Much has been said about Apple’s attempts to weld bits of iOS to OS X. Generally, I’d argue that system-wide functionality like autosave is a boon to the desktop, but the iOS-like launcher called Launchpad is just awful. Still, despite nods to iOS, it’s pretty clear Apple still has two operating systems. They are distinct and separate and apps are designed for each, even if they share a name. For example, Numbers exists for Mac and iOS, but the spreadsheet app is hugely tailored for each environment.

Now take a look at PC Pro’s Windows 8 gallery. If you had no idea about Microsoft’s plans for Windows 8, you’d be forgiven for thinking it’s a gallery of two different operating systems—and that’s because it sort of is. Microsoft has smashed its lovely mobile UI into Windows with a brick. The net result is a touch system that will in many cases reveal ‘standard Windows’ underneath. Microsoft argues this is about choice, providing people with the ‘power’ of Windows on tablets, but also a touch UI. It argues it’s a no-compromise approach. I say it’s the result of a company that didn’t have the balls to bet the farm on something truly new, unique and suitable for the future of computing.

Apple got things right with iOS, even if it took a while. Amazingly, Microsoft’s Windows Phone team then not only created something that didn’t rip off iOS, but also sometimes bettered it. But once again a lack of vision and a desire to ‘respect’ legacy is holding Redmond back. What a pity.

Mark Bernstein writes that there are always problems. He thinks the Mac and tech press is trying to drum up traffic by running articles critical of Lion. But he thinks the operating system isn’t to blame, and other factors cloud people’s judgment.

Whenever an operating system ships, everybody always runs around in circles to complain about it. Operating systems are big. They interact with everything. And they’re new, so they are a blame magnet. If you have an application bug, people will blame the operating system. If their disk is wearing out, odds are the operating system installation will push it over the edge and they’ll blame the operating system. If their network is wonky, what sort-of worked before might not work how – or might still sort-of work – and either way, some of them will blame the operating system.

And he also blames the press:

I blame a corrupt trade press. The way you get attention and make money – not much money – in this game is to start flame wars, and so “Apple ships lousy operating system! Scroll bars backwards! Apple doomed!” gets links and traffic and sells ads for off-brand iPad cases. And of course some of the financial press try to launch memes to manipulate stock prices – either because they play the market or simply to show what big lever-pullers they are.

I have some sympathy with that viewpoint; too many tech blogs are clamouring for hits rather than offering quality writing, and much of this comes from Apple rumours and anti-Apple sentiment. But there’s a nugget of truth in the Lion blame game. I cannot remember an Apple OS so buggy since the very early days of Mac OS X. I’ve certainly had way more problems in OS X Lion than in Snow Leopard, Leopard and Tiger. Apps crash far more regularly (mostly those that utilise the new auto-save feature), my Wi-Fi network that was fine under Snow Leopard absolutely refused to work using the same settings under Lion, and I’ve seen a ton of interface glitches, most notably with Save dialogs randomly getting really messed up and printing buttons and menus in the wrong place.

Of course, as Bernstein states, other factors could be at play here. For the first time, I installed a new OS over an old one, so perhaps there are clashes; although in my defence, this is how Apple wants people to install Lion by default. Perhaps my Wi-Fi network was screwy anyway, and Lion merely finally broke it. But I’m seeing too many issues, too many bugs, to suggest this is anything more than an OS that doesn’t have quite the same level of care that Apple usually enforces. None of the bugs have stopped me from using Lion and I certainly don’t plan to revert. But when TextEdit and Numbers crash for the nth time—despite neither app having crashed even once during my using them with Snow Leopard—that sets off alarm bells about the state of the system itself, rather than the state of tech journalism.

Hat tip: Daring Fireball.

Back in May, I wrote a quickfire review of sorts of the iCADE, a little arcade cabinet for the iPad. Around the same time, I also turned down two commissions to review the hardware for British magazines, primarily because I believed at the time that the hardware wasn’t reviewable in the traditional sense—the lack of support by third parties meant it was impossible to rate. The hardware was solid, but the only game at the time you could use with it was the mediocre Atari’s Greatest Hits; making that car crash about 20 per cent better certainly wasn’t worth a 75 quid investment, and yet it seemed wrong to massively downrate great new hardware due to poor support.

iCADE support has since grown, albeit slowly. But it was interesting that when I recently interviewed a bunch of major publishers involved in retro-gaming, they remained utterly tight-lipped about iCADE plans. To my mind, it would make perfect sense for Taito, Namco, Capcom and others to support the hardware, but what we’ve instead seen is a handful of indie developers quietly adding iCADE support to their apps. I no longer have an iCADE to hand, but I imagine that mini cabinet with Mos Speedrun or Minotron is probably a great pairing.

What’s most curious, however, is the lack of support from majors might be down to them working on their own systems. TouchArcade last week reported on Atari’s own stick, which strikes me as an odd idea—it’s portrait only (many of Atari’s games aren’t, nor are many of the apps that support iCADE), and a good chunk of the games in Atari’s compilation weren’t originally designed for joystick control, which is part of the reason they never really clicked for me with the iCADE. And earlier today, developer Stuart Carnie linked through to the iNVADERCADE, which looks like a tiny arcade cabinet for playing Taito’s rather poor iPad version of Space Invaders (which scales up the iPhone release in a lazy manner). It’s unclear from the video on the site whether other games will be supported, but even so, as developer Paul Pridham asked:

Is the iPad controller market that lucrative?

I doubt it is, and I very much agree with Carnie’s reply:

I would think one general purpose controller would be ideal. There is no standard SDK by Apple = fragmentation

I’m not really convinced at all by the need for physical controls for iOS games, because the best developers have gotten past that limitation, but I can see there’s a certain niche appeal regarding a ‘traditional’ controller, especially one as cute as the iCADE. What I don’t understand is individual developers releasing ones for their own games, fragmenting an already tiny market, rather than seeking to support a product that already exists and is already generally liked by those who’ve used it. I’d quite like an iCADE, especially if more games supported it; but the last thing I need on my desk is a little row of iPad games controllers, each one only working with a tiny number of titles.

The BBC reports that the EU has decided to extend music copyright to 70 years. However, I feel the article needs some helpful translation work.

Musicians are set [to] receive royalties for their songs well into their old age under a new EU ruling.

“Record labels are set to make even more money from dead and very aged popular musicians, under a new EU ruling, which doesn’t actually help most musicians.”

Regulations approved on Monday extended copyright on sound recordings from 50 to 70 years.

“Cliff Richard’s earliest songs had started to enter the public domain, which would have reduced his royalty cheques by a little bit, and this would have been a disaster for the 250-million-records-sold musician.”

According to those backing the law, the copyright extension is all about creating an ‘incentive for authors’, and I’m sure Cliff and others in their 70s will now feel a huge incentive to make more music and be more creative. We’ll for a moment ignore all the people who could have done something truly creative with popular songs entering the public domain.

The move has been welcomed by the music industry. Presenter Jools Holland called the ruling “fantastic news”. “Artists put their hearts and souls into creating music and it is only fair that they are recompensed in line with the rest of Europe,” said Holland who also performs and records his own music.

“And who is also getting on a bit, which has nothing to do with his stance on this subject.”

I agree with copyright and patenting in principle. There should certainly be a period during which a creator and their backers reap the rewards of creativity. But there must be balance. In extending copyright beyond the point most creators will live, we’re not encouraging creativity; instead, we’re helping a few very old musicians not lose some royalties from their earliest recordings, but mostly filling the pockets of record labels petrified of losing their investment that’s already been paid for myriad times.

Still, I can’t imagine anyone expected a different outcome, and copyright for popular media will continue to be extended periodically. If you ever think the likes of Mickey Mouse will enter the public domain, I’ve a mouse-shaped bridge to sell you.

I’m pretty sure some analysts spend their days lobbing darts at a dartboard and then applying whatever number they hit to the current piece of analysis, especially when it comes to marketshare. However, it takes a truly special company to consider outlandish reports conservative. And so it goes with Bloomberg’s report:

Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) said its Windows Phone operating system may capture more than 20 percent of the smartphone market over the next two to three years with the help of hardware manufacturers and increased marketing efforts.

So, here we have an analyst firm—Gartner—who thinks Android will lead forever in smartphones, growing from a 23 to 49 per cent share, and that iOS will struggle onwards, growing its share from 16 to 17 per cent. Windows Phone? Naturally, that will skyrocket from 4.2 per cent to 19.5 per cent, blazing past iOS in the process. And yet Microsoft thinks that’s conservative. Presumably by 2020, every single smartphone will run Windows Phone and will directly jack your brain into Steve Ballmer’s PC.

Perhaps I shouldn’t be too quick to judge. People thought Apple didn’t have a chance, and it took a fair chunk of the market. But then Apple did that by innovating and creating a new type of personal computer/smartphone hybrid that took Apple users and everyone else by storm. I fail to see how Microsoft will have such meteoric marketshare rise, even with its Nokia tie-up, when most people either remain infatuated with the iPhone or happy with the cheaper/more expandable Android alternatives. Still, maybe Microsoft knows something I don’t—perhaps Tim Cook in his new CEO role is hastily remaking all iPhone 5 cases out of fish scales.