By Alex Brooks Gorillaz Perform at Glastonbury Festival in 2010 | Photo by Bethan Phillips
Music has for centuries been enjoyed by groups of people. Music is by definition an art and art is intended to be enjoyed and shared. To this day millions of people attend live concerts, music festivals and musical shows—all to share the experience of music. But music is often listened to and enjoyed on an individual basis these days and whilst we’re all very sociable, maybe more so than ever, music is all too often enjoyed by a single pair of ears.
This trend towards unsociable music isn’t new, the advent of personal music players in the 1980s made it a norm to have music directly injected into our heads without anyone around us being any the wiser. Thankfully the trend is reversing, but Apple seems to have not been invited to the party.

The principle of sharing the song currently been listened amongst a group of peers made its first waves on the internet in 2002 with the advent of Last.fm. Started in 2002 the service simply offered the ability to share the song currently being listened to on its website, with time Last.fm built up an impressive picture of an individuals musical taste. Last.fm was always listening and for me alone has over five years of music data, for some of my friends over nine years.
I’ll return to important subject of listening habits later but for now let’s continue to focus on the social element. I recently regained an interest in Spotify, it had been a few years so I was guessing the collection had grown somewhat and it was time I explored some music outside of my iTunes. Suffice to say Spotify has blown me away, not just in terms of choice (although that is impressive), but in terms of how I can interact with my friends and the wider community.
iTunes 10 with Ping a music-orientated social network
Collaborative playlists, easy sharing of playlists and a constant live stream of all the music that my friends are listening to flowing by makes for a more immersive exploration of music. Apple doesn’t underestimate the power of friends sharing what they’re listening to, with the huge iTunes ecosystem Apple attempted in 2010 to create a music based social network called Ping. I’ve discussed this before back in 2010 and concluded the similar; Apple doesn’t do social well, never has done and maybe never will. Problem is that two years down the line we’re more connected than ever and Apple more than ever looks like the train has left the station and they’re still fumbling with their luggage.
The solutions are now in front of Apple’s face, services like Last.fm have been forced into the background but the likes of Spotify, Rdio, and Pandora have supreme sharing and discovery. The kind of sharing and discovery that has time after time helped me discover and listen to new music.
Don’t get me wrong Apple has services to aid in music discovery, based on the thousands of songs I’ve bought I get average recommendations. Apple clearly underestimates the power of changing trends and how a large network of friends are the key to seeing that change.
Spotify opened my eyes in another way though and that was with the built-in apps. This is more shocking because Apple invented this game, they created the App Store and they cemented the idea of a platform and developing on a platform. Spotify has taken this idea and run with it.
Guardian Music app inside Spotify
Without going into too many specific examples the likes of having recently reviewed albums by The Guardian listed with their star ratings or having Rolling Stone magazine recommendations. How about apps curated on popular music around you or playlists created from all that recommendation data on Last.fm? Spotify has it all and it works superbly.
I have zero doubt that Apple could pull this off but there is a missing piece. It’s a piece that has been rumoured year after year for a while now and it comes down to streaming. Apple without a doubt has the largest collection of online music but I can’t get to it all readily. Without that ability to compile a playlist of 50 songs that I don’t own and have never heard is impossible without the ability to stream them.
iTunes streaming may never come but in the meantime it’d be wise of Apple to re-energise its Ping adventure, the share of music listening might be shifting away from Apple and it needs to claim it back. Although I have no doubt that Apple is still the offline listening king.
Or is Apple holding out for its streaming service to wipe the floor with the competition and create the largest music social network in the world without piggybacking on Facebook?
You can follow me on Twitter @alexbrooks, or follow @worldofapple for the latest on Mac refreshes this year.

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks As the fifth month of the year continues to progress the time is nearing for Apple to release a flurry of new Macs. Unlike the days of IBM’s PowerPC CPU architecture it’s now relatively easy to pinpoint when and what Macs are going to get refreshed at what point during the year and that is all down to Apple’s use of Intel’s architecture.
Last year Intel released Sandy Bridge and up to this point all Macs but the Mac Pro take advantage of the Sandy Bridge architecture. In addition Thunderbolt connectivity became a standard across Apple’s lineup of Macs, slowly pushing Firewire into the past.
In 2012 Intel’s new architecture is named Ivy Bridge, on a technical level the architecture marks a huge leap from the previous Sandy Bridge taking advantage of a 22 nm die shrink process. Some other headline improvements over Sandy Bridge include PCI Express 3.0 support, integrated USB 3.0 and the use of tri-gate transistors (sometimes known as 3D transistors) which offer the same performance as their “2D” counterparts but are said to offer up to 50% less power consumption. Apple may choose not to be cutting edge with all the technologies available in Ivy Bridge as the company tends to enjoy setting its own trends.
Outside of the real technicalities of Ivy Bridge the raw numbers look promising over Sandy Bridge; CPU performance is said to increase between 5% and 15% and integrated GPU performance between 20% and 50% (for the recored the integrated GPUs are HD 2500/4000).

Intel Processor Microarchitecture Schedule
As mentioned above Ivy Bridge carries support for USB 3.0, making use of the same connector and being featured on PCs for several months now it’s certainly the year we see Apple make the upgrade. Unlike what has been reported elsewhere the Ivy Bridge architecture does not carry inherent support for Thunderbolt but Intel’s new controller named Cactus Ridge was out on the market earlier this year. Cactus Ridge marks Intel’s second-generation Thunderbolt controller and carries a smaller footprint and less power consumption, the developments to the Thunderbolt architecture aren’t just good news for Mac users in terms of less power consumption, heat generation and footprint but also will push other manufacturers to adopt the technology.
Ivy Bridge is set for release across the whole of 2012, currently quad-core processor models are already on the market and PCs with Ivy Bridge are on sale. Dual-core mobile CPUs are not expected until June 2012 but Apple has been known to get advanced purchasing rights in the past.
But enough talk about what Ivy Bridge is about, let’s take a look at what we can expect from Apple in terms of Mac models this year. For desktop models this remains a not too difficult task but for Apple’s notebook models this year it’s widely expected that there will be a big shakeup. Intel also hasn’t quite finished releasing all Ivy Bridge details so more suitable chips may come clearer after this has been posted.
Currently five notebooks make up Apple’s portable Mac line ranging from the ultra-portable 11-inch MacBook Air to the not so portable 17-inch MacBook Pro. Rumours have been circulating for some months that Apple will not only try and condense the choice but also amalgamate the lines. It’s expected that Apple will make bold moves and push the Pro models towards a more Air like form factor but there is little consistency in rumours with some claiming Apple will remove the 17-inch model all together and others claiming it will stay.
Naturally if Apple decides to go the way of thinner, lighter notebooks then the same (or similar) processors that adorn the current MacBook Pros will be unsuitable. Intel has already admitted that Ivy Bridge runs hotter than Sandy Bridge and anyone who has used a current MacBook Pro would raise an eyebrow at that.
Rear view of Mac mini (Mid-2011)
Mac mini
Let’s deal with the desktop first then starting from the bottom up. Apple’s Mac mini was last updated in July 2011 and was largely a minor update gaining Thunderbolt and Bluetooth 4.0 support and upgrades to Sandy Bridge, here’s how the Mac mini currently specs (low end to high):
Intel Core i5-2415M, 2.3GHz dual-core
Intel Core i5-2520M, 2.5GHz dual-core
Intel Core i7-2620M, 2.7GHz dual-core (optional upgrade)
Intel Core i7-2635GM, 2.0GHz quad-core (Mac mini server)

Candidates from the currently announced Ivy Bridge lineup for a future Mac mini update include (low end to high):
i5 3320M, 2.6GHz dual-core (low end)
i5 2260M, 2.8GHz dual-core (high end)
i7 2530M, 2.9GHz dual-core (high end option)
i7 3720QM, 2.6GHz quad-core (Mac mini server)

Intel is expected to release the majority of these chips in June 2012 so don’t expect a Mac mini refresh until July or August.
iMac
The iMac is historically the first desktop Mac to move over to Intel’s new platform, last year the iMac received an update in early May and in addition to the update to Sandy Bridge the iMac also gained Thunderbolt connectivity, and a HD FaceTime camera. Here’s how Sandy Bridge shaped up on the iMac (low end to high):
i5 2400S, 2.5GHz quad-core (21.5-inch low)
i5 2500S, 2.7GHz quad-core (21.5-inch high, 27-inch low)
i7 2600S, 2.8GHz quad-core (21-inch option)
i5 2400, 3.1GHz quad-core (27-inch high)
i7 2600, 3.4GHz quad-core (27-inch option)

There are quite a few potential candidates in the Ivy Bridge lineup, here are my most educated guesses (low end to high):
i5 3550S, 3.0GHz quad-core (65W mac TDP, 6MB L3) (21.5-inch low)
i5 3550, 3.3GHz quad-core (77W max TDP, 6MB L3) (21.5-inch high, 27-inch low)
i7 3770, 3.4GHz quad-core (77W max TDP, 6MB L3) (21-inch option)
i5 3570K, 3.4GHz quad-core (77W max TDP, 6MB L3) (27-inch high)
i7 3770K, 3.5GHz quad-core (77W max TDP, 8MB L3) (27-inch option)

A number of the Ivy Bridge CPUs listed are already available on the market but expectations are for an iMac refresh in late May or June.
Mac Pro
Apple’s Mac Pro is not a desktop computer that sees regular updates even if the CPUs featured inside have gone through revisions. The Mac Pro was last updated in August 2010 and is in a strong position for an update. The Mac Pro has historically made use of Intel’s high-end Xeon processors the breed available in the current Mac Pros is based on the Nehalem architecture.
With Apple not sticking to regular update cycles it’s best to skip right over the Mac Pro, it’s best tackled on its own in the future. If I was a betting man though I’d put money on an update this year, possibly a significant one.
MacBook Air family (Mid-2011)
Notebooks
Time to move onto the notebooks. As discussed briefly further up, this year looks set to mark a serious milestone in Apple’s lineup of portables. Whilst over the last couple of years Apple has been trimming down on the number of models available, most notably removing the MacBook, there remains a dense lineup with some notebooks not having clear distinctions from others.
Marco Arment has already done a bit of leg work in the notebook arena and also brings up the same questions that I would after looking at the rumours and Intel’s Ivy Bridge lineup. The rumours in their current state are scattered across the landscape but a defining pattern amongst them is that Apple will do away with the MacBook Pro type format and make all of its portables more like the MacBook Air, i.e. thin, light and presumably without an optical drive.
In terms of CPUs this raises a very big question as to how Apple wishes to serve its customers who seek a bit more power on the road. The current 15-inch MacBook Pro base model makes use of the Sandy Bridge Core i7 2675QM quad-core processor clocking in at 2.2GHz, despite having a thermal design power (TDP) of 45W this chip runs hot. Some of this is said to be down to the discrete-GPU but either way a processor with a 45W TDP with four cores is a lot to cram into a relatively thin notebook.
The proposal is of course to make an even thinner 15-inch model which naturally rules out using 45W processors and looking at Intel’s lineup probably rules out any quad-core processors too. As Marco points out in this post, Apple will most likely have to drop the discrete GPU and make use of one of the 17W dual-core Ivy Bride processors in a 15-inch MacBook Air. Based on these assumptions we won’t be saying goodbye to the Pro model anytime soon and only serves to confuse Apple’s notebook lineup even more.
Without more coherent rumours it’s impossible to see where Apple is going with the MacBook Pro. As for the rumoured retina display, they’re not relevant to a discussion on Ivy Bridge but more pixels require more horsepower, this certainly seems like an innovation on our doorstep and one heading for the current form-factor MacBook Pro.
Early-2011 MacBook Pro family
The MacBook Air is an easier prospect, this years refresh is set to be a simple speed bump. I don’t see the rumoured retina displays making it into the Air lineup just yet, here’s how the current Air lineup looks (low end to high):
i5 2467M, 1.6GHz dual-core (17W TDP, 3MB L3 cache) (11-inch model)
i5 2557M, 1.7GHz dual-core (17W TDP, 3MB L3 cache) (13-inch model)
i7 2677M, 1.8GHz dual-core (17W TDP, 4MB L3 cache) (11- and 13-inch option)

With its Ivy Bridge processors Intel is offering almost identical chips to those Sandy Bridge ones used in the MacBook Air carrying a slight clock speed bump and making use of the 22nm die which should reap some power saving, although the process does not affect the physical size of the processors.
Here’s how the Ivy Bridge MacBook Airs will shape up:
i5 3317U, 1.7GHz dual-core (17W TDP, 3MB L3) (11-inch model)
i5 3427U, 1.8GHz dual-core (17W TDP, 3MB L3) (13-inch model)
i7 3667U, 2.0GHz dual-core (17W TDP, 4MB L3) (11- and 13-inch option)

That’s a complete summary of where I believe Intel’s Ivy Bridge processors will land on Apple’s Mac lineup, barring the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro lineup.
As for timeframes, it all comes down to when Intel begins shipping the chips in good volumes. Apple has been known to get chips before other manufacturers, here’s what I’d say timeframe wise for refreshes:
Mac mini – July/August 2012
iMac – late May/June 2012
Mac Pro – impossible to say, potentially anytime now
MacBook Pro – limited knowledge on potential refresh, expect around July/August 2012
MacBook Air – July/August 2012

You can follow me on Twitter @alexbrooks, or follow @worldofapple for the latest on Mac refreshes this year.

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks iPad with Ultrafast 4G LTE on Apple’s US website
Outside of the United States Apple has been making headlines that aren’t exactly positive and it’s all surrounding how the company has chosen to advertise the new iPad. As is common knowledge these days Apple took the bold step to include LTE connectivity in its latest iPad model as one of the major features. Ahead of the iPad release I shot down the chances of Apple including LTE, stating primarily a lack of international adoption as a key reason for Apple to wait a year. I later relented and suspected it was inevitable.
However, LTE in the iPad is seemingly causing Apple more headaches than they would have envisaged and since before the iPad was even announced has been a point of frustration for myself and many others. This breaks into two simple ideas, the first idea being that LTE actually constitutes as true 4G connectivity and second the reason as to why Apple hobbled the iPad internationally?

When the slide advertising 4G LTE connectivity appeared at the iPad 3 launch in March my jaw hit the desk. I was expecting the feature so that came as little surprise but Apple’s insistence on calling it 4G baffled me, I naturally and wrongly assumed that Apple would take the higher moral ground over the carriers. It does appear that the carriers now have had one over on everyone.
From here it gets a bit complex with plenty of acronyms to boot, and before we dive right in let’s just clarify exactly what kind of 4G is included in the iPad. Unfortunately Apple offers no insight on its website but as we know that the new iPad packs a Qualcomm MDM9600 we can decipher what kind of connectivity is on offer. The MDM9600 brings to the table support for UE Category 3 LTE, CDMA2000 1x/EVDO Rev. A and B as well as all the 3G connectivity to allow it to roam internationally but notably packs DC-HSDPA+ and HSPA+ for up to 42 Mbps download speeds. All this tells us is that the chip supports LTE with a maximum downlink of 100Mbps and uplink of 50Mbps.
Unfortunately it’s more complicated than this, we can however refer to the definitions given by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) as to what is and isn’t 4G. This is more complicated than it should be too as the ITU have moved the goal posts on the definition, a move I would say is to suit the carriers.
In October 2010 the ITU completed a long assessment of what did and didn’t qualify as being included in the ITM-Advanced standard (4G to me and you). At the time the ITU ruled that the only 4G technologies would be LTE-Advanced and WirelessMan-Advanced, not that this ruling stopped providers like Clear, with their WiMax product, advertising services as 4G.
The criteria the ITU set for a technology to be true 4G in October 2010 was a 100Mbps downstream for high mobility (fast moving vehicles) and 1Gbps for low mobility (walking or slow moving vehicles).
It didn’t take long for the ITU to move the goalposts though. After T-Mobile was allowed to advertise it’s 100% 3G HSPA+ network as a 4G network a very discrete change made its way into the ITU specifications. The press release from early December 2010 is still online for reading, here’s the good bit:
Following a detailed evaluation against stringent technical and operational criteria, ITU has determined that “LTE-Advanced” and “WirelessMAN-Advanced” should be accorded the official designation of IMT-Advanced. As the most advanced technologies currently defined for global wireless mobile broadband communications, IMT-Advanced is considered as “4G”, although it is recognized that this term, while undefined, may also be applied to the forerunners of these technologies, LTE and WiMax, and to other evolved 3G technologies providing a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed. The detailed specifications of the IMT-Advanced technologies will be provided in a new ITU-R Recommendation expected in early 2012.
This obviously opened the doors to all sorts of technologies being considered “4G” including LTE as we know it today, HSPA+ and WiMax. None of which can get anywhere near the original ITM-Advanced specification of 100Mbps downstream for high mobility and 1Gbps for low mobility.
In December 2010 Philip Solis at ABI Research wrote a blog post about the change, it remains poignant today.
It has now passed “early 2012″ and the ITU, an organisation closely associated with the UN, has yet to release a more solid definition of 4G so we’re stuck with a specification that none of the currently named 4G technologies adhere to and of course giving free reign to carriers who have begun widespread labelling of 3G services as 4G. That said the FCC and similar authorities in other countries seem to have no legal jurisdiction over the terms 2G, 3G or 4G.
Apple is just as guilty of this as anyone else and is of course just bending to the will of the carriers, probably most notable is the recent iOS 5.1 update which began showing 4G symbols on iPhones that were connected to HSPA+ 3G networks, even when the speed of said network was potentially abysmal.
Apple’s iPad is causing another kind of 4G related controversy, a controversy which is firmly outside of the USA. It started with and has been most publicised in Australia where the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) took issue with Apple using the term ‘WiFi + 4G’ to describe the iPads being sold in Australia. There are LTE “4G” services available in Australia but they’re not compatible with the iPad due to the frequency band that Australia’s networks run on.
In this particular case Apple was initially resistant to the pressure but has since relented, if you look at the Australian online Apple store whilst the iPad is still advertised as being a ‘WiFi + 4G’ (which I suppose it technically is) the accompanying text reads “not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMAX networks.” On the actual product page itself it’s difficult to find any mention of 4G at all.
iPad models as seen on the Australian Apple Store (As of 2 May 2012)
Now the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has begun looking into the branding of the iPad in the UK. The ASA has received a number of complaints regarding the branding and has in the past instructed Apple to clarify that the iPad is not compatible with (currently non-existent) 4G networks. According to the BBC Apple advised the ASA that “no further reference to the 4G capabilities of the iPad will be made on their UK website”. Yet the UK website is still plastered in references to the 4G capabilities of the iPad with no clarification on whether it’ll work or not.
iPad models as seen on the UK Apple Store (As of 2 May 2012)
We know Apple is stubborn, not only in getting its own way but in the consistency of its marketing material worldwide. There are a number of baffling points here though, why would Apple only release an iPad with LTE capable of working on the 700Mhz band which is only used in North America? And then why on the full knowledge that the new iPad has 4G that doesn’t work in the likes of Australia and Europe did it insist on advertising so?
Even in the US this whole LTE thing is a bit of a debacle, AT&T operate what’s called a Class 17 700MHz network which primarily operates in the 704MHz to 787MHz range where as Verizon runs a Class 13 700MHz LTE network operating between 764MHz and 787MHz. Which not only means Apple has to make two different kinds of iPad but that consumers need to make a choice when purchasing.
In Europe and the UK it looks likely that the 800MHz band will be used for LTE across the board, which is not at all compatible with the current generation iPad. In Australia where LTE rollout is making good progress the band used is 1800MHz—also not compatible with the current iPad.
Map of worldwide LTE rollout (Red = commercial LTE, Dark blue = roll out commitment) Source: Wikipedia
It’d be wishful thinking to expect Apple to revise the iPad for emerging LTE networks outside of North America, for that we’ll have to wait another year. For now Apple should remove references to the iPad being 4G compatible but that brings us right back to what exactly does “4G” mean?
In the future it’s unlikely that the landscape will brighten at all. Next year Apple will almost certainly begin to make use of Qualcomm’s new 28nm chips for greater power efficiency and we can expect an expansion upon the bands supported and therefore an expansion of the networks supported around the world, that’s not to say that Apple might have to make a number of models for use in different areas of the world.
Even further, some 3-7 years we can expect the move towards LTE-Advanced to take place. In its current form LTE-Advanced is a true 4G technology capable of very high speeds even to fast moving vehicles. Whether we’ll see a worldwide unification of standards and a concerted push towards adoption; I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks Quarterly Revenue Estimates and Actual Results Q212
Apple today announced financial results for its second fiscal quarter of 2012 which ran from January 1 until March 31. The Company posted revenue of $39.2 billion and net quarterly profit of $11.6 billion, or $12.80 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $24.7 billion and net quarterly profit of $6 billion, or $6.40 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 47.4 percent compared to 41.4 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 64 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
During the quarter Apple also sold 4 million Macs representing a 7 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. Apple also sold 35.1 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 88 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter as well as 7.7 million iPods during the quarter, representing a 15 percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 11.8 million iPads during the quarter, a 151 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter.

“We’re thrilled with sales of over 35 million iPhones and almost 12 million iPads in the March quarter,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “The new iPad is off to a great start, and across the year you’re going to see a lot more of the kind of innovation that only Apple can deliver.”
“Our record March quarter results drove $14 billion in cash flow from operations,” said Peter Oppenheimer, Apple’s CFO. “Looking ahead to the third fiscal quarter, we expect revenue of about $34 billion and diluted earnings per share of about $8.68.”
iPhone unit sales Q212

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks In a weeks time Apple will reveal the results of its second fiscal quarter of 2012. As ever all eyes will be on the world’s largest company who last quarter reported over a handful of record breaking figures including record breaking quarterly revenue of $46.3 billion.
Let’s just spend some time recapping Apple’s first fiscal quarter of 2012 which is historically always Apple’s largest quarter due to holiday sales, in this particular instance the quarter was made even more impressive due to pent up demand for the new iPhone which was released during the quarter with those figures coming in at just over 37 million units.
The iPad was of course the gift to have for Christmas and despite common knowledge that a new model would only be a few months away sales came in at a healthy 15.4 million, representing year-over-year growth of a whopping 111 percent. Macs also performed well during the quarter and for the first time Apple reported sales of over 5 million Macs with year-over-year growth of over 25 percent, put in perspective against a declining PC sales market then that is impressive.
Looking ahead to Apple’s fiscal second quarter which ended on March 31 it’s unlikely that we’ll see a record breaking quarter like the one past but it will be notable for a number of reasons.

Tim Cook has said multiple times already this year that China is a huge market with huge growth, other countries to watch are Brazil and India. Despite reporting sales of 37 million iPhones last quarter the iPhone 4S hadn’t yet made it into China which it eventually did right at the start of Q2 on January 13.
Quarterly iPhone unit sales with Q212 Estimate
Estimates of iPhone sales during the quarter run between 26 and 44 million but the general consensus is around 35 million, mighty impressive considering the quarter doesn’t include pent-up demand or holiday sales. We can thank China for that.
The iPad is sure to impress this quarter as well. Announced on March 7 the new iPad was available in 10 countries on March 16 and when the quarter came to an end was available in 35 countries. During the opening weekend Apple reported sales (including pre-orders) of over three million. Sales of the third-generation iPad are expected to come in at around 12 million, which would represent impressive year-over-year growth of 160% and only a small drop from the preceding massive quarter.
If we predict that the Mac will continue to grow at roughly 25% per quarter then sales will dip below the 5 million mark and come in at a still healthy 4.7 million for the quarter. Between January and March Apple did not refresh any of their Macs and rumours of a refresh across the board have been persistent.
The headline figure of the results will of course be the quarterly revenue and whilst it’s highly unlikely that Apple will top its figure of $46.3 billion it might not be far off. For reference in Q211 the company reported quarterly revenue of $24.6 billion. Estimates are still coming in but the consensus is that Apple will announce quarterly revenue around $42 billion, which would mark only the second time that Apple has recorded quarterly revenue over $30 billion in company’s history.
Apple Quarterly Revenue Q212 Estimate
Apple’s Q212 results will be available at the closing bell on April 24 at 4.30 PM Eastern time, 1.30 PM Pacific or 9.30 PM in London. Apple will then host a conference call, which can listened to here, starting at 5 PM Eastern time, 2 PM Pacific or 10 PM in London.

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks Flashback trojan Flash installer
Brushed under the carpet or blown out of proportion by the sensational mainstream media? However you think the coverage of the Flashback trojan played out the fact is that Apple handled the whole thing badly. But in typical Apple fashion seems to have scraped through unharmed, I suspect in future they won’t be so lucky.
It all played out much the same way that any major exploit does. For Microsoft if an exploit grabs hold and spreads to tens of millions of Windows computers then it is big news, even if that proportion of install base is relatively quite low. For Apple, who’s reputation of invisible Macs prevails, the story is much the same. The Flashback trojan was said to have spread to over 600,000 Macs worldwide-which is estimated to be about one percent of the install base.

The method of infection was all relatively textbook, some nefarious JavaScript code on a webpage is used to load a Java-applet which will download a fake Flash installer. Safari if set to open “safe files” upon download will open the installer and any unsuspecting user will jump right into thinking it is a real Flash player installer. Once infected the trojan changes a bunch of network settings and attempts to silence network activity detection apps like LittleSnitch. The aim of the trojan is to add the infected Mac to a botnet used for DDoS attacks on websites.
All sounds unfortunately all too common so far and naturally such a trojan’s spread could be stopped by good user education. Installing apps that you haven’t opted to download or install, not opening downloaded files by default, not entering the system password unless 100% sure why, and ensuring you trust all websites visited are just a few ways in which the spread of such trojans could be slowed significantly. But that’s not the case and I know even relatively savvy Mac users who got snagged by Flashback, somehow.
Apple however doesn’t seem to want to take onboard any of these lessons and instead has opted for a worrying tactic that involves saying nothing about the exploit, releasing a patch and removal tool over a week later and assuming it’ll go away. I’m being kind by saying Apple took just over a week to get a handle on this problem, the truth is that Flashback was discovered by Intego in September 2011, long before the infection spread to hundreds of thousands of Macs. For the record Oracle patched the actual Java exploit earlier in the year but Apple opts to bundle such updates into large security updates which it chooses to release intermittently throughout the year.
When Apple did eventually release a patch, with an accompanying invisible removal tool, the company’s tactics became very clear. Apple’s solution to prevent future infections is to disable the automatic execution of Java applets which can be re-enabled by the user. If after a period of time no Java applets have been used then the Java plugin will disable itself again. This is merely patching a still untreated and bleeding wound.
I can almost see Apple huffing and puffing like a teenager who’s been told to do the washing up. Why should Apple spend resources constantly keeping up-to-date with Java patches and whilst we’re on the subject Flash exploits when Macs don’t even come with these installed? I appreciate that’s not quite an oranges to oranges comparison there as Java will offer to install upon detection and Flash will not but the point remains Apple should not try an remove itself from the responsibility for the security of its customers Macs.
The whole Flashback story is marred by a cringeworthy performance from Apple, when one of the largest mainstream news websites in the world covered the Flashback infection Apple “could not” provide a statement. Any communication from the company came through updates on its support website.
There is even a report that anti-virus firms trying to track the botnet servers and block them came up against Apple’s attempts to do the same but ended up with Apple blocking harmless tracking servers. Could very well have been an innocent error but one that a communication channel would certainly fix.
Apple handled this badly but at the end of the day it wasn’t their plugin. I don’t agree that simply disabling the plugin is a solution nor is assuming that because Macs don’t ship with certain plugins that it is seemingly OK to take in excess of three months to patch major vulnerabilities.
However, one day either OS X or iOS will come up against a serious security problem. We’ve had brushes with incidents on iOS in the past and whilst its true that the OS is heavily sandboxed it is not immune from exploits especially as the market share continues to grow. OS X is a much more vulnerable beast, also with a growing market share. An exploit right inside Apple’s code that spreads to hundreds of thousands of devices couldn’t go ignored for six, four or two months not even one week.
Apple has a gold plated reputation of having computers that don’t require clunky anti-virus software and where users can feel safe using the internet as well as mobile devices that alleviate all the concerns that Android users suffer. But chinks in this shiny facade can and will quickly ruin this reputation for a very long time. Just think how you feel about Windows today.

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks iCloud music on iPhone, iPad and Mac
This week the subject of Apple’s cluttered and bloated iTunes app has been on the agenda. Jason Snell over at Macworld originally argued that if Apple is going to embrace the cloud, like it appears to be doing, then iTunes should be simpler. Snell suggests breaking iTunes down into separate apps, “one devoted to device syncing, one devoted to media playback. (And perhaps the iTunes Store could be broken out separately too?)”
Then Federico Viticci at MacStories chimed in with a slightly different take but along the same lines. Viticci’s take moves along a different tangent and one that has been playing on my mind for a few weeks now. The basic premise of Viticci’s argument is why does iTunes need to the hub of all our media and device syncing? Put simpler, why are we still using iTunes?

It’s a great point and evidently Apple feels the same way. Since the inception of iOS 5 and iCloud Apple clearly recognises the importance of moving away from iTunes and moving away from the traditional method of syncing. However Apple has a serious challenge on its hands and whilst you could argue that Apple is the king of stripping away the unnecessaries in life I can’t help but think that pulling iTunes back to basics is one challenge too far.
Like I said though, Apple recognises the problem. When introducing iCloud Steve Jobs used an analogy he had used many years previous when introducing the idea of the digital hub. The premise of the digital hub was a Mac at the centre of a consumer’s digital lifestyle, iTunes for the iPod, iPhoto for the digital camera and iMovie for the camcorder. With time this changed and all those devices were in one device and so slowly all those functions and more were in one app—iTunes.
With iCloud Apple has made it clear that it is rethinking the digital hub strategy and is moving away from the Mac as the centre of the hub to iCloud as the centre of the hub. And Apple has followed its word, take for example just some of these changes that have occurred in well under a year:
– Movies and TV shows purchased on the iTunes Store can now be streamed to an Apple TV from the cloud
– iTunes in the Cloud allows streaming of music from the cloud to iOS devices
– iTunes Match puts an entire music library, purchased from iTunes or not, in the cloud
– Music, books and apps can now automatically propagate to iOS devices and Macs
– iOS device backups are now stored in the cloud
That is just some of the headline changes in Apple’s move to the cloud and most of them are unfortunately counter acted by a lack of change elsewhere. Take for example if I purchase a Season Pass for a TV show on my Mac, iTunes will then attempt to download a lot of data to my Mac when all I want to do is stream to my Apple TV and whilst we’re on the subject I’d like to stream to my iPad, iPhone and Mac as well.
Third-generation Apple TV showing iTunes movies
The solution to all of this feels a long way off and complex. As Jason Snell argues, iTunes needs to be spun off into multiple apps. I argue that the iTunes store (probably shouldn’t be called iTunes anymore) should be a separate app much like the Mac App Store. Then there should be an app that acts a repository for all this content followed by an app that deals with managing iCloud and effectively syncing (Update:Thomas Verschoren even put together some mockups).
But here’s the thing, why sync at all?
Now I know what you’re thinking, Apple can’t deprecate syncing completely. How would an iPhone magically fill itself with music, movies, apps and books? iOS devices already have a tether-less setup process but currently it’s quick and painless covering some of the basics like connecting to WiFi, turning location on and signing into iCloud; it would be a world of pain to then have to then select what music, video, apps and books should be synced to the device.
Streaming of this content isn’t the answer, that’s a good solution for a housebound device like the Apple TV but iPads and iPhones are meant to be out and about away from WiFi and whilst a good LTE connection could easily stream a HD movie that’d be your data allowance for the month gone in a flash.
It also shouldn’t be overlooked that a recorded video on an iPhone can be very large, not even all home broadband connections could cope with uploading a 1GB video to the cloud and then back to all the over devices. Works great for photos (aka Photostream) but it won’t do the job for video.
There is no clear solution but what is needed is a continued push towards everything on iCloud and a concerted effort to stop the reliance on iTunes and begin stripping it of features. Unfortunate if recent rumours are true it would appear that the iCloud manager that is required so urgently will instead be built into iTunes 11 and not just into the OS or as a separate app.
On the bright side Tim Cook has said that he sees iCloud as a long term strategy, hopefully one day iTunes will be my go to place for playing music and that’s it.

Source: World of Apple

By Alex Brooks Walter Isaacson speaks at The Royal Institution in London
In a most auspicious setting Walter Isaacson took to the floor last night to talk about his 2011 biography of Steve Jobs. Having visited Amsterdam and Oxford this week on a whistle stop tour promoting the book it was particularly notable that Isaacson’s visit to London found him in a location that is special for all sorts of reasons but particularly in reference to science of which Isaacson’s past biography subjects include Einstein and Franklin.
Taking place in the famed lecture theatre of The Royal Institution in Mayfair, Isaacson set off the session retelling much of what is present in the biography of Jobs that was released not long after his death in October 2011. Mercurial is a word that pops up a lot when trying to create a summary of Jobs but according to Isaacson Jobs was a fan of the word.

When telling about his first encounter with Steve Jobs in 1984 Isaacson explains that whilst at Time magazine Jobs had come in to demonstrate the Macintosh. Whilst Isaacson was the only one using a computer the rest of the magazine was still stuck with typewriters, according to Isaacson Jobs had him looking at the display of the Macintosh with an artist’s loupe inspecting every pixel.
It was this encounter that Jobs spoke of wanting to get the Oxford English dictionary on the Macintosh and had looked up mercurial and seen it describe someone who is prone to “sudden or unpredictable changes of mood or mind”, it was not this that attracted Jobs to the word but in fact the antonym which suggests “calm, tranquil and unchangeable”.
During the same encounter Jobs demonstrated his mercurial spirit by suddenly becoming aggravated as to why Time magazine hadn’t made him ‘Man of the Year’.
Much of Isaacson’s book of Jobs focuses on his love of simplicity and the same rang true during Isaacson’s 30 minute opening piece in which he described Jobs as having a passion to drive people to do things that weren’t previously thought possible and that Jobs recognised the importance of “connecting beauty to technology”.
Amongst a number of anecdotes about Jobs’ attention to detail Isaacson brings up the story of the iPod’s on/off button, or lack of. Jobs according to Isaacson went into a meeting during the iPod’s creation and asked the design “what the fuck is that?” pointing at the off button, after an uncomfortable silence someone answered saying that it was and on/off switch, Jobs retorted “what does it do?”
Much later on whilst Isaacson and Jobs were talking in the Apple founder’s backyard the question of life and death came up. Jobs expressed much of his Buddhist beliefs that life is a spiritual journey and it’s important to put something back into the flow of history. Jobs then said after a long pause that maybe it all ends just like an off switch, click and it’s over. Then with a little expressed, maybe that’s why I don’t like putting them on Apple products.
Tim Cook speaks at a celebration held in memory of Steve Jobs
Once Isaacson had spoke a bit about the the writing of the biography and restating many of the anecdotes inside he sat down with Roger Highfield for a quick interview and then questions were opened to the floor.
First up was Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales who asked Isaacson that if he could question Jobs on anything else now what would it be? Isaacson gave no specific example but mentioned that one subject he could not get Jobs to talk about was philanthropy despite Jobs’ wife having setup College Track and serving as its president.
Much like as is outlined in Isaacson’s book he states that Apple’s focus is on digital photography, textbooks and the TV market. Expanding very little on what is already known Isaacson did say that Jobs would have wanted a very integrated system offering whatever you want when you want it.
On the same day that Isaacson spoke in London Google CEO Larry Page had an interview on Bloomberg’s Businessweek and claimed that the differences over Android and iOS were “all for show”. Isaacson disputes this referring back to when Mac OS and Windows were having a similar show down, Jobs believed that Gates and stolen a lot of Apple’s hard work and had then begun licensing it to hardware manufacturers.
According to Isaacson Jobs saw what is happening with Android as a repetition of history, that Android stole much of Apple’s hard work and is now licensing it how to “junky” hardware manufacturers.
Isaacson admits that Jobs was emotional about this, the success of Windows saw his time at Apple come to an end in the 80′s and that his reactions will have be channeled through those emotions. Isaacson says that Tim Cook is less emotional and will deal with the lawsuits and Android differently.
I got the chance to ask Isaacson about those recordings he has of Jobs from their many interviews and whether any revisions are planned to the book. Isaacson told me that most of the interviews are actually in note form and releasing the few interview tapes would be difficult as they’d need some censoring.
More interesting though was Isaacson’s take on any future revisions or additions to the book. At first the answer seemed to be a strong no, expanding upon it Isaacson suggested that the missing bits, or lack of colour in some areas, in the biography would most likely be filled in by biographies of other key figures at Apple. I’m skeptical of how many copies a biography of Jony Ive or Phil Schiller would sell.

Source: World of Apple

By roman Macs already get great battery life. The newest line of MacBooks are supposed to run 7 hours straight without needing a wall socket. But what if you left your MagSafe charger at home, and you know you’ll need 8-9 hour … Continue reading →

Source: MacTip.net

By roman If you click on the AirPort icon on your menu bar, you get an overly simple view about your wi-fi connection.  You can see available networks and their signal strength with 4 bars. If you click on the Airport menu … Continue reading →

Source: MacTip.net