Store [TS]

  could replace multiple middlemen for [TS]

  some people just one middleman for [TS]

  another but certainly wasn't adding one [TS]

  like Best Buy and your credit card [TS]

  payment processor and Apple aren't all [TS]

  in the loop plight so they didn't add a [TS]

  middleman now the app stores cut is much [TS]

  bigger than the cut of many of the [TS]

  middlemen that it replaced so for [TS]

  example if you were an independent [TS]

  active and you're using a payment [TS]

  processor there's no way your online [TS]

  payment processor was taking 30% cut of [TS]

  your revenues like way smaller than that [TS]

  right so even though Apple may have just [TS]

  been replacing a middleman they were [TS]

  drei they were not like better in that [TS]

  regard to the developer taking a much [TS]

  bigger cut of your money then then your [TS]

  existing payment processor was maybe [TS]

  actually a lesser cut than your retailer [TS]

  because if you were selling box software [TS]

  that's just you get shafted on that like [TS]

  the people who actually sold Box Mac [TS]

  software by the time that goes through [TS]

  all the various layers of distributors [TS]

  and middlemen and becomes a box and they [TS]

  sell it how much money you get out of [TS]

  that is way less than 70% so depending [TS]

  on where you were coming from Apple [TS]

  could have been a much worse middleman [TS]

  than the one I replaced for you or a [TS]

  much better one or somewhere in the [TS]

  middle up existing middlemen were [TS]

  usually a lot less draconian about the [TS]

  product itself so your payment processor [TS]

  doesn't care what the hell you're [TS]

  selling unless maybe you're selling porn [TS]

  or some sort of gambling thing because [TS]

  yeah they don't like that but your [TS]

  payment processor doesn't care if your [TS]

  application is defaming a political [TS]

  figure you know as your payment [TS]

  processor doesn't care if what you're [TS]

  selling duplicates the functionality in [TS]

  an application that Apple makes all you [TS]

  know it contains curse words or yeah [TS]

  that they don't care that and retailers [TS]

  well again a little might be a little [TS]

  bit more draconian than just the payment [TS]

  processor Bozell we don't want to carry [TS]

  that invest bug this is not part of our [TS]

  image or whatever but certainly less [TS]

  picky than Apple or it's like oh we [TS]

  don't like the api's you're using that's [TS]

  PI doesn't care what ap as you use so [TS]

  there's another case where Apple is [TS]

  probably more restrictive and a worse [TS]

  experience for the developer than the [TS]

  middleman it was replacing so other [TS]

  things that the app stored it took away [TS]

  the direct relationship between software [TS]

  vendors and their customers nope those [TS]

  aren't your customers anymore now those [TS]

  are apples customers and Expo impose [TS]

  extremely strict and pretty much [TS]

  arbitrary rules on the content on the [TS]

  apps we're going to decide whether your [TS]

  application can be in the store based on [TS]

  us looking at it and making a decision [TS]

  and we'll try to give you a list of [TS]

  rules and try to give you a hint but [TS]

  those rules change all the time and God [TS]

  knows what they're going to be we decide [TS]

  uh there is a policies in the App Store [TS]

  that excluded not just individual [TS]

  applications but entire classes of [TS]

  applications for example backup software [TS]

  which needs to read every file on your [TS]

  desk well you need administrator [TS]

  privileges for that and the Mac App [TS]

  Store says no no admin privileges and by [TS]

  the way you're gonna need to be sandbox [TS]

  a whole categories of software if that [TS]

  was this category of software you were [TS]

  in you can't even participate in this [TS]

  new middleman because you're not allowed [TS]

  in at all [TS]

  and again certainly things like your [TS]

  payment processor would not eliminate [TS]

  backup software but because of some [TS]

  arbitrary decision I just want to cut of [TS]

  your you know your payment transactions [TS]

  and perhaps the worst one this new [TS]

  middleman at the App Store it has its [TS]

  own software and it favors its own [TS]

  software over your software so no [TS]

  competing with anything in Apple makes [TS]

  if they said no actually we prefer to be [TS]

  the only application that even looks [TS]

  vaguely like this on the store so we're [TS]

  rejecting yours that was one of the [TS]

  first times that I just totally flipped [TS]

  the switch on on the App Store's like [TS]

  years and years ago when like the iOS [TS]

  App Store when they publicly said that [TS]

  they rejected an application because it [TS]

  duplicated some functionality that [TS]

  provided looks like oh that's it this is [TS]

  BS this is totally BS this app stores [TS]

  because it up to that point I was like I [TS]

  was willing to entertain the idea of the [TS]

  app store because I thought it could be [TS]

  okay but you know once they did that [TS]

  once they've totally been filed up into [TS]

  the you know so that's the way it's [TS]

  going to be okay I get it now [TS]

  that's like you know that's like if Best [TS]

  Buy also had its own software making [TS]

  firm and they didn't want to carry [TS]

  Microsoft Word because they sold their [TS]

  own word processor so they wouldn't [TS]

  carry Microsoft Word back in the retail [TS]

  days or egghead software or whatever you [TS]

  want to do so and these rules change all [TS]

  the time like oh can I make something [TS]

  competes with iTunes can I make an app [TS]

  that does podcasts well now you can do [TS]

  that but also don't make something looks [TS]

  like a dialer but actually that looks [TS]

  kind of like an interface that looks [TS]

  like the program switcher that's [TS]

  included in Mac OS 10 even though we [TS]

  copied it from your app originally we [TS]

  now are not going to allow your app in [TS]

  the store there was a follow up item I [TS]

  had for ages about that that just pisses [TS]

  me off to no end what was that one I was [TS]

  just still had my notes quickster or [TS]

  quick Swit not quick stir quick switch [TS]

  or something like that it looked like [TS]

  the application switcher oh yeah I know [TS]

  what you mean I'm trying to remember it [TS]

  to somebody in the chat room I'm sure [TS]

  remembers what this thing was called [TS]

  sworn I had that in my notes much like [TS]

  in the trailer I wanted to do a whole [TS]

  show on that because that pissed me off [TS]

  so much it's like the Apple effectively [TS]

  copied the third-party application with [TS]

  the look and feel and we don't know if [TS]

  they even saw this their application but [TS]

  the bottom line is the application came [TS]

  out first Apple came out second to look [TS]

  just like that other one and then when [TS]

  the mag app store came along they [TS]

  wouldn't allow that app in the store [TS]

  because they said it looks too much like [TS]

  the application that we built into the [TS]

  offices right there just total BS light [TS]

  like lights which is that the name of it [TS]

  scooter computer thinks it's light [TS]

  switch quick pick [TS]

  pulled from the AppStore yeah this is a [TS]

  post from august 2011 i led to the [TS]

  shownotes yeah so that that is total BS [TS]

  and terrible terrible terrible so this [TS]

  you know that this is what the AppStore [TS]

  middleman is doing even though it was [TS]

  not adding the middleman it was [TS]

  replacing the middleman but replacing [TS]

  them in ways that had many disadvantages [TS]

  compared to the middlemen who was [TS]

  replacing right and yet and yet the [TS]

  AppStore are both in iOS and on the Mac [TS]

  side is grudgingly tolerated by the same [TS]

  developers who getting shafted by all [TS]

  the things that I just listed there all [TS]

  right never mind by the way taking 30 [TS]

  percent of their money you know what why [TS]

  is that how why is the App Store [TS]

  tolerated this was the main like thing [TS]

  oh so you don't like middlemen but [TS]

  everyone seems to be okay with the App [TS]

  Store or I don't hear you complaining [TS]

  about the App Store Oh first if you've [TS]

  been listening to show for I think you [TS]

  have heard me complain about the App [TS]

  Store but it's true about developers [TS]

  like there's lots of complaining about [TS]

  the App Store and there still is lots of [TS]

  complaining about the App Store but [TS]

  people put their apps in it don't they [TS]

  why why is the App Store accepted better [TS]

  than readability why aren't like the [TS]

  same people are complaining our [TS]

  readability it would be as if people [TS]

  complain about readability but all the [TS]

  people complaining about it were [TS]

  subscribers to readability and giving it [TS]

  money every month and all the websites [TS]

  complaining about readability [TS]

  we're nevertheless signing up with [TS]

  rehabilitating that's not happening [TS]

  people are complaining and as far as I [TS]

  can tell [TS]

  very few people customers or readers are [TS]

  signed up with readability like it's not [TS]

  they don't have millions of users and [TS]

  they're not like on a hockey stick [TS]

  growth type of thing as far as I know [TS]

  and certainly the publishers are not [TS]

  clamoring to sign up with readability [TS]

  and just think everyone has to sign up [TS]

  with a wall at the same time complaining [TS]

  that's what happened on the App Store [TS]

  everybody complained about it but every [TS]

  developer if they could get in the store [TS]

  or got in and some people would complain [TS]

  about the App Store and then also [TS]

  complain that they couldn't get into [TS]

  this thing that they hate you know food [TS]

  here is terrible the portions are so [TS]

  small like it was that's the way it was [TS]

  going with the App Store and still is so [TS]

  why is that what makes readability [TS]

  different than the App Store well the [TS]

  App Store the key thing of the App Store [TS]

  had going I'll start working things well [TS]

  one is that replaced many many separate [TS]

  middlemen with a single very popular one [TS]

  so even though it's like okay for this [TS]

  person we replace [TS]

  your payment processor and this person [TS]

  we replace your retailer and for this [TS]

  person replace your different payment [TS]

  processor even though for any individual [TS]

  developer or customer for that matter it [TS]

  only replaced one or two middlemen [TS]

  collectively it said all those different [TS]

  middle members there are many payment [TS]

  processors many retailers many different [TS]

  websites to go through and buy stuff it [TS]

  replaced all of them with one extremely [TS]

  popular visible middleman so from the [TS]

  consumers perspective that's good but [TS]

  you don't have to look at 20 different [TS]

  places to find it is there any cool new [TS]

  software I can buy like you just go to [TS]

  this one place that everyone knows about [TS]

  because it's very popular because [TS]

  they're a big company and everything [TS]

  right and for the developers it replaced [TS]

  each individual developers need to deal [TS]

  with a payment processor to deal with a [TS]

  retailer to deal with whatever they're [TS]

  dealing with now everybody's dealing [TS]

  with the same middle person and it takes [TS]

  some of the guesswork out of all do I [TS]

  have the best payment processor this [TS]

  payment processor annoying do I need to [TS]

  change your different one you know so it [TS]

  coalesced many different middlemen I [TS]

  don't think readability does that [TS]

  because they're kind of trying to be a [TS]

  new thing and they're just not as [TS]

  popular as either not as visible as [TS]

  Apple is and their service is not as [TS]

  popular as the App Store became because [TS]

  they don't have the kind of visibility [TS]

  they don't have the time to say [TS]

  everybody who's reading the web first of [TS]

  all everybody doesn't even use the old [TS]

  version to readability that just [TS]

  reformats the thing it's tends to be gig [TS]

  geek type of feature it's not like their [TS]

  Microsoft or Google or someone with the [TS]

  leverage to say everybody who reads the [TS]

  web you're all going to be readability [TS]

  customers and are most of you are going [TS]

  to be in the less you know about [TS]

  computers the more likely you are to be [TS]

  a readability customer we're going to [TS]

  unify the world of getting payment for [TS]

  reading things on the web by [TS]

  reformatting pages they haven't done [TS]

  that iTunes also greatly reduce the [TS]

  friction to buying things because they [TS]

  had existing iTunes accounts from that [TS]

  little music thing they did a couple [TS]

  years ago with credit cards with people [TS]

  who already are shown that they're [TS]

  completely willing and able to click a [TS]

  button and buy stuff so apples bring [TS]

  with it literally millions of customers [TS]

  ready to buy with a single click [TS]

  readability is not bringing in that they [TS]

  don't have an existing database the size [TS]

  of the iTunes music store coming over to [TS]

  okay we've already got all these people [TS]

  all their credit cards in an application [TS]

  that they all have installed and they've [TS]

  shown that they're willing to click on [TS]

  and buy stuff we're bringing that to [TS]

  bear on reading websites they're not [TS]

  they're not bringing that Apple also [TS]

  brought national TV adds tremendous [TS]

  exposure featured placement in this [TS]

  store that everyone's going to [TS]

  get featured placement in the operating [TS]

  system that millions of people use you [TS]

  know featured placement on the phones [TS]

  that millions of people are going to buy [TS]

  Apple is bringing with it big big big [TS]

  guns to counteract all the crap that I [TS]

  just listed that's terrible than the App [TS]

  Store does all this this good stuff is [TS]

  counterbalancing good stuff leads to [TS]

  increased sales both potential increased [TS]

  sales like look all the people I could [TS]

  sell to an actual increase sale and all [TS]

  that bad stuff you choke it down once [TS]

  those checks start coming in right if [TS]

  this was the deal with readability if [TS]

  it's like like this readability like [TS]

  they're taking money on people's behalf [TS]

  and I don't like it and I like it [TS]

  they're heading this middleman layer but [TS]

  man I signed up for readability and now [TS]

  the income from readability is dwarfing [TS]

  my income from advertisers that they [TS]

  would be comparable to the App Store of [TS]

  that happened people would still be [TS]

  complaining about them but suddenly [TS]

  you've got something they're like well [TS]

  yeah everything I said about them is bad [TS]

  is still bad but man look at the size of [TS]

  this check look at what they're bringing [TS]

  to bear look at what they've brought to [TS]

  my site they bring in the customers that [TS]

  bring in the money they're bringing the [TS]

  audience that's what the App Store has [TS]

  brought and that's why iOS developers [TS]

  and Mac developers in general probably [TS]

  have a net positive attitude about the [TS]

  App Store despite their complaints [TS]

  because they're bringing the customers [TS]

  that bring in the money readability is [TS]

  not bringing this all we're left with is [TS]

  a situation where they want to insert [TS]

  themselves as a middleman and they're [TS]

  not bringing those benefits to the App [TS]

  Store which i think is a much worse [TS]

  middleman brought along to [TS]

  counterbalance all the bad things that [TS]

  it does the biggest one from consumers [TS]

  perspective is they're not bringing a [TS]

  unifying thing I think unification is [TS]

  really really important I think that's [TS]

  the biggest advantage of the App Store [TS]

  that it's this one well-known place to [TS]

  go to find software and that was such a [TS]

  an icebreaker such a bottleneck in the [TS]

  old world of like how do you find [TS]

  software you're not a nerd how to help [TS]

  you know where to find software just [TS]

  like I'm just on the internet and I type [TS]

  into Google software Mac's something I [TS]

  ends up in a site that gives me a virus [TS]

  you know you go to the App Store it's a [TS]

  top item in there one of the top items [TS]

  in the Apple menu you know on your phone [TS]

  it's right there on your phone on the [TS]

  home screen you just press it with your [TS]

  thumb and you can buy stuff that was [TS]

  tremendous and readability has nothing [TS]

  compared to that and then there's the [TS]

  customers so that I think is the major [TS]

  major difference in the App Store and in [TS]

  case you haven't noticed I am NOT a fan [TS]

  of the App Store or its policies or any [TS]

  of those things but I recognize the vast [TS]

  that it does spring I am a fan of making [TS]

  it easier to buy software making it [TS]

  easier to install and uninstall software [TS]

  because I think that leads to more [TS]

  people buying software more software [TS]

  developers being able to develop [TS]

  software as just once they become that [TS]

  linchpin in the business all the bad [TS]

  things that you become way worse that's [TS]

  why I'm complaining about them reshaping [TS]

  the business in a way I think there's [TS]

  not advantageous to certain kinds of [TS]

  applications because they're so powerful [TS]

  because of those other things you know [TS]

  with great power comes great [TS]

  responsibility [TS]

  allows to happen this my four-year-old [TS]

  says that a lot yeah so I said that [TS]

  really is not bringing vastly increased [TS]

  exposure this is all setting aside I'm [TS]

  still setting aside the issue of taking [TS]

  money other people's behalf and [TS]

  everything less friction and receiving [TS]

  money maybe there's less friction [TS]

  because you could say this this infinite [TS]

  friction now because most sites don't [TS]

  take money directly from customers and [TS]

  so there if readability can get you some [TS]

  money that's that's better than not [TS]

  getting it all but again they don't have [TS]

  the millions of users with credit cards [TS]

  they're kind of starting from zero and [TS]

  trying to build up most sites don't get [TS]

  money from readers they get it from [TS]

  advertisers and so if readability was [TS]

  going to like the App Store reduced [TS]

  friction between two existing parties [TS]

  there were people who wanted software [TS]

  and people who sold software and the App [TS]

  Store reduce friction between those [TS]

  parties to transfer the money while [TS]

  taking a cut if readability wanted to do [TS]

  the same thing that the App Store did [TS]

  but do it in the world of websites [TS]

  readability would be reducing friction [TS]

  between advertisers and websites because [TS]

  that's the current flow of money that's [TS]

  how things get made on the web money [TS]

  flows from advertisers to the websites [TS]

  and the websites produce content with [TS]

  the money the advertisers give them so [TS]

  if readability had swooped in and said [TS]

  what we're doing is reducing friction [TS]

  between those two parties and making it [TS]

  easier for them to transfer money maybe [TS]

  they would have you know they're not [TS]

  doing that they're saying there's a [TS]

  party here that you're not even getting [TS]

  money from it would be kind of as if the [TS]

  app store came in and said we're going [TS]

  to make it really easy for advertisers [TS]

  to put their ads in applications and [TS]

  give money to application vendors and [TS]

  application vendors would say well we [TS]

  write software and we sell it we don't [TS]

  like our software isn't ad supported but [TS]

  it wouldn't be much better if your [TS]

  software is supported by advertisers and [TS]

  customers didn't have to buy it [TS]

  we're gonna make that easier in fact [TS]

  we're collecting money right now from [TS]

  advertisers and we'll give it to you and [TS]

  then your ads will go you know it's to [TS]

  parties that weren't that you know it's [TS]

  different us obviously on the web but [TS]

  they say well don't you think readers [TS]

  should be giving you money wouldn't that [TS]

  be a better relationship directly [TS]

  between readers and sites without these [TS]

  advertisers in the middle I kind of [TS]

  agree with that but the fact is that's [TS]

  not how the relationship works right now [TS]

  maybe maybe sites shouldn't get money [TS]

  from readers instead but as it had last [TS]

  show the advertisers are out bidding the [TS]

  readers so far readers are not willing [TS]

  to pay as much as advertisers and often [TS]

  not willing to pay anything at all even [TS]

  the New York Times do you think anybody [TS]

  could get money from people it'd be the [TS]

  New York Times even the New York Times [TS]

  is having trouble figuring out jeez how [TS]

  can we get even a fraction of the money [TS]

  we need to to sustain our business [TS]

  directly from readers even though the [TS]

  New York Times has always been getting [TS]

  some money like with the newspaper [TS]

  subscriptions on the web they're finding [TS]

  it difficult they're trying to figure [TS]

  out how do we pay how do we adjust like [TS]

  how many articles you get for free and [TS]

  how much should it cost then even then [TS]

  when you pay the New York Times I [TS]

  believe you still get a filled with ads [TS]

  so they still going with the advertisers [TS]

  so readability is fighting an uphill [TS]

  battle here and they are not doing [TS]

  things the way the AppStore did they are [TS]

  not bringing the advantages the AppStore [TS]

  brought to their credit like they're [TS]

  also not bringing the massive [TS]

  disadvantages that the AppStore brought [TS]

  but it doesn't really matter if you're [TS]

  not it readability is not able to pay to [TS]

  pay these content providers enough to [TS]

  sustain their business they're just not [TS]

  interested like are you wake me up [TS]

  readability when you can pay the kind of [TS]

  money that the advertisers are paying [TS]

  and so it's kind of a chicken egg [TS]

  situation where well we can't do that [TS]

  until we get lots of readers but readers [TS]

  don't want to sign on if there's not a [TS]

  lot of sites signed on and then if we [TS]

  collect money without the site signing [TS]

  on they complain and they're in a tough [TS]

  spot I think here's someone the final [TS]

  thing about open readability is a email [TS]

  from Brad Fortin who is a loyal [TS]

  readability customer I think it's good [TS]

  to have the view of someone who likes [TS]

  your readability what do they like about [TS]

  it and why do they like it so he says [TS]

  the way I see readability business [TS]

  models that I voluntarily give them $10 [TS]

  a month in the hopes that they'll be [TS]

  able to contact these content providers [TS]

  and distribute my money to them in [TS]

  proportion to how much of their content [TS]

  I read and enjoy periodically I'll go [TS]

  through the list of sites I've tried to [TS]

  contribute to see who isn't signed up [TS]

  with the service yet and try to contact [TS]

  them in the hopes they'll sign up and [TS]

  take my money [TS]

  I'm considering raising my amount of $20 [TS]

  and if more content providers hop on I'm [TS]

  willing to go as high as 60 roughly what [TS]

  I'm paying my ISP this is the money I [TS]

  think the sites deserve and I think [TS]

  readability proportionally distributing [TS]

  that money to sites for me is a [TS]

  wonderful idea and I wish more sites [TS]

  were willing to sign up for it that's [TS]

  Noble and I think that's what [TS]

  breathability wants but how many people [TS]

  do you think in the world are like Brad [TS]

  Fortin who are willing to pay $60 a [TS]

  month and if you divide that $60 a month [TS]

  amongst all the web pages that all the [TS]

  websites that someone reads over the [TS]

  course of the month how much is that a [TS]

  month and multiply that by the number of [TS]

  users who are willing to pay that and [TS]

  see how much money exactly these [TS]

  websites you're going to get and then [TS]

  compare it to how much money advertisers [TS]

  are paying these websites and again I [TS]

  think people find that the advertisers [TS]

  are massively out bidding the readers [TS]

  and you know if you're running a website [TS]

  and you have to find a way to sustain it [TS]

  like it's similar for this for this [TS]

  podcast if every reader was willing to [TS]

  pay $10 an episode for this podcast you [TS]

  would not need advertisement no probably [TS]

  not [TS]

  so everyone listening right now if you [TS]

  you can like start a separate website [TS]

  and say okay I'm willing to pay $10 an [TS]

  episode or $1 an episode for [TS]

  hypercritical go ahead and get money [TS]

  like Dan is not going to turn down your [TS]

  money for the number you know to me but [TS]

  I think you're gonna be outbid by the [TS]

  advertisers and I think people like it [TS]

  this way they like getting the free [TS]

  content like you're being advertiser [TS]

  supported if there was a third party [TS]

  trying to swoop in and say we can get [TS]

  you money directly from readers dan [TS]

  would say well that's great no but if [TS]

  you don't give me enough money don't [TS]

  give you as much money as the [TS]

  advertisers I can't get rid of the [TS]

  advertisers you know what I mean and and [TS]

  if you didn't talk to Dan about that and [TS]

  started taking money on behalf of Dan to [TS]

  listen to hypercritical I think you'd be [TS]

  pissed about it and rightfully so so [TS]

  this is the situation readability finds [TS]

  itself in ah and I think it's a [TS]

  difficult situation but the reality is [TS]

  what the reality is if readability [TS]

  through force of will or advertising or [TS]

  whatever was able to convince more [TS]

  people that they should pay for content [TS]

  than they will have been able to do [TS]

  something that many other people have [TS]

  not been able to do and you know I think [TS]

  we would all thank them for it but I [TS]

  just don't think it's going to happen [TS]

  now so that's readability didn't take [TS]

  too long no not at all [TS]

  got time for a little tiny bit on [TS]

  flashback I think what do you think well [TS]

  I think it's important to talk about it [TS]

  and you know get your take on now for [TS]

  those who don't know flashback is the [TS]

  name for this I should have looked this [TS]

  up is it a virus is it a Trojan horse [TS]

  what is the technical classification of [TS]

  this piece of malware affecting the Mac [TS]

  well I guess they are calling it malware [TS]

  that's the umbrella term that is the [TS]

  umbrella term I think that's probably [TS]

  fine dry is it is it a drive-by attack [TS]

  is that the official something like I [TS]

  think drive-by attack is the now because [TS]

  it's not a Trojan horse so this is a [TS]

  piece of malware that is reportedly [TS]

  affecting like something that people [TS]

  things like 1% of all Mac's yes like [TS]

  600,000 Mac's or something like that [TS]

  right and Gruber talked about in his [TS]

  show a little bit and what he said I [TS]

  thought was a good point for those of us [TS]

  were old it's remap we remember a time [TS]

  back when viruses did exist on the Mac [TS]

  back in the classic Mac days I had [TS]

  viruses I believe with the popular one [TS]

  that I kept getting was the invar virus [TS]

  lowercase n capital vir and I would [TS]

  disinfect myself from the Enver virus [TS]

  using Reza and the Delete key so that's [TS]

  that's old-school uh some viruses [TS]

  existed back way back in the old days [TS]

  when max were black and white and had [TS]

  monarch you know monochrome tiny 9 inch [TS]

  screens and stuff like that and as [TS]

  Gruber pointed out the virus is spread [TS]

  back then through floppy disk because [TS]

  there there was no internet kids you [TS]

  know there were BBS's and there are [TS]

  modems if you were lucky but even the [TS]

  Mac had not great support for those but [TS]

  generally they you got a virus because [TS]

  you went to a Mac user group meeting [TS]

  that was a mug that's what we called [TS]

  them back in the day they don't stick on [TS]

  mugs that's what they were called I [TS]

  don't know they don't still call them [TS]

  mugs I don't think they exist anymore [TS]

  because we have the internet now but [TS]

  you'd go to a meeting with a bunch of [TS]

  old cranky people and you would exchange [TS]

  floppy disks and you would bring the [TS]

  floppy disk film usually filled with she [TS]

  the shareware software or pirated [TS]

  commercial software or something and [TS]

  half of them had viruses on them and [TS]

  when you put them into your computer [TS]

  they would infect it you know and and so [TS]

  that's how viruses spread now [TS]

  analogy to the way virus is spread these [TS]

  days is the difference between a [TS]

  sexually transmitted disease and an [TS]

  airborne virus type of disease sexually [TS]

  transmitted diseases as bad as they are [TS]

  like AIDS and everything spread much [TS]

  more slowly than something that's [TS]

  airborne where you see in all the [TS]

  outbreak movies or contagion was a [TS]

  recent one if you have to take a floppy [TS]

  disk and stick it into a computer to [TS]

  spread a virus that's going to spread [TS]

  much more slowly especially when every [TS]

  computer in the world isn't connected to [TS]

  each other nowadays viruses can spread [TS]

  because all of our computers were [TS]

  connected to the Internet and if the [TS]

  Internet is the vector for this [TS]

  infection if it's on webpages a virus [TS]

  can spread much much more quickly now [TS]

  today than it used to be able to spread [TS]

  but despite the fact that back when Mac [TS]

  viruses were sexually transmitted so to [TS]

  speak they were still widespread enough [TS]

  for me to have gotten and for every [TS]

  classic Mac user I know to have gotten [TS]

  them because they would spread more [TS]

  slowly but they would spread just [TS]

  through this little beans of floppy [TS]

  disks going from one place to the other [TS]

  right now [TS]

  so that was the old days of no name [TS]

  remembers because nobody used Mac's [TS]

  because there were tor computers and [TS]

  they had mice and only two high [TS]

  computers have mice right and then Apple [TS]

  almost went out of business then they [TS]

  came back and then a few people more [TS]

  started buying Mac's and you had Mac OS [TS]

  10 and there's this period of time where [TS]

  the Mac's really didn't have a problem [TS]

  with malware at all and there was lots [TS]

  of debates about this and and you know [TS]

  the the PC had tremendous problems with [TS]

  the viruses because they were the [TS]

  massively dominant platform at the time [TS]

  all of our computers got connected to [TS]

  each other and so it's exploited and [TS]

  Microsoft spent years trying to pin down [TS]

  Windows XP and then you had the Vista [TS]

  disaster because they spent all this [TS]

  time trying to make the security better [TS]

  and all that stuff during this time the [TS]

  Mac was basically malware free you [TS]

  didn't have to think about malware you [TS]

  didn't have to do anything Mac user [TS]

  still did they would always ask what [TS]

  should I do about viruses what should I [TS]

  do about malware and my question was do [TS]

  nothing because there's nothing to [TS]

  protect yourself from that won't always [TS]

  be the case but right now it's no point [TS]

  in killing yourself trying to protect [TS]

  yourself from threats that don't exist [TS]

  right this was the time during which [TS]

  Apple and needed to be working its butt [TS]

  off and I think it was trying to because [TS]

  this was the honeymoon period now where [TS]

  it's not a problem of the Mac platform [TS]

  Apple now you should be spending this [TS]

  time to make sure that when inevitably [TS]

  if you're successful malware does become [TS]

  a problem on the Mac platform which we [TS]

  all know is coming it's just a certain [TS]

  just a matter of [TS]

  like you know there wasn't like the Mac [TS]

  wasn't vulnerable you get you can right [TS]

  now for it really easily it was arguably [TS]

  more vulnerable than Windows but nobody [TS]

  cared the market share was too small or [TS]

  whatever eventually if you're successful [TS]

  Apple that's going to change and you're [TS]

  going to be vulnerable so you better [TS]

  spend time nailing stuff down and that's [TS]

  kind of what Apple's been trying to do [TS]

  it like sandboxing this is all to [TS]

  prevent malware Tyvek supplies get flash [TS]

  off the system by default don't install [TS]

  java by default like just try to pin it [TS]

  down pin it down pin it down because [TS]

  this is the period of time during which [TS]

  you know you you have you have this [TS]

  window to try to try to get your house [TS]

  in order before the inevitable malware [TS]

  comes the windows didn't have that [TS]

  luxury they had to do it like under live [TS]

  fire they had to swap the engine of the [TS]

  car while it was running and just pin [TS]

  their operating system down while it's [TS]

  under constant attack constantly [TS]

  reacting things a patch of the week to [TS]

  patch a smaller ability and everyone [TS]

  species being infected with viruses that [TS]

  was a mess for them Apple had a window [TS]

  of time to really turn the screws down [TS]

  on his operating system and also to its [TS]

  credit when Apple made a new platform it [TS]

  came up with iOS it did a really good [TS]

  job of locking this thing down so far [TS]

  malware has not been a problem in iOS [TS]

  and I think it is much much much much [TS]

  much less vulnerable than the Mac to [TS]

  malware simply because there are few [TS]

  moving parts and just everything is much [TS]

  more nailed down in iOS everything is [TS]

  confined and limited in its authority to [TS]

  do stuff the Mac is not like that and [TS]

  the Mac is an older codebase and so on [TS]

  and so forth right well it looks like [TS]

  time has run out for Apple and you know [TS]

  the buzzer has rung Apple is not done [TS]

  it's like pencils down no more working [TS]

  and apples in the middle of its essay it [TS]

  didn't get done doing everything that it [TS]

  wanted to do I think Apple would have [TS]

  liked it if it had a few more years of [TS]

  grace to say can we just get sandboxing [TS]

  sorted out and get everybody into [TS]

  sandboxing which is difficult because [TS]

  Sam boxing you know there's a whole [TS]

  issues with existing applications having [TS]

  to change or limited functionality to [TS]

  fit in sandboxing and Apple trying to [TS]

  negotiate with the developers all right [TS]

  we really want you to be sandbox but we [TS]

  do understandably we want your [TS]

  applications still to work and not be [TS]

  frustrating to users and this is dance [TS]

  that's still going on and the first [TS]

  significant malware in the Mac OS 10 era [TS]

  has hit and infected 1% of the computers [TS]

  so time is up for Apple and it's kind of [TS]

  sad they didn't get done everything they [TS]

  wanted to do arguably they didn't move [TS]

  fast enough they were [TS]

  had other priorities in the early days [TS]

  of Mac os10 one of those other [TS]

  priorities was you know making iOS which [TS]

  I think was this important for them to [TS]

  concentrate on that priority because it [TS]

  turns out to be the majority of their [TS]

  business at this point and is probably [TS]

  the future of the or of the company but [TS]

  it is kind of a shame that they didn't [TS]

  get farther along and the one particular [TS]

  thing I'm going to ding them for is not [TS]

  so much technologically that they [TS]

  couldn't screw down the Mac platform to [TS]

  be tighter in any amount of time that [TS]

  they had because I think it's probably [TS]

  more important to concentrate on iOS [TS]

  which is the obviously the platform of [TS]

  the future kick-boxing support of the [TS]

  future but their policies yeah no one [TS]

  came to that one and no they want their [TS]

  policies like that the way your company [TS]

  reacts to threats that's like a [TS]

  corporate policy decision and some [TS]

  rejiggering your organization to react [TS]

  to that and Apple has always been bad [TS]

  that has not been changing it like what [TS]

  you want to see is like for example this [TS]

  Java exploit that flashback exploits [TS]

  it's been around like it's been patched [TS]

  since February and the rest of the [TS]

  civilized world [TS]

  but because apples like man wouldn't [TS]

  really use Java it's not installed by [TS]

  default who cares about this like [TS]

  they're not on top of their game in [TS]

  terms of getting about patches they in [TS]

  effect did this to them stuff like I [TS]

  don't know how long it took flashback to [TS]

  go from zero infections to 1% of the [TS]

  installed Mac installed base but it [TS]

  might have been over a long period of [TS]

  time and you know if Apple had patched [TS]

  this exploit as soon as the patch was [TS]

  available this might not have been an [TS]

  issue at all but they're so damn slow [TS]

  and so damn stingy about rolling out [TS]

  changes now some of that is like what we [TS]

  don't want to have a patch every single [TS]

  week and we you know the but they're not [TS]

  they're not fast enough and then coming [TS]

  out now like oh here's three job updates [TS]

  in a week I did I put a link to the [TS]

  current job update and a link to an [TS]

  hour's technical story about this they [TS]

  did three Java updates in a week that's [TS]

  being reactive after 1% of your install [TS]

  base is infected these are just policy [TS]

  decisions get a mechanism for dealing [TS]

  with hot fixes take them seriously if [TS]

  you some Java exploit and it's patched [TS]

  and the rest of the world's has the [TS]

  patch Mac users should have that patch [TS]

  don't wait six freaking months because [TS]

  like I will roll it into the ten point [TS]

  seven point four update or whatever like [TS]

  patch it out they need a culture and a [TS]

  procedure of acknowledging exploits and [TS]

  acting on them quickly and if you don't [TS]

  want to disrupt users by potentially [TS]

  screwing up their operating system like [TS]

  that's on you to figure out the [TS]

  technical [TS]

  illusion to push out like mandatory push [TS]

  out of patches to people of software [TS]

  fixes without breaking their crap that's [TS]

  part of being reactive to software [TS]

  threats and it has it's pretty much a [TS]

  sideshow to Oh sandbox everything [TS]

  lockdown RS and get rid of exports these [TS]

  are is industry-wide things flash is not [TS]

  really their responsibility and I think [TS]

  by not shipping it they're basically [TS]

  abdicating that responsibility but Java [TS]

  even though they don't ship it as you [TS]

  showed when you're experimenting a last [TS]

  show it gets installed automatically by [TS]

  Apple the second you do anything that [TS]

  involves Java so it's on them to fix [TS]

  that and I bet they're a bunch of these [TS]

  you know security things that have been [TS]

  known for a long time that fixes are [TS]

  available for that Apple simply has not [TS]

  distributed not integrated into the [TS]

  codebase because they don't consider it [TS]

  a priority that's something they should [TS]

  have changed a long time ago and it's [TS]

  really embarrassing that now they've [TS]

  been caught with their pants down that [TS]

  so not like this is a zero day exploit [TS]

  where no one even knew about this [TS]

  exploit and now it's infected all these [TS]

  Mac's it's a you know nine oh how many [TS]

  days is that 100-day exploit or however [TS]

  long it's been since February there's no [TS]

  excuse for that so at this point the [TS]

  time has run out it's very disappointing [TS]

  that Apple has not reorganized itself as [TS]

  a company to be the type of machine that [TS]

  I imagine Microsoft is at this point [TS]

  having been proved that you know in a [TS]

  crucible of fire viruses that Microsoft [TS]

  is ready at a moment's notice to hotfix [TS]

  everybody who is on their latest [TS]

  platform providing fixes as soon as [TS]

  possible to the latest exploits as soon [TS]

  as they're available Microsoft is not [TS]

  sitting on patches for things that have [TS]

  impact since February they're just not [TS]

  there they are more proactive than that [TS]

  and their organization is basically [TS]

  structured better to deal with security [TS]

  threats and apples it's and I think [TS]

  that's a shame so I'll give Apple a [TS]

  d-minus on reactiveness two security [TS]

  threats and like a b-minus on its [TS]

  ability to revise its platform to be [TS]

  more secure because they're doing that [TS]

  then it's taking them a while and I [TS]

  can't really fault them for [TS]

  concentrating more on iOS because from [TS]

  business perspective that makes sense [TS]

  but the organizational stuff bad job [TS]

  there and by the way I still have not [TS]

  found a single Mac in real life infected [TS]

  with this none of my Mac's at home work [TS]

  and I haven't [TS]

  talk to anybody I don't know anybody [TS]

  that has either [TS]

  that doesn't make course that it has not [TS]

  going to make sense because if I roll my [TS]

  hundred sided die right and I say if I [TS]

  get a one that means I'm gonna find a [TS]

  virus that would be 1% so it makes you [TS]

  know I have a 99% and not a chance of [TS]

  not finding that virus in any computers [TS]

  that I encounter and I think I've rolled [TS]

  that hundred sided die in front of each [TS]

  computer and it has not come up on the [TS]

  one number that I select and so this [TS]

  fits I you know but one percent is still [TS]

  a large number of people and it's such [TS]

  it's just so lame that this this [TS]

  happened at all because it's like it's [TS]

  not a zero day exploit something Apple [TS]

  code Apache long ago and just didn't and [TS]

  sing them panic with three patches in a [TS]

  single week first two of which didn't [TS]

  even have a thing to remove it and even [TS]

  the current one says it removes some [TS]

  variants of this virus well thanks a lot [TS]

  Apple pretty lame you know if Apple had [TS]

  been really smart as as you say you know [TS]

  all this time that Apple has been nicely [TS]

  impervious but just not affected for the [TS]

  most part by any kind of virus you would [TS]

  have thought that Apple would have been [TS]

  building up a really aggressive team [TS]

  behind the scenes just sitting there [TS]

  ready to pounce at the future the first [TS]

  sign oh there's a problem that's alright [TS]

  we got 20 guys who have all they've been [TS]

  doing is waiting for this day and now [TS]

  let them loose and like they have that [TS]

  thing that the text malware like they [TS]

  integrated that and like Snow Leopard [TS]

  like they've been adding stuff to the [TS]

  operating system to try to be reactive [TS]

  to this and stuff but the policies not [TS]

  the mechanisms like they have the way [TS]

  they have that signatures of malware [TS]

  thing and you know that's automatically [TS]

  downloaded to you and you don't even [TS]

  have a choice and it's happening in the [TS]

  background there's no you know that [TS]

  thing like they built that thing but [TS]

  their reaction to like things like known [TS]

  exploits with existing patches that they [TS]

  just need to integrate it into their [TS]

  codebase and release like they're [TS]

  they're dropping the ball on the on the [TS]

  stupid corporate policy stuff not on the [TS]

  technology stuff like just release the [TS]

  patch like all you needed was some guy [TS]

  to say our new policy is whenever a [TS]

  security vulnerability is found in [TS]

  insert software or technology or Apache [TS]

  PHP Java any of the millions of things [TS]

  that Apple integrates and ships [TS]

  we will integrate that patch and release [TS]

  it to our customers within X number of [TS]

  days and X should not be 97 right that's [TS]

  you just have to lay down that policy [TS]

  and build the organization around that [TS]

  but just the sense of urgency wasn't [TS]

  there I guess the like they felt good [TS]

  about like oh we got this malware [TS]

  detection and we can push out new [TS]

  definitions to find stuff and it's like [TS]

  how I oh this is what I keep asking I [TS]

  haven't found a story tell me how long [TS]

  did it take to go from 0% of Mac users [TS]

  to 1% did that happen overnight [TS]

  over a week over a month over 6 months [TS]

  how long did it take for this thing to [TS]

  spread how long did Apple have as this [TS]

  infection slowly spread and they did [TS]

  nothing right maybe it was really fast I [TS]

  don't know but the exploit has been [TS]

  known for a long time and the patch has [TS]

  been available for a long time it's just [TS]

  it's inexcusable [TS]

  so yeah the honeymoon period is over for [TS]

  Apple now they really need to get on the [TS]

  ball I think this infection is not that [TS]

  bad it's not like it's the [TS]

  percentage-wise but like what the thing [TS]

  does there Apple's lucky that this one [TS]

  wasn't like one that waits on people's [TS]

  computers and then then simultaneously [TS]

  erases all their hard drives on a [TS]

  particular date six months from now like [TS]

  that would be nasty and that would give [TS]

  Apple a huge black eye but it could have [TS]

  been Apple's actions have not done [TS]

  anything to prevent that from happening [TS]

  they're just lucky that this particular [TS]

  virus seems to be a boring botnet type [TS]

  of controlling thing and now apples [TS]

  counteracting it but blah as I'll save [TS]

  Instagram for another show yeah I think [TS]

  you have we have to redo is that it then [TS]

  that's it one hundred and hundred two [TS]

  minutes I think I got one none non-stop [TS]

  siracusa yeah 143 here on my fancy word [TS]

  skype 143 yeah one hour 43 minutes 15 [TS]

  seconds activities on my thing in [TS]

  elapsed time 103 I don't know I did you [TS]

  go through a wormhole has it really been [TS]

  143 minutes now one hour 43 minutes one [TS]

  hour four yeah hundred but I of 103 [TS]

  minutes we will know when we get the 60 [TS]

  minutes we change units and I don't know [TS]

  what an hour [TS]

  well logic logic doesn't logic doesn't [TS]

  yeah yeah you oh you mean the the [TS]

  application software and out the car [TS]

  something that's cured that is our exxor [TS]

  all right all right so we'll wrap this [TS]

  thing up if you have thoughts and [TS]

  comments for John siracusa the best way [TS]

  to get them to him is to go to five by [TS]

  five dot TV slash contact pick [TS]

  hypercritical from that list and type [TS]

  with you what you have people some [TS]

  people John they will send us email just [TS]

  to like like they'll they'll figure out [TS]

  your email address or mine and they'll [TS]

  email it to us that way outside there [TS]

  it's like they're going to you know [TS]

  above my head behind my back and I don't [TS]

  reply to those emails I don't read them [TS]

  either the only way to email about this [TS]

  show is to go through the proper channel [TS]

  which is use that form so do that and of [TS]

  course you know I rate the show go to [TS]

  iTunes go in there rate the show if you [TS]

  want to make John really happy review [TS]

  the show you can follow him on Twitter [TS]

  Syracuse s IRA there's no Z in here s [TS]

  IRA see us a nosy I'm Dan Benjamin on [TS]

  Twitter we appreciate your listening [TS]

  we'll be back again next week thank you [TS]

  John thank you [TS]

  you [TS]