Ben Dodson

Freelance iOS, macOS, Apple Watch, and Apple TV Developer

The CoverSutra Saga

A few people have started asking me for my opinion on the fast-growing story about CoverSutra, a mac application for which the developer promised free updates until version 3.0 several years ago but then switched to be exclusive on the Mac App Store with a new 2.x version which old customers would have to rebuy. I have mixed opinions about this but it gives me some scope to talk not only about the Mac App Store, but also about selling on the internet in general and the lack of understanding by a large amount of the commenting world.

Looking at the issue at hand first of all, it is essential that you go to the Sophiestication Blog and read the article that sparked this all off. The basic details are that version 2.5 was a new update that was to be exclusive on the App Store yet this reneged on a previous promise (made several years ago apparently) that all updates would be free until version 3.0 - users that bought a version recently would now not be able to upgrade to 2.5 without paying $5 on the App Store. At first glance, the fault would appear to lie with the developer and, to be fair, that is still my general opinion. A lot of people have backed the developer purely because of the horrendous abuse that she has suffered on her blog (which I'll come to shortly) but that is to forgive something because of abuse after the fact which, in this case, is actually immaterial. She promised a free update until version 3.0 and didn't deliver it so in a way people are allowed to be pissed especially when she remarks that "a migration from the previous standalone version is sadly not possible.... however I lowered the price to $4.99 so there's no reason not to pick up a copy for new features". This was excaberated by her fanning the flames in the comments by telling everyone to "chill down" and so on.

As the comments got worse (and needlessly aggressive in tone), it became apparent that a lot of the problem was people not understanding why they couldn't get updates through the Mac App Store and that the developer had forgotten the previous promise that was made. I'll come to the Mac App Store shortly but the issue of a promise could have been dealt with in a far more dignified way. Upon being reminded about the promise, she should have instantly made a simple apology and outlined what had happened. Instead, she told an already riled crowd to "calm down" and made the situation far worse. In essence, the initial promise should never have been made. Upon it's revelation, the 2.5 version should have been recompiled to be distributed through the Sparkle system she was using.

It‘s true that I could have made version 2.5 available through the legacy Sparkle updater. But maintaining two builds, one for the App Store and one with the serial number checks, was too time consuming for me. Precious time better spend on the actual update and my other apps.

I have to disagree with this assessment. I agree wholeheartedly that maintaining two distribution channels is difficult and, if I were to launch a mac application tomorrow, I would only choose the Mac App Store. However, if you have an update system in place, there is not much effort involved to publish an update through it (as that is the essence of the system). This does not mean she would need to sell version 2.5 on her website, just push an update through her existing system for the old users. That would have solved all the problems and taken considerably less effort than it's now going to take to "restore sanity" to her users.

It's very easy at this point to blame the Mac App Store for this issue. After all, if Apple allowed upgrade pricing then this wouldn't be happening. I disagree with this also as the Mac App Store is not trying to be the all encompassing place for mac software as is highlighted by their terms of what is and isn't allowed in the store. They are creating a store for certain kinds of apps sold in the way in which Apple sells its own apps. iLife for example comes out almost every year but there is no upgrade pricing - it's priced cheap (for mass consumption) and a new version is something worth buying so you pay for it. You don't pay for the *.x releases mid-cycle (as these are bug fixes and tiny new features) but the next version generally adds a great deal. You could say "I've been a customer for x years - I deserve a lower price due to customer loyalty" but I don't think that's true. This seems to be the same philosophy that Apple are trying to encourage in the Mac App Store, namely price your apps low but customers have to buy again when a new version comes out. Conversely, your version updates had better be good as your customers won't be happy if you put out a new version that they have to pay for again but doesn't add anything good.

Paying for new versions of things is something that we, as customers, should be used to. After all, when Sonic the Hedgehog 2 came out on the Mega Drive, we didn't complain that we already owned Sonic the Hedgehog 1 and version 2 only added new levels and a new character so why should we pay full price? You buy the next version again as it adds new things that you want. This is exactly the same in desktop apps as it is for mobile apps or computer games. The pricing actually becomes immaterial compared to the philosophy of "buy new versions of apps". If your app is priced well, then people will pay for the new version. If they don't, then you got the money for the old version and you've learned that the features you added in your new version aren't actually as good as you thought they were. Do some market research, start work on a new version, and hope that they'll pay next time.

This is something that we need to get used to. As an app developer myself, it appalls me that people think that having paid $5 for an app they should get free upgrades for life. That isn't sustainable, economical, or fair to developers. However, the onus is also on us, the developers, to make each version so good that people will pay for $5 again for each new version.

So, going back to the CoverSutra story, I agree with the developer on one hand but disagree on the other; I agree that going the Mac App Store route is the best way and that each new version should be charged for separately. I do disagree however with her going Mac App Store exclusive on updates for her previous customers when she had promised free upgrades for a certain period of time. She didn't need to make that promise but she did (presumably to make more sales at the time) so those free updates need to happen.

My final thought on all this is about commenting on the internet in general. As you may have noticed, my website has recently been redesigned and one of the features I've redeveloped is the blog. It no longer has a commenting system. This is by design as I've noticed the deterioration of comments over the last couple of years. The facelessness of the internet means that people now act in a way that they wouldn't in a normal conversation. The comments on Sophia's blog are nothing short of sickening regardless of the rights or wrongs of the decision taken and that is exactly one of the reasons why I won't let people comment on my blog anymore. I've never attracted such aggression before but the fact that it seems to be slowly becoming the norm on the internet troubles me. If people want to reply to my blog posts, they can contact me on Twitter (where I can reply directly knowing that they've heard back from me - commenting systems don't always inform the commentator of a reply), post a reply on their own blog, or email me directly. That way, they aren't anonymous (leading to more reasonable discourse) and I can reply back to them.

One of my big hopes for 2011 is that iTunes will add a "reply" feature to commentators so that we don't get the same level of abuse and stupid comments on the reviews of Mac and iPhone apps as that is going downhill currently - many people leave comments on apps saying "this doesn't work" but without the power to reply it's near impossible to let someone know a problem has been fixed. Most developers do want to help and aren't trying to screw the customer over but with the anonymous reviews and comments left by the countless numbers of people with bad attitudes, it's very easy to stop caring about the customer. I can't help but think that the whole CoverSutra thing wouldn't have exploded as much as it did if Sophia had comments disabled on her blog...

My take on Microsoft's Keynote at CES 2011

Tonight I did two things I didn't think would ever happen; I stayed up until 2:30am to watch Steve Ballmer give a presentation and I installed Silverlight on my Macbook Air. Why you ask? As someone in the "mobile development space", I felt it was my duty to not just focus on Apple's keynotes (fantastic though they are) and instead take a listen to a few other CEO's, especially when they could be announcing something important in the area of tablet PCs. Last year, Steve Ballmer famously introduced "slates" to the world at a time when Apple hadn't yet launched a tablet and all the rumour blogs were pointing at the possible name for a new device being the iSlate. It struck me then that by suddenly calling the tablets he was announcing slates (when nobody had previously) that Ballmer was just doing some showboating as he was launching something before Apple. However, the iPad (I like to imagine Steve Jobs put out the iSlate name purely to fool Ballmer whilst all along knowing he was going to call it the iPad) launched shortly afterwards to international success. In the year since, no other tablet has gained as much media attention or sales. The HP slates that Ballmer announced at CES 2010 have conveniently never materialised. So, I was curious to see if slates would be making a comeback and if we'd actually see an iPad-killer. As an iPad developer, I thought it best that I see the competition as it happened rather than waiting until morning for the news.

Aside from any tablet announcements, I was also curious about what was happening with Windows Phone 7 and any news about upcoming games for the Kinect. I know very little about Windows Phone 7 (about from the UI looks a bit better than Android's) so any extra knowledge would be an asset. The Kinect, on the other hand, is a device I've owned since day one and absolutely love - I'm just keen to know what they are bringing to it apart from fitness and dance games.


It's 2:30am. I refresh Safari and nothing. 2:35am. Nothing. 2:40am. Nothing. Finally, at 2:47am, somebody from CES comes out after showing off a video to showcase CES that looks like it was made pre-2000. It was a seriously bad video with the only indication it was new being that it had a song that's only just been in the charts as a backing track. It was painful. The only thing more painful was the guy introducing who seemed to speak corporate bullshit (I have no idea what half his sentences meant) and the odd reference to a book he'd written that he was trying to plug. This was topped only by his introduction for Steve Ballmer in which he called the Microsoft CEO "focused". In any case, the music started and we all expected Steve to come bounding out like a maniac as per usualbut he didn't. I was genuinely surprised to find Steve behaving and sounding a little bit like a normal person throughout! Anyway, he briefly talks about how successful Microsoft has been in the past year (let's face it, we needed reminding) and how he wanted to talk about Kinect, Windows Phone 7, and then Windows itself. I'll give you my opinion of each in the same order.


I love the Kinect. It's a fantastic device and some of the homebrew apps that people have written to use it have been truly inspiring. For all that, the launch titles were fairly unimpressive with the most popular games being Kinect Adventures (that comes free with it), Dance Central (dance game from the people behind Rock Band), and Your Shape: Fitness Evolved (which has an amazing UI and gives you the socially awkward power of laughing at anyone who still uses Wii Fit). However, this isn't gaming for the masses; this is trying to be a Nintendo Wii with an albeit better controller. I should point out at this point that Steve did put a lot of emphasis into the marketing slogan of "You... are....... the................. controller" as if we haven't heard it a million times already. Anyway, were we going to find out about some awesome new software for the Kinect.

Umm... no.

The first "big" announcement was that the Netflix interface would now be controllable with the Kinect. I already thought it was but then I'm not in the US so I don't get to see any Netflix interface! Next up was that Hulu would be coming to the Kinect. Now that is a good announcement, but alas, it's US only as well so not terribly exciting for me personally. There was some talk about some more ESPN stuff including some very awkward "trash talk" about a college football game and then that was it for the live demo. And then Steve came back onstage but this time in the form of his Xbox avatar in order to tell us about Avatar Kinect. When I'd first heard the name Avatar Kinect about 3 hours before the presentation, I assumed it was going to be some amazing Kinect powered tie-in with the 3D film Avatar. How wrong I was!

Avatar Kinect is a free piece of software that will be available in a future Xbox update. It allows you to use your Xbox Avatar to talk to friends by putting you in a number of different settings with your friends Avatars (e.g. a news desk or a car park) where you can then chat or record movies, etc. The technology is pretty clever in that it will do lip syncing and animate facial features (Steve showed this off with his eyebrows) but I can't help but feel that you'd use the app once to try it out and then never use it again. Why would you chat with your friends through your avatar when you have a proper webcam built into the Kinect and the software to use it? It was hardly earth-shattering news so the Xbox portion of the evening was pretty disappointing.

Windows Phone 7

As I said earlier, I don't know a huge amount about Windows Phone 7 so I was kind of looking forward to seeing this section to try and understand it a bit better. The first thing that Steve points out is that the Windows Phone 7 is actually really good, it's just not very popular as people haven't seen it. We are encouraged that by showing it to people, they really like it and thing it's better than other phones on the market. This smacks of Project Mojave to me - to those that don't remember, Project Mojave was a Microsoft marketing experiment in which they tried to combat the negative tide of opinion about Windows Vista by putting focus groups together to try the next version of Windows (naming it Windows Mojave) but instead gave them Windows Vista. This led to lots of video of people saying "this is great" and "so much better than Vista" before then being told the truth. The end result was supposed to be that Vista is great and people need to use it rather than bitch about it but the actual feeling you got from it was that Microsoft has a real problem with it's marketing department. This appears to be true of Windows Phone 7 as well if the only reason it isn't the biggest selling phone of the year is because people haven't used it or don't know about it.

In any case, now was the time to show it off. So, did they do a Steve Jobs style gradual walkthrough or a nice video to show off it's strengths? No. They got a "chief goatherder for two, young, rambunctious kids" who seemed to be on some medical grade drugs to do it. Words can't describe how off-putting Liz Sloan is so I'm just going to embed the 8 minute segment she did below. If you can get through 30 seconds without wanting to scream then you did better than me.

Firstly, her presentational style is such that I quickly forgot about the phone as I was concentrating on her so much trying to work out just what she was on. That isn't good for a phone which is described as "a good phone if you show it to someone" as we weren't seeing the phone, just her. Other things that riled me were that she thinks it's a "great phone for people like us" whilst talking to the audience but she actually means "people like her". The audience wasn't made up of busy mums who want to get tasks done on their phone quickly - it was made up of tech nerds who were going to a 4 day conference about technology. These are the kind of people that want to get lost in their phones every day and never come out. In addition, her description of copy and paste (a feature which is a long time coming - yes, I know it took a while on the iPhone as well but you don't launch an "iPhone killer" without it) was borderline patronising and nearly every task she did I could do at the same speed on an iPhone or Android phone so I don't follow the supposed speed increase which she was talking about. The stat of "5500 apps in our store" was also repeated far too much - that isn't a figure to be proud of.

The best piece for me though was a dig at Google that went all wrong. Liz tried to point out that Bing on the Windows Phone 7 pushes the most relevant pieces to the top so you don't have to hunt around to find information. The demonstration given was a search for "Miami Heat" which then showed the score from last night at the top of the search results "instead of a lot of blue links that then brings me to the answer" (read Google Search Results). I thought this a little odd so I searched for "Miami Heat" in Google and, as I suspected, the scores for the last 3 games were shown right up top. Liz passionately explains how this breakthrough (*cough*) also worked for things like stocks and weather which I'm pretty sure show up in Google in the same way as well (along with cinema times, maths calculations, and a host of other things).

All in all, the Windows Phone 7 segment was pretty terrible. The highlight was probably Steve showing off how Xbox Live works on the phone and the announcement of a pinball game that connects with Fable 3 to give you gold. This was however quickly marred by a video showing how great games are on Windows Phone 7 that mainly featured iOS games which have been ported...


And so we got to the final round; Windows itself. Unfortunately Microsoft had already announced the biggest thing some 4 hours earlier which was that Windows was now being rebuilt to work on SoC processors (estimated time: 18-24 months) but that didn't stop them giving us another 15 minute demo of what that looks like. Aside from that, there was very little to say. A few laptops and tablets were briefly demoed and I'd like to talk about two of them which caught my eye; the Acer Iconia and the ASUS EEE Slate EP121 (just rolls of the tongue that one).

Acer Iconia - this new Windows 7 laptop looks a little like a large Nintendo DS due to it's dual screen setup but unlike the DS, both screens are touch-enabled. The demo looked ok apart from a few UI issues such as tapping the tilted screen (remember Steve Jobs saying how they'd never do this as every time they tested it people hated it?) and having a folder stretch over both screens leading to a big plastic bar half way between your viewing area. However, the thing that irritated me the most was the gesture to bring up the onscreen keyboard. Since seeing the demo, I've asked a few people "what do you think Microsoft would choose a suitable gesture for bringing up a keyboard"? Most people said a swipe up or even a two or three fingered swipe in a direction. Instead, Microsoft decided that a 10-fingered gesture (must be the world's first) was best - you have to push all 10 of your digits onto the lower screen at the same time to bring up the keyboard. Without having used the Iconia myself I can't really comment on how it works but I can't imagine that typing on a glass display is going to be particularly good for long usage. The iPad is great but you wouldn't use it to type an essay and entering any text is really a bit of a chore - I would hate to have that as my main input option on what is supposed to be a fully fledged PC, not just a tablet for light app usage. Having said that, it's a very different concept and I'm going to be interested to see consumer feedback on the dual-screen approach.

ASUS EEE Slate EP121 - This was the main tablet that was shown off and is actually a full PC inside a 12.1" tablet form factor. It's running an Intel Core i5 and can have upto 4 gigs of RAM in it. They seem to have hedged their bets for input methods by bundling it with both a wireless keyboard and a stylus but you can also use normal touch and a virtual keyboard. The thing that struck me was a) it looks heavy and too bulky to be a convenient tablet and b) the input methods don't look good. If you have a tablet, you shouldn't need a physical keyboard. Yes, you can get them for the iPad but why would you? If you need to do a lot of typing you are probably better off with a real laptop rather than a tablet device. The demo showed an excel spreadsheet being controlled with touch at one point (with a pinch gesture to zoom) and then using a stylus to edit a spreadsheet. I can't imagine anything worse than trying to fill in a spreadsheet on a 12.1" tablet with a stylus but there you are. I haven't used it, so again I'm speculating, but I have a feeling that this device is going to get very hot and run out of battery very quickly (they say 3+ hours on their website!). For $100 less than the asking price (which is $1,099), you could get an 11" MacBook Air with a higher screen resolution, longer battery, far less weight, and a much smaller form factor. A MacBook Air could also run Windows 7 if that's what you want!


The keynote ended with a look at the Microsoft Surface which is now in a smaller form factor, is slightly cheaper, and has support for 20 fingers in multitouch gestures rather than 10. That was pretty much all I could glean about it! I do like the Surface but I wish they'd spent as much time as they have on that working on a truly mobile tablet OS rather than trying to shoehorn Windows 7 onto every device. Windows 7 may be good for some tasks (I don't like it personally) but it is not a suitable OS for a tablet in the same way that OS X wouldn't have worked on a tablet. Android made a similar decision when they tried to put a mobile phone OS onto a tablet. Apple made the right choice by making an optimised OS for it and that is why it has succeeded and other tablets have failed (although it will be interesting to see how the new Android 3.0 UI, supposedly optimised for tablets, will work out).

Overall I was pretty disappointed with the Microsoft Keynote. Sure there were some interesting ideas being floated with the dual-screen Acer laptop and the Windows for SoC announcement but the majority was just rehashing things that have already been demoed or shown off in the past and irritating people showing off features that most mobile phones now have. Microsoft have a lot of catching up to do in the mobile world and I think this year is going to hit them pretty hard.

Contact Forms

Over the last 14 years, I have witnessed the internet expanding rapidly and becoming massively commercialised. With this kind of rampant upscaling, there is always a point at which there are enough people using the system that want to exploit it in some way, usually for monetary gain. With the internet, this has been done rather crudely with the invent of spam email. There are large numbers of servers whose primary aim is to crawl the internet searching for an email address. They then generate a list of these email addresses and sell them to companies who will send out mass emails trying to entice people to buy something or other.

As this problem has increased (apparently over 85% of all emails sent are spam), web developers have panicked and come up with all sorts of stupid methods to try and prevent it. Most developers won’t output their email address in plain text on a website (or with a mailto link) but instead choose to try and hide it by doing something along the lines of “ben [at] bendodson [dot] com”. This is highly inaccessible and is a real pain to try and decipher sometimes – and besides, a human spammer could read it anyway! Other developers will set up a contact form and then protect it by means of a Captcha system or some other horrendously inaccessible device. These systems are incredibly difficult and time-consuming for able-bodied people to use let alone those with poor eye sight or other disabilities. Even so, these systems have become prevalent across the internet and show no signs of slowing down. Some contact forms now ask basic mathematic questions to prove you’re human completely over looking the fact that every one of these systems can eventually be thwarted as spam-bot developers adapt to them.

The real problem I have with all of these systems is that they impose limits on web users and slow them down. They pass all responsibility to the user and treat them like spam until proven innocent (by means of a test) rather than just accepting that these things happen and using an automated system that can filter spam from real conversation. Therefore, I’ve decided to take a stand against this and publish my email address loud and clear with a link that will open it in your email client of choice. If I get spammed, it really doesn’t bother me – I have a “junk mail” folder which has protected my inbox for a very long time and will continue to do so. Please feel free to contact me – I look forward to hearing from you soon!

Why I built an Item Finder for Gowalla

Last Thursday, I expanded my Gowalla Tools website (a companion site for the popular geo-location game Gowalla) to include a new feature known as the Item Finder. It works by displaying a list of spots in any area you choose, and them removing those that don't have items you are missing from your vault. I always knew that this would be a controversial feature and that I'd need to write a piece explaining why I had built it - now that a few people have complained that it is "changing the core nature of the game", it is probably an apt time to publish my opinion on why this is not the case.

Ever since I began work on my Gowalla Tools project, people have consistently been in contact to ask me to make an item finder. They were frustrated that it seemed so difficult to find existing items in their areas when they were so abundant in other areas. For example, in the UK it's very difficult to find a "Cowboy Hat" as these are only available in spots marked as "Saloons" (of which we have very few). However, a few of these rare items have made it to our shores thanks to random items being seeded into new packs (meaning new players have a chance of having a rare item such as this available to them from the start) which are then dropped at locations to make them founded spots.

In the first version of Gowalla Tools, I added a feature which allowed you to see what items were available at any spot you chose. This was not exactly game changing as you could work this out yourself on the Gowalla website by seeing what items had been dropped and picked up until you ended up knowing what was there - my site simply did it faster. When I was initially asked to add a search feature, I was hesitant as I felt it took a lot away from the game and made it simply an item collection game similar to Packrat (which is how the vast majority of players came to find Gowalla) rather than a game about going to places. I actually felt so strongly about changing the game into item collection that I edited the first draft so that items appeared in a popup window rather than inline - this meant it took a good 3 seconds or so before you could view the items at a spot and thus made it so that you couldn't just click around and see what was there. Aside from my issues around gameplay, there were technical constraints as searching that many spots would place heavy demand on both mine and Gowalla's servers so I ruled it out.

It was a month or so later that I suddenly started to hit a brick wall with items. I was missing around 10 items all of which were proving to be incredibly elusive as they were created mainly for the Texas area (e.g. Longhorn). I realised I was spending a lot of time on the Gowalla Tools map clicking around trying to find out what items were available in my area and found quite a few items I had been missing that way. Gowalla also stepped up their game and introduced version 1.3 of their app which allowed you to vault items from within the application - they were starting to take items more seriously so my site needed to do similarly.

I started to get underway with a brand new site and introduced the 13 days of Gowalla Tools Christmas - a daring attempt to build 13 new tools for the site within the 25 days leading up to Christmas. The first tool was obvious to me; the map needed to be radically overhauled and easier to search and view spots. I improved the item offering quickly by showing you what items were at a spot and highlighted those items that were missing from your vault. On day 2, I added the item search. It didn't work the same way as many people had hoped (e.g. type in "Longhorn" and it'll show you all the spots that exists) due to the technical constraints. However, it did allow you to load all the spots in your area and then remove all but those that had items you needed.

Initial feedback was excellent and I had felt that my compromise between ease of use and item searching had been well balanced. However, I was recently alerted to a post on GetSatisfaction (and several tweets) that felt that the new feature was game changing for Gowalla and was tantamount to cheating.

I disagree.

My main reason for playing Gowalla is nothing to do with items - it's about finding new places and visiting those places. It's about finding interesting spots in your neighbourhood that you may never have known were there and then going out and visiting them. In my opinion, items were added in order to lure more people from Packrat and to make it seem more like a game but the key thing is locations. Yes it could be perceived that the Gowalla Tools Item Finder makes it unfair to those that knew where items were previously who are now unable to get them as somebody else has now found them, but that's all part of the game. You can't pick up items unless you are checked in at a location so if you don't go there, you can't have it. If someone else gets there first, then the item is theirs!

The one thing that has annoyed me from the start about Gowalla is the rights that people have given themselves in terms of "that item is mine" or "I'm going to create that spot so you can't". There are no "rules" in Gowalla apart from "first come, first served". The claim that this is game changing is ruled out completely by the fact that Gowalla are fully aware of the Gowalla Tools website and support it (with many of their developers retweeting and using the functionality). I speak with the developers frequently to let them know when I'm releasing new tools that I feel conflict with the core gameplay or could interfere with their servers (e.g. by placing too much demand). I would of course remove any tool they felt violated these rules and as yet no request has been made - only encouragement to do more!

On the positive side, there are a lot of people using the Item Finder in the way I intended. I received a lot of tweets yesterday from people thanking me as they had found an item at a spot and were now going their specially to get it. Some people were travelling up to an hour out of their way to get an item and I think that's great! They were playing the game, going outside to new places rather than waiting and hoping that nobody would know an item they would quite like was there.

The item Finder does not change the core gameplay of Gowalla in any way - it adds to it by showing you spots that are of interest to you. There are people who are affected (namely those on the Android platform) but unfortunately that is a shortcoming on Gowalla's part in not implementing the same level of gameplay for all users. They shouldn't have launched the Android version without all the core game components but this does not mean that Gowalla Tools should be limited. There are several people on devices that can't play Gowalla who would like to - should we horde items away for them? Of course not! Items can still be obtained in the traditional ways and as yet they aren't limited to batches in the same way Packrat items are so I don't see the problem.

Over the coming weeks I'll be releasing more tools that push forward this key feature of getting out there and discovering new places and todays new tool (Flickr Integration) hopefully expands this more by giving you more visual information about a place before you get there. I stick firmly by my decision to release the item finder and I hope that the majority of you will agree with me.

Now get out there and start Gowalla'ing!

The Apple Magic Mouse: Necessary upgrade or expensive luxury?

Apple recently announced the introduction of their latest peripheral, the Magic Mouse (so called due to trademark problems with the existing "Mighty Mouse" name). The new mouse offers the same multitouch features as found in the trackpads of recent MacBooks and of course the iPhone and iPod Touch. But is it any good?

Previous Apple Mice

The previous model (the "Mighty Mouse") was a complete disaster in my opinion and the only Apple product apart from the Tiger Xserve that I have never been able to defend (even as a devout fanboy). The main problem was that the scroll button (or 'nipple') would get clogged with dirt so easily that it would invariably stop working after a couple of weeks heavy usage. The official Apple solution to this (which has since been pulled from the KnowledgeBase) was to turn it upside down and bang it in your palm! Whilst it had a couple of benefits in terms of OS X integration (such as activating Exposé by squeezing) these features quite often generated more problems than they solved (such as activating Exposé by accidental squeezing). So how does the Magic Mouse differ?


The Magic Mouse has no buttons, no squeezing, and no cable. Like the unibody MacBooks, it has gone for a simple look using the minimum number of parts; one piece of aluminium and one piece of glass. It is incredibly short (in terms of height) compared to other mice whilst being slightly longer than others. With no distinguishing buttons and a symmetrical shape, the only visual aid to placing it the right way round is the standard Apple logo displayed on the top. In my opinion, the design is beautiful yet simplistic (as you would expect from any recent Apple product) but would look at home in a museum of modern art. Not many people care about the aesthetics of a mouse (which is strange considering it's prominent location in most homes) but now I've had this on my desk, I'd find it very difficult to go back to something uglier.

Before you've even got it to your desk you are struck by the beauty of the device. The packaging is incredibly similar to the new iPods (which makes a lot of sense) but it still amazed me to see just how little packaging was used.

Apple Magic Mouse packaging

It is difficult not to pick up the Magic Mouse in the Apple Store and not be impressed with the way it is packaged. This is how all packaging should be in the modern world - I'm not talking just about technology (although there is large scope for improvement) but in everything from food to clothing. Smaller packaging means not only that you can put more product in a store but also that you save fuel from transportation (as you can move more units in the same lorries / boats leading to less trips) and minimise wasteful plastic packaging. I was impressed when I found out that the mouse came with batteries (very rare these days) but even more impressed when I discovered they were already in the device which was simply turned off. This saves a huge amount of space and more plastic.


As other commentators have noted, there is no "wow" moment with this mouse. By this, they mean that the majority of Apple products have that initial euphoria when you use it for the first time (e.g. when you first unlock the iPhone or when you lift the MacBook out of it's stunning packaging) but this mouse doesn't have that. You just use it. However, what it does have is a strange sensation roughly after an hours use when you try to go back to using a normal mouse. You find the scrolling isn't as intuitive and that you've been using the multitouch features without even thinking about it. It is a very easy mouse to get used to and it is that which provides the "wow" as you realise you have been completely taken in.

In terms of setup, it's a standard bluetooth mouse so a quick trip to the "mouse" page in Settings will have it set up in know time. As of the time of writing, you need to download an update via "Software Update" to take advantage of the multitouch gestures but when OS X 10.6.2 is released it will be built into the OS by default. The only negative here is that the update is 62MB which is a little excessive - this is most likely due to the videos that show you how to use the gestures in a similar way to the videos found on the MacBooks to show you how to use the trackpad. In any case, setup is quick and painless.

At present, there are very few actual uses of the multitouch. Clicking is performed by a physical click (not just tapping as per the trackpads) but there is only one button. The multitouch comes into play by detecting where your finger is on the surface and then linking that up to whether it is a primary or secondary click - this is very useful if you are left-handed or ambidextrous (as I am) as you can quickly switch the mouse to your other hand and it still feels comfortable thanks to the symmetrical design. The only other two uses are scrolling (a simple case of moving your finger around on the surface - you can go up, down, left, right, and diagonal which is useful for zooming in photos, etc) and the two finger swipe which lets you go backwards and forwards through browser history and photos. Apple also point out you can zoom into a page by holding the control button on the keyboard and swiping your finger up and down but this has always been possible by holding control and using a scroll wheel so I wouldn't describe it as a unique function.


There appear to be two main criticisms of this device if you read the forums or the reviews pages on the Apple Store; size and functionality.

A lot of people have found the size uncomfortable as it's so much shorter than previous mice. However, I note that most of these reviews were from people going to their local Apple Store and trying it rather than at home. I had read these reviews and so when I got to the store I made a point of squatting down to try it as the benches in the store are very low (meaning you're not holding the mouse as you normally would). This made a huge difference to how it sat in my hand and so I think a lot of these reviews just stem from this problem. I would never buy a mouse that cost this much money without trying it out first but it is important that you try and recreate how you would use it as much as possible.

The second problem of functionality is much more valid in my mind. For a multitouch device, this mouse uses a woeful amount of multitouch features. When it was first announced I was expecting all the features of my trackpad such as pinch, rotating, zooming, 3-4 fingered swiping, and maybe a few extras as well. Without this option (and the customisation that goes with it) there are just too few buttons for a lot of consumers. The squeeze buttons on the Mighty Mouse may have been annoying to some but at least it gave you a way to control Exposé from your mouse - something that can save a lot of time over the course of a day. Likewise with no middle button control you can't get to your dashboard or spaces easily (or use it like a PC mouse for opening new tabs in browsers).

My theory on this lack of functionality is that Apple know they are going to get negative reviews that focus intently on this issue. They will therefore release an update in a month or so which fixes it and adds full multitouch support which will then write off all of the negative reviews. In this way, they are able to choose the negative issue that people will focus on safe in the knowledge they can resolve it later on and make it seem that everybody loves the device. People who had an issue with the device can't then say "x is bad about it" as their original review will have focused on the multitouch issue as the only negative. From what I've seen of Apple's marketing machine (one of the best in the world to my mind) and my studies of politics, this is exactly the kind of controlled negativity that I would expect. I guess we'll see if I'm right in a month or so!


So is the mouse worth £55 (or $69 - strange currency conversion there...) - at the moment I would say no simply due to the lack of features supported by the multitouch. If these are corrected in a future update (and I'm confident they will be) then this will be one of the finest mice on the market, but at the moment it feels as if it's full potential is being restricted. There is no question that this is a beautiful device, but the functionality needs to match the aesthetics before I can fully endorse it.

Update - 11th Nov 2009: I was recommended BetterTouchTool by @ricklecoat which is a free app that enables some extra features of the mouse. For instance, my Magic Mouse now reveals my desktop when I slide two fingers up / down and does Exposé when I tap (yes tap, not click) with three fingers. Has improved my productivity no end!


I've put together a few shots of the unpacking of the Magic Mouse as well as comparing it with a few of my older mice. Check it out on Flickr.

How to pitch an app idea to an iPhone developer

Thanks to my appearance on The Gadget Show earlier this week, I've been inundated with people emailing me with ideas for iPhone applications. The majority of them have no understanding of the development aspects (which is fair enough) but have ideas for apps they want me to build, usually with payment via the profit made. I've had quite a few interesting ones come through, but some have been suggested with very little thought or realism applied. I decided to create this article to show prospective idea senders how an idea should be presented along with a few answers to common questions I've received

Research your idea

There is nothing worse than replying to 2 or 3 emails in which the sender is being cagey about their "brilliant new idea" only to discover (often after spending time signing, scanning, and sending an NDA) that it is actually an idea for which there are over 250 apps available on the store. The key thing before contacting a developer is to make sure that your idea has not been done already. If it has, then either think of something else or find a unique selling point in your app that will make it stand out from the crowd.

Make sure your app is relevant

So your idea hasn't been done before? The App Store has been open for over a year with over 65,000 applications so the next question should be "why hasn't it been done". There are three answers to this question: it's impossible, it's not a good idea, or it's unique.

Impossible: When I say "impossible", I mean that you've come up with something that the iPhone SDK won't allow (it may still be a good idea). For example, you may have an idea to download soundclips off the internet and store them in the iPod library. A good idea in theory but the iPod library only has read access so you are limited to what you can do. There are several rules within the iPhone SDK which limit what can be done so be prepared that your idea may not be possible within those confines - there may, however, be workarounds (e.g. in the example above you could build a custom application to play the soundclips you've downloaded).

Bad Idea: The most common bad ideas I've had sent tend to be duplicating the functionality of an existing website into an iPhone app. You might have a killer idea on your website and be the market leader in a certain arena. This does not mean that converting it directly to the iPhone is going to be a good idea. If your idea is working on a website already, then it is already accessible from an iPhone (provided it's not made in flash) so there is little benefit to making a custom application apart from it'll look slightly better. It may be that there are a huge number of potential iPhone users who are put off by your website running on the device. In that case, you should consider making a web app. This is a way of using standard HTML and CSS to make a website look like an iPhone application but takes no extra knowledge than that of building your regular site. I've built a few web apps myself and found it to be incredibly easy if you are using something like UiUiKit.

Unique: You've checked the App Store and found no trace of your idea, you are certain it's possible to do with the features of the device, and it's not a simple port of an existing website into an application. In that case your app is probably a unique endeavour and should definitely be pursued!

Know your audience

When I've been pitching for web development work in the past, I've often had clients say to me "we should definitely make an iPhone app for this as well" to which I usually reply "why". There is an unhealthy obsession at the moment with making applications simply for the fact that it shows you are modern. However, you can easily spend a large sum of money building an application for a small bit of street cred only to find out that none of your target audience actually use iPhones (or wouldn't use your application anyway).

If your idea is simply duplicating functionality of your website, then you shouldn't make it an iPhone application (or even a web app) unless more than 20% of your visitors are using an iPhone or you've had a lot of people ask for an app. You wouldn't suddenly start supporting Internet Explorer 5.5 on the mac again but quite often you'll find more people visiting your website with that than with an iPhone yet people will often overlook simple statistics to try and seem more modern.

Don't make custom apps or websites for devices or browsers that your users aren't using!

Understanding development costs

An iPhone app is not an easy thing to build and so, like a house or a website, you are paying for the expertise of the developer you commission to create your application. If you believe your idea is unique and you are going to make a large profit from it, then you need to pay your developer for the application in a one-off fee the same way that you would pay a builder or any other tradesman. However, if you don't have the finance to pay to have your idea built, then some developers will be open to the idea of building the idea for you for free but then taking a percentage of the profit that comes in from selling the app.

Negotiating for development costs is often very similar to the Dragon's Den program in that you will negotiate in terms of equity (how much of the profit you are willing to share) in order to get an expert to build the application. However, where this often falls down is with prospective clients offering around 20% equity. If you come to the table with nothing but an idea (and aren't planning on doing any designing, building, or marketing) then you can't expect to find a developer that will build your app and agree to taking a small percentage.

In my own case, I prefer to be paid for the application but I will occasionally deal in terms of equity if I think the idea is good enough. Having said that, I refuse to take less than 50% if I'm expected to build an application from the ground up with no other form of payment - most other developers are the same.

Update, December 22nd 2015: Whilst this was the case in 2009, it certainly isn't the case in 2015 and the vast majority of developers will not work for any form of equity. Please ready my new article iOS developers don't work for free.

It is important to note that it is not possible to give a straight up cost for an application before you've heard the idea. I've received several enquiries of the sort "can you tell me how much it'll cost to get an app built". Pricing is generally based on the amount of time required so if you want a basic utility then it will cost a great deal less than a complex 3D game. Bear in mind that you may be asking your developer to build a website or server software to run your applications (if you plan on using push notifications for example) and so these should be factored into your financial calculations.

Note: with all applications, Apple takes approximately 30% of the sale of each application to cover the costs of the App Store. This means that for every 59p sale, you keep approximately 42p. You are paid at the end of each month by Apple but you are paid by territory and if you haven't earned over $150 in that territory then the amount rolls over to the next month that you do. For example, if you made $100 in one month in the USA, then you are under the $150 threshold. That rolls over to the next month. If you then made another $100 you would be over the threshold so at the end of that month you'd be sent $200. When you are negotiating with an iPhone developer, be sure to clarify if they are talking of their percentage in terms of sales price (before Apple takes it's 30% cut) or profit (after Apple has taken it's cut).

Building an app on your own

Apple provides all of the tools you need to make an iPhone application via it's developer website at although you will need to be using a mac with an intel processor. You can't build iPhone applications on windows.

With the free SDK that Apple provides, you can use all of the features of the iPhone and test them in the iPhone Simulator that is also provided. You can't, however, run the code on your own device or submit it to the App Store. To do that, you'll need to get a developer license which costs $99 per year and can be purchased through the developer website above. Once you have the license, you'll be able to generate provisioning profiles for your apps which will enable it to run on your own device or up to 100 other devices (e.g. friends, colleagues, testers).

All apps are written in Objective-C so I'd highly recommend you buy a book on the subject. If you are coming from a web-based background (e.g. PHP, Ruby, JavaScript, .net) then I'd also recommend you start by learning C before moving onto Objective-C. You may be raring to jump into the SDK and start using things like the accelerometer and location services, but if you don't know how an array or a dictionary works, then you'll never be able to build an app that works well.

Getting your apps into the App Store

The only things you need are your completed application code (that should have been tested extensively in both the simulator and on actual devices) and a developer license. Once you have these, you are able to generate the correct certificates to publish your application to the App Store. You will be asked to supply not only text such as descriptions, app title, and keywords, but also screenshots and a 512x512px image of your application icon for use in Apple's promotional materials so make sure you have these available.

The actual process for submission has been under a lot of criticism but basically you submit your app and then wait for a while (usually around 14 days - Apple have placed an indicator of queue length on the iTunes submission portal now) to find out if your app has been rejected or accepted. If it's been rejected then they should supply you with information about what is wrong and how to fix it. If it's been accepted, then congratulations, your app is ready for prime time!

Note: a common question seems to be "can I submit an app with your developer license". If we were to assume that I built you an iPhone app, then yes I could submit it to the app store using my license saving you $99. However, this would mean the app appeared under my company name rather than your own and all payments for the app would go into my bank account. Whilst this is possible, most clients would prefer that their company name is displayed and that all finance goes through them.

Copyright and other legalities

When Apple checks the application in it's approval process, it does not take into account copyright or any other legalities of that type. This means that technically you could steal an idea such as "Super Mario Bros", make a duplicate app, and then submit it. However, you are still liable for breaches of copyright and so could be sued by the correct copyright holders and have to repay damages. The basic rule of thumb is don't use copyright images, text, or music, and don't mimic other peoples ideas or intellectual property.

Contacting a developer

If after reading all of the above you are pleased with your idea and want to get an iPhone developer on board, you will need to contact them with the following pieces of information:

  • A detailed explanation of your idea - if you are not comfortable with giving up your idea, then get the developer to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (or NDA) which will prevent them from stealing the idea. It is worth pointing out to the developer that you have already done your research and know that your idea is unique before asking them to sign anything as you will be more likely to get a favourable response.
  • What you are looking for - you'll need to detail what you need the developer to do (e.g. build the app, suggest changes, recommend a designer, etc) and also if you are looking to pay outright for the code or enter into a profit-share agreement (and the potential terms of such an agreement).

I reply to all emails that I receive but many developers will not get back to you if the two points above are not fulfilled. The more detail you supply, the more likely it is that a developer will want to work with you and form a professional relationship as it shows that you are serious and have researched your idea rather than being someone interested in simply making a quick bit of cash by copying an existing flash game.


I hope that this article has given you a quick insight into how you can make your ideas more appealing to an iPhone developer and answers some of the more common questions about the process. If you have further questions, please feel free to leave them in the comments below or contact me. I'll be updating this article as and when other common questions come in.

Social Beacon: Developing An iPhone App for "The Gadget Show"

You can watch the Gadget Show episode online and download Social Beacon from the App Store.

A couple of months ago, I was asked if I'd like to appear on Channel Five's "The Gadget Show" to take part in a challenge about iPhone applications with Jason Bradbury and Suzi Perry. I had only been developing iPhone apps for a short while but decided to enter into the spirit of the challenge by jumping head first into some of the trickier aspects of the iPhone SDK. The show and results of the challenge aired last night so I thought it was time for me to do a write up of the application and the process of building it.

The Early Stages

My day-to-day job involves me working as a freelance PHP developer but I'm a huge Apple fan and have owned every iteration of the iPhone. It wasn't long before I started toying with the idea of building iPhone apps, but the programming language was different to anything I'd ever done before. As a PHP developer, I found it very hard initially learning how to code in Objective-C (the coding language for iPhone apps). However, I purchased a couple of books including the excellent "iPhone SDK Development" and "Learn Objective-C on the Mac" and it wasn't too long before I became an iPhone developer.

After making it on to the App Store with Magnetic Flux & Metal Detector [iTunes Link], I was asked if I'd be interested in making the iPhone Application for "The Gadget Show". The initial concept was fairly simple: an application that allowed you to quickly choose from a list of questions to build a sentence which could be sent to your social networks. I agreed immediately and began working with my friend Liza Hayes on the design but hadn't realised exactly what I'd let myself in for.

In order to work as expected, the application would need to access an SQLite database on the device, be able to store custom sentences input by the user to that database, be able to build a sentence based on building an SQL query, and use the networking features of the iPhone to post to both Facebook and Twitter. I had done a lot of work with Facebook Connect and the Twitter API in my web development work and I knew that Facebook had a custom integration of its API for the iPhone. Even so, the networking problems were going to be tricky to overcome. To add to all of this, Jason suggested that he'd like a way to show off the accelerometer in the iPhone, and I was interested in the settings panes and how we could make the app easily customisable.

Developing the app

The iPhone 3.0 OS had just been released, yet as a registered iPhone developer I was working on iPhone 3.1 so there were enumerable problems in switching my Xcode environment and devices back and forth between the two versions. This was compounded with problems with Facebook Connect in that it had been written for the 2.1 OS and so was not 100% compatible with 3.0 leading to some caffeine fuelled Googling!

We had decided that the accelerometer could be used in what Jason called "Fingerless Functionality" whereby you could shake the phone left and right to navigate around the Social Beacon wheel, and then tip the phone up and down to progress backwards and forwards through the option. A simple shake of the phone would be enough to regenerate a sentence. These parts were all very straightforward (especially the shake, which can be detected with one line of code in OS 3.0) yet we came to a usability problem once we thought about sending the message. We couldn't use the shake or the down gesture, as these were used for regenerating the sentence on the final screen, so we needed to find another fingerless input method to post the message. The answer eventually came in the guise of the microphone: we could detect sound so that blowing into the mic would blow your message to the internet! Of course, this meant learning yet another aspect of the SDK that I had previously left untouched -- Core Audio -- but I'm always up for a challenge!

Distribution and the App Store

With various bugs overcome and a final test version working on my device, we were ready to distribute the app via the App Store. You may have heard some of the horror stories from the App Store -- it can take a very long time and you end up being rejected without reason -- but I have to say that I found the process to work incredibly well. It took 14 days from submission before Apple got back to us to say that the Application had been rejected due to a bug in the networking code (if you weren't connected to the internet the app would hang, or worse, say that the message had been sent). They were incredibly helpful and gave a detailed explanation of the problem as well as including some sample code to show how the networking portion could be handled better. After a couple of hours fixing it up, we resubmitted and the app was available around the world a few days later.

We were of course competing against Suzi's "Biker Blast-Off! [iTunes Link]" which was distributed at the same time, but crucially neither app was publicised on either Twitter or any other medium without mentioning the other with the same weight (so we'd invite people to try both apps). Within 3 days, Social Beacon was in the top 20 free social media applications whilst Biker Blast-Off was climbing up the overall free application charts worldwide and racking up a huge number of downloads. Interestingly, as both of our apps climbed higher, the reviews became more negative and I realised that this was true of nearly every app in the store. It seems that even if you are willing to give away a free product which could easily be charged for, people will still rip the idea to pieces (some comments on the game even saying "you'd need to pay me to play this game" - no pleasing some people!).

The Aftermath

Jason Bradbury and Ben Dodson

The show was aired last night (and is available to watch online) and has the full story as well as the final figures and the winner of the challenge, but the story of the apps continues. Since the show, both applications have now shot back up into the charts with both apps appearing in the top 10 free applications in the UK App Store. Social Beacon is currently sitting pretty at spot number 4 and I couldn't be happier with it.

A big thank you to the Gadget Show team (especially Colin Byrne, Chris Payne, and Jason Bradbury) and to Liza Hayes for her fantastic design work. It was a great experience and it looks like I'm going to be developing iPhone applications for a long time to come!

Gowalla Tools Web App: Find your missing Gowalla items!

For those of you who play the excellent iPhone GPS game Gowalla, I've built a handy web app that will allow you to see all of your missing items and where you can find them. In addition to telling you what type of spot a particular item is likely to appear at, it will also list specific spots if applicable (such as states - some items only appear in Texas for instance) and allow you to use the built-in location awareness of Safari in iPhone 3.0 to show you where the nearest spots of that type are. It is available today at and is the first in a series of small utilities I'll be creating to help players.

Gowalla Tools - Login

The first thing you will see when you open the web app is a prompt for your Gowalla username. You don't need to login to the service, but it does need to know your username so it can search through your pack effectively (although you can also see your friends' missing items if you want to help them out with any of your own spare items).

Gowalla Tools - Missing Icons

You will then be shown all of your items in a list. Tapping any of these (e.g. "Conference Badge") will then show you which spots are likely to randomly give you the item in question when you check in.

Gowalla Tools - Icons Appear At...

The list will sometimes be broken into two sections: spot categories where you have a chance of finding the item on check in, and internal categories or spots. These internal categories are usually things such as states (e.g. "Texas" has quite a few items) or freebies (which I believe are items randomly dropped by devs) but are often actual spots (e.g. "Alamofire" - the offices of the developers).

With the standard categories, you can tap them to find spots in your local area (but you'll be prompted to allow the site to use your location - your location information isn't stored, it's just used to determine your nearest spots).

Gowalla Tools - Location Confirmation Gowalla Tools - Nearest Spots

If there are spots in your area, you can tap on them to view the spots information on the Gowalla website.

If you save the web app to your homescreen (press the '+' symbol in Safari and choose "Save to Homescreen") then you'll get a pretty custom icon so it looks just like a normal iPhone app (which it may well become one day). I'll be expanding the service offering as and when I find new things to include :)


The site is in beta mode so there may be a few bugs and tweaks but if you have any feedback, please let me know. Happy Gowalla'ing!


The web app is not owned, maintained, or developed by Alamofire, Inc. - Gowalla and all other trademarks and imagery are copyright of Alamofire.

iPhone 3GS: Review and Speed Test (vs. iPhone 3G)

I was up at 5:30am this morning in order to start queueing for the iPhone 3GS outside my local O2 store - I'm happy to say that I was the first person in the queue and although I had problems in getting a second contract (eventually deciding to buy a PAYG version from the Apple Store) I am now the proud owner of the iPhone 3GS. In this short post, I hope to review a few of the key features as well as giving you some real world stats from tests I've run to show the differences between the iPhone 3G and the iPhone 3GS. Please use the comments section if you have any questions!

iPhone 3GS vs iPhone 3G

Initial Thoughts

My first thought was that the iPhone 3GS somehow felt nicer than the previous models of the iPhone. I remember upgrading from the original to the 3G and thinking that the new plastic back made it feel more comfy and it seems that again something has been done to the texture to make it seem more solid and comfortable. Although it looks exactly the same as the 3G, there are a few minor aesthetic details such as the lettering on the back now being the same colour as the Apple logo which makes it stand out a bit more.

The "oleophobic screen coating" (that's oil resistant to you and me) really does work incredibly well. With previous iPhones, greasy finger marks on the screen wouldn't go away even if you rubbed them with your t-shirt or trouser leg; they just smeared. With the new screen coating, one wipe with a t-shirt makes the screen look just like new. This is a very useful addition to my mind!

One other detail I noticed straight away is that the screen is a lot brighter. I had thought it was slightly better (in the same way that Snow Leopard is much clearer than Leopard although this is to do with a switch to the 2.2 gamma standard) but wasn't aware of how much better until I placed it next to my old iPhone 3G - you can see the difference in the photo above. The key thing here is that both phones were set to the same brightness level so there really is an improvement in the hardware somewhere.

New Features

Compass - the new digital compass (or magnetometer if you prefer?) was one of the big talking points of the iPhone 3GS as it allows for far more accurate turn-by-turn navigation. It also added a sexy new app appropriately named "compass". The compass app itself is fairly basic and I felt that the actual readings were quite slow to adjust. Additionally, making a very small change to the orientation of the phone doesn't always reflect in the compass which is a little frustrating when you are trying to get it to point exactly North. Having said that, it's good enough to get a basic idea of which way is which. The real area the compass shines in is in the updated Maps application where pressing the location button re-orientates the map to the direction you are facing. This is absolutely invaluable when navigating and is a feature I will be using heavily.

Voice Control - When it was announced at the WWDC Keynote, I felt that Phil Schiller sounded a bit stupid going on about how this great phone was now able to do voice commands seeing as it was something my Nokia could do 8 years ago. However, I now realise why he was quite as smug as he was. It really does work exactly as they demoed it. After I synced my contacts and music, I tried a few of the commands such as "phone Ben Dodson" (to which it replied "work, home, or mobile?"), "play panic at the disco", "play more songs like this", and "what song is this". Every name and command I tried worked flawlessly so I was incredibly impressed. The real power is that with other phones you'd need to add a voice tag for each contact whereas with the iPhone, it just reads the text and interprets your voice accordingly so there is no need for you to record a voice command prior to using it. The app looks awesome as well!

Camera - The new camera app is fantastic. I can't believe that it's only a 3MP camera as the quality of the images is as good as some phones I've seen with 5 or even 7MP. The video app is simple to use (as you'd expect) and again the quality is very very good. It's a shame it doesn't film 720p but the colour balancing and overall quality make up for the relatively small resolution. The only negative I can find is that video at nighttime is fairly grainy (whereas in daylight it's beautifully smooth) and the camera would really have benefited from having a flash. I was really hoping the rumours that the Apple logo would act as a flash light were true but it appears that it's not the case... for this model at least!

I've got the need, the need for speed!

My main reason for buying the iPhone 3GS is that I wanted faster app loading times and generally quicker responses within the apps. Playing Sonic the Hedgehog on my 3G nearly bought me to tears as it was actually unplayable (I'm sure they only tested it on a 2nd generation iPod Touch...) and I'd always get frustrated playing Tap Tap Revenge 2 when the app would skip a little due to memory running out. So, speed was a big thing I was interested in.

I did not imagine it would be as good as it actually is.

The speed increases I've noticed so far have been nothing short of phenomenal for something that got a 50% speed boost and a doubling of RAM. Quite often, load times have been reduced by up to 4x and overall app reliability is nothing short of flawless. Here are a few stats based on some of my most commonly used and intensive apps:

Bejeweled 2 - app launch to menu screen
3G = 12.1s
3GS = 3.7s

iDracula - selecting "grave park - survival" on menu to actual gameplay
3G = 21.6s
3GS = 6.5s

Peggle - app launch to "touch to play" message
3G = 25.4s
3GS = 10.2s

Sonic the Hedgehog - app launch to "SEEEGGAAAAA" message
3G = 5.9s
3GS = 2.7s

Tap Tap Revenge 2 - app launch to main menu
3G = 6.4s
3GS = 3.3s

Tap Tap Revenge 2 - selecting "The Sound of Settling" on "Hard" to start of track
3G = 8.9s
3GS = 3.5s

All apps were tested on the 3.0 OS after an iPhone restart. They were timed using a stopwatch and each test was run 3 times and then averaged in order to minimise discrepancies.


The speed boost was definitely the biggest thing for me and I have to say that it has exceeded my expectations. The small range of stats above don't accurately display how snappy everything has become. Previously, navigating the menus of Tap Tap Revenge 2 always a pause of around a second between each screen whereas now it's instant. Also, actually playing the game could be incredibly frustrating as I knew I was in time but a memory glitch along the way would cause the tappers to move erratically causing you to miss them even though you hit the area at the right time. This was verified to me when playing on the 3GS as I got a 100% streak straight away without really trying too hard. Another game that suffered horribly on the 3G was Sonic the Hedgehog which really shouldn't have been allowed to go on the App Store. It was probably ok on the 2nd Gen iPod Touch as that had a slightly faster CPU, but on the 3G it was just dismal with stuttering sound, obvious slow down and speed up, and a whole host of other glitches such as unresponsive controls. On the 3GS, it plays exactly as it always should have done - exactly the same as it did on the Mega Drive.

I haven't even touched upon areas such as the speed increases in Safari rendering (pages are near instant - truly amazing mobile web browsing), the noticeably smoother animations between apps, or any of the other minor tweaks that make sure that the 3GS not only outperforms the 3G, but actually completely exceeds the speeds that were previously attainable.

However, there are one or two problems in all of this. For me, the biggest question mark hangs over how the App Store is going to be managed. The iPhone 3GS has much better hardware and allows for much better graphics which means that theoretically we should get into a situation where apps are available only for 3GS. However, it looks as if Apple is going to resist this route and that the 3GS upgrade is purely for across the board speed increases rather than in making more powerful apps. I can't predict what is going to happen but I fear that there will be a lot of apps made that will only work on the 3GS but they won't be labelled as such in the App Store (in the same way that Sonic the Hedgehog should have been labelled 2nd Gen iPod Touch only). This leads to a lot of frustration when you are paying £5.99 or so for a game which then won't work on the existing hardware.

So, do I think the 3GS is worth the upgrade?

Yes. Yes I do.

The tale of the "O2 Fail" (starring the iPhone 3GS)

Ever since the iPhone 3GS was announced in the Apple WWDC Keynote last week, the internet has been ablaze with criticism about both AT&T and O2 with regards to their upgrade policies to the new phone for existing iPhone 3G customers. I have battled long and hard on Twitter and on the O2 Forums to try and put across that they have in fact done nothing wrong, it is the public that are misguided, yet this has fallen on relatively deaf ears. I decided it would be easier to put one whole post together about the "O2 Fail" (or #o2fail for you Tweeters) and the rational response to it so I could just point people in this direction rather than re-explaining myself over and over!

Disclaimer: I don't work for O2 and never have done. I used to be on the 3 mobile network in the UK as it was the cheapest before switching to O2 in order to get the iPhone. I bought the original iPhone about 4 months before the 3G came out (and so paid full price for it which was around £330 plus a £35 contract) and then upgraded to the iPhone 3G by paying £59 and upgrading to the £45 18-month contract. I will be buying the iPhone 3GS next Friday by taking out a second contract and letting the remaining 6 months on my current contract run out. Therefore, I have no reason to be supporting O2 as I would benefit greatly if they caved in and let people upgrade for free - the point I'm putting across is that there is good reason why they aren't doing that and people need to understand why that is.

O2 Fail Twitter

The iPhone 3GS

During the WWDC Keynote, Apple announced that the new model of the iPhone (the iPhone 3GS - the 'S' stands for 'Speed') would be released on the 19th of June in 6 countries at a price of $199 for the 16GB model and $299 for the 32GB model. Crucially, these were prices on a specific AT&T 24-month tariff for new customers. Here in the UK, the prices vary from 'free' to £280 or so (or even £550 if you choose Pay As You Go). Again these prices are for new customers only. So, as was bound to be the case, there are a large number of iPhone 3G customers who want to upgrade to the iPhone 3GS who are being told they have to finish their existing contracts before they can get the new model. This can be done in two ways; wait until your contract ends or pay to get out of it now. This very simple issue is the basis for all of "O2 Fail" comments over the past few days. Let's look at why it has annoyed people so much...

"But last time..."

When the iPhone 3G as announced, O2 allowed original iPhone customers to terminate their contracts early at no cost and start a brand new contract. The only cost was that of the phone and was the same cost that applied to new customers. In my own case, this was around £59 as I moved up to the £45 a month contract (18 months). The reason O2 did this (when they and other carriers have never done this for a phone before) is because they didn't subsidise the original iPhone. When you went to the Apple Store or to an O2 store, you paid the full retail price (which was around £330 for the 16GB model). Therefore, the contract you were on was purely making money based on calltime - that was a pretty sweet deal for O2 and so it was surprising they allowed people to upgrade.

In any case, most people seem to think that as it happened last time it should happen this time. They have failed to grasp the crucial word 'subsidy'. The original iPhone wasn't subsidised, the iPhone 3G was (as is the iPhone 3GS). This means that a large portion of the money you now pay to O2 from your contract goes directly to Apple for the cost of the phone. It's worth pointing out that this is the same with every other phone on the market with every other carrier (unless you're using Pay As You Go in which case you pay the full price for the phone up front). So, if O2 were to say at this point "of course you can upgrade under the same conditions as last time" they would lose a HUGE amount of money as not only would they not have made any money on airtime, they would have lost the money on the subsidised phone.

What about paying off the remaining subsidy on my phone?

There have been a fair number of people asking this question - "why can't I just buy out my subsidy and get a new contract". The key problem here is that O2 would still not have made any money as they would have basically given you free airtime for the last 12 months. If you only pay your subsidised part, then they aren't making money. This is where the crucial word 'contract' comes into use as you signed an agreement to pay a certain amount of money per month to cover the cost of the phone and the airtime.

But what about customer loyalty!?!

The follow up argument to the above is "but they'd make money on the airtime in my new contact". So, you've just screwed O2 for the past 12 months by using their network without effectively paying for it and now you want a new contract where they will be able to make their money back? I don't follow that for one instant as what happens when the next iPhone comes out in 12 months ? We'll go back to square one with the argument being "they did it the last 2 times, why can't I upgrade now" which means that again O2 will go without being paid for their network usage.

Ok, how about they just add my remaining contract to my new contract?

This is a slightly harder argument as in a way it makes some sense. Rather than waiting 6 months for my contract to expire and then upgrading to a new 18 month contract, why can't O2 just let me upgrade now and add an additional 6 months to my new contract? This would work in theory but the problem is that you'll start getting people on contracts from 18-36 months and I'll guarantee that come next year they'll be the first ones to ask for another extension putting them on 24-42 month contracts and so on. This is a similar problem to people extending loan terms forever and ever in that there comes a point where they simply aren't going to pay it back. I don't know the full details but I imagine there are some laws on how many times a contract can be extended as well in order to ensure fair fiscal management but don't quote me on it!

Don't they realise we're in the middle of a recession!

This is by far the best argument I've seen used - people actually pointing out that due to the "credit crunch", O2 should be lowering prices so they can get the phone cheaper. If the recession is really that bad, don't you think it's a little stupid of you to be arguing about getting a slightly faster iPhone? Surely you should be worrying about the price of basic essentials like food, clothes, and petrol rather than the ability to get a slightly better camera in your smart phone? And how do you think mobile phone carriers are doing in the economic crisis? They need to make money as well!

The Facebook Group

One of my other favourite things during this whole saga has been the Facebook group I DONT WANT TO PAY TO UPGRADE MY IPHONE! - I don't think I even need to provide an argument against this.

My Point

I've spoken about the reasons why these arguments are flawed but my real point is that people don't "need" the iPhone 3GS so I don't understand why so many people are desperate to upgrade. I'm an iPhone developer and therefore want the new hardware so that I can write better apps that utilize it's hardware, but to everybody else there is very little gain. Sure you get a slightly better camera, the ability to film video, and a digital compass (as well as a processor and RAM upgrade) but you get far more from the 3.0 upgrade than you do from the hardware upgrade.

I suppose my real point is that there are things called "contracts" that people have entered into - they are now throwing their toys out of the pram because they can't get the latest shiny object from Apple without paying for it but unfortunately that's just how it is and O2 are not going to change their minds. Why not? Because if they did they would lose huge amounts of money. At this point people decry the greedy networks and the fact that they are going to take their business elsewhere. The crucial point is that O2 is the only network that can cope with the iPhone properly and they are the only supplier so you either stay with them or you get a Palm Pre, a Google Android, or one of the new Windows Mobile phones from another supplier. But, I can guarantee that in 12 months when a new model of those phones comes out, the networks won't let you upgrade early for free so you'll be back where you started.... just with a rubbish phone instead!

The key point is that the iPhone 3GS has not been designed for existing iPhone 3G customers - it has been designed specifically to address the concerns of people who were deciding whether to get one of the other smartphones I mentioned or an iPhone. They have added MMS, Video, and a better camera - the three major flaws with the iPhone that any undecided customer would count as negatives. If you're an iPhone 3G user at present, I highly doubt that you are going to stop becoming an iPhone user over this issue as you have already been sold on the idea of the phone and you know that no other phone currently suits your needs.

Besides, as a network O2 has proved itself to be far better than many other iPhone carriers (*cough* AT&T *cough*). They are supporting MMS on launch day (including video for those with the 3GS), the push notification system has worked flawlessly so far (I've been beta testing it), and they have internet tethering working as well (which also works very well - I'll be coming back to the price of this later).

What can I do?

So if you're read this and been swayed over to rational thinking rather than getting involved in the anti-O2 hype, what are your options for upgrading to the iPhone 3GS?

Wait. I know it's difficult but you don't need the iPhone 3GS. If you had a great need for video then you would have bought a different phone in the first place. If you bought your iPhone 3G on launch day, you should have 6 months of you contract left and this may be reduced to 0 months, 3 months, or 5 months depending on how much you've spent recently - take a look at the O2 Priority List for details.

Buy a Pay As You Go iPhone 3GS and sell your old iPhone 3G on eBay (or to a friend, etc). You get the full functionality, get to keep your number, and it'll all work on launch day just by putting your existing SIM card into the new phone. Visual Voicemail, etc, will work as you'll still be on a contract plan (the hardware between the contract and PAYG phones is the same). Plus you might even make money this way as the iPhone 3G's are selling for a high price - best to get on their quickly though!

Pay off your existing contract. This route is the most expensive but you could pay off your existing contract and take out a new one - the price is generally the number of months remaining times your monthly rate so in my case it was £270 (£45 x 6). This is the easiest way but the most expensive.

Take out a second contract. This is what I'm going to be doing next Friday. Rather than paying off my contract in one lump sum, I'll keep that contract and my iPhone 3G (I use it for app testing) but I'll just get a new contract with the iPhone 3GS. This means I'll be paying for 2 contracts for around 6 months but that spreads the cost a bit rather than having one big hit all at once. Also, you can downgrade your iPhone contract one level after 9 months so I'll be able to move my iPhone 3G down to the £35 plan this month (and the £30 the month after) which will save some money - it also means I have a spare, live phone in case I need it for anything. This is again an expensive method but it spreads the cost rather than having it all in one hit - however, it may be subject to a second credit check to make sure you can afford two contracts at once.

What should O2 do?

To my mind, this whole saga could have been avoided if O2 still offered 12 month contracts. Of course, the main problem is that phones are getting more and more expensive and operators want to keep overall contract prices as low as possible so they look competitive. I believe it was 3 mobile who were the first to bring in 18 month contracts as they could do so incredibly cheaply - they got a huge market share simply because people didn't realise what they were signing up for.

So, on the one hand you could have 12 month contracts but charge people a large amount a month so you cover both subsidy and airtime, or you can have 18-24 month contracts which are cheaper but then the customer has to pay out if they want to upgrade to the latest and greatest phone. Both have their issues and overall the cost is probably the same; the real difference is when you pay it. Personally, I would like to see mobile operators offer all three services so people can choose straight up if they want 12 months (high price, low lock-in), 18 months (medium price, medium lock-in), or 24 months (low price, high lock-in). That would avert this whole discussion on upgrading to new phone models!


So there you have it - O2 haven't done anything wrong, they are simply doing the same as every other provider has done since they were created. We can shout all we like but they won't back down on this issue as it doesn't make any financial sense for them to do so. If you are desperate for the iPhone 3GS, then you'll just have to pay for it or wait it out a bit longer.

Now, if I've convinced you to stop petitioning O2 about iPhone 3GS upgrades, perhaps I can convince you instead to spend your time petitioning them about their ridiculous Internet Tethering charges as that is a fight I believe can be won - £15 for 3GB of transfer is far, far too much and I can't see any justification for it! So, give up the 3GS battle and instead shout about the tethering charges :)

« Older Entries Newer Entries »