What is the point in further fragmenting iOS game controllers?

I previously wrote about fragmentation of iOS games controllers, with the GameDock providing a different system from the somewhat popular iCade. Before that, I questioned the sanity in app-specific controllers, because it made no sense that someone would buy a controller for one game or set of games.

Duo had form in this, creating Atari Arcade, an Atari-branded controller specifically for the mediocre Atari’s Greatest Hits, which includes a bunch of arcade games that really only work with their original controllers that weren’t joystick-based. So Atari Arcade is not only more limited than the iCade, but a non-optimal experience with the only games it works with. Great.

Duo’s now announced Duo Gamer and Duo Pinball. Again, these appear to be specific to certain companies—the Gamer ” plays exclusively with top-rated Gameloft apps” and the Duo Pinball? Yup: “Duo Pinball works exclusively with the games from Gameprom listed on the website”. What’s most baffling about this isn’t that Duo has started from this position (iCade, remember, initially only worked with Atari’s compilation), but that the website FAQs appear to suggest it wishes to remain there:

I’m a developer; can I use the Duo Gamer for my game?
No, the Duo Gamer works exclusively with Gameloft games. If you’re interested in using a controller for your games please email controllerdev@discoverybaygames.com.

I’m a developer; can I use the Duo Pinball for my game?
No, the Duo Pinball works exclusively with Gameprom games. If you’re interested in using a controller for your games please email controllerdev@discoverybaygames.com.

So the aim appears to be “we will design a controller specifically for your games, rather than adding value to our existing products”. Perhaps I’m missing something, but this seems like a perfect way to send your hardware rapidly to the bargain bins, once people realise quite how limited it is. Still, perhaps the press will help out. After all, while not being thrilled with the Duo Pinball itself, Slide to Play said in its review:

Duo Pinball controller works with games from just one company, Gameprom, the makers of the best pinball games on the App Store

Well, I guess Pinball Arcade and Zen Pinball must be figments of my imagination. Lucky me.

October 3, 2012. Read more in: iOS gaming

1 Comment

Apple bangs the stupid drum regarding apps that promote other apps

Oh, Apple. Every time I think you’ve got your shit together regarding the App Store and not being jerks regarding blocking apps that supposedly ‘confuse’ users, you start being jerks. As reported by TechCrunch, your latest guidelines are worthy of a headdesk:

Apps that display Apps other than your own for purchase or promotion in a manner similar to or confusing with the App Store will be rejected.

Note that this isn’t stopping people advertising apps within their own apps in the annoying way that pisses off users (like those wonderful splash screens for an entirely different app when you launch an app), but instead potentially stopping people providing apps that curate the App Store, in a way that’s actually useful to users.

Recent changes to the App Store have improved things a little on iOS devices, at least in terms of navigation. But Apple still relies heavily on charts (i.e. what’s popular rather than what’s actually worth buying), and those reviews that do lurk within app pages have about as much collective worth as the mutant offspring of Amazon product reviews and YouTube comments.

To be fair, Apple does at least attempt curation itself. Beyond the charts, there are new & noteworthy sections, along with app- and genre-specific collections that might help someone look further afield. But these are often arbitrary (it boggles the mind, for example, that no Llamasoft game has ever been displayed within one of Apple’s retrogaming collections) and, of course, they don’t have the value of third-party objectivity. It’s the equivalent of a music store providing their selection of what is worth buying, rather than a music review site, magazine or app doing the same.

It remains to be seen which apps will be effectively banned by Apple due to this rule, or whether, as AppGratis CEO Simon Dawlat optimistically opines, Apple will just shoot low-end copycats (PocketGamer.biz). But if Apple does simply tear down a sub-section of apps, those that assist users in buying great apps, and those that often drive traffic to indies, that won’t benefit App Store users, nor, in the long run, will it really benefit Apple.

Further reading: Who controls the App store? by Xiotex Studios.

October 2, 2012. Read more in: Apple

1 Comment

Tim Cook’s apology for Maps is nuanced and smart

Apple CEO Tim Cook has apologised for Maps. The response to his letter has been varied. Some have said Jobs would never have apologised (they’re wrong), and my Twitter feed was full of people claiming Cook wasn’t really apologising, or that he should have done something more.

I’d say anyone expecting some kind of grovelling apology combined with no positive spin whatsoever is being naïve, not only from an expectation standpoint regarding what Apple should or would do, but from what any company would do. What we got from Cook was instead a mostly unambiguous statement and apology, with a little added reasoning, and something that I consider a major surprise that few rival corporations would do.

At Apple, we strive to make world-class products that deliver the best experience possible to our customers. With the launch of our new Maps last week, we fell short on this commitment. We are extremely sorry for the frustration this has caused our customers and we are doing everything we can to make Maps better.

The main apology. Right to the point, and admitting Apple fell short of the quality you’d expect. This is beyond what many companies would bother with.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

More or less the “Google wouldn’t give us…” bit, but it outlines and confirms Apple’s reasoning. Fair enough, but I’ll bet Eric Schmidt wasn’t happy with this.

There are already more than 100 million iOS devices using the new Apple Maps, with more and more joining us every day. In just over a week, iOS users with the new Maps have already searched for nearly half a billion locations. The more our customers use our Maps the better it will get and we greatly appreciate all of the feedback we have received from you.

Outlining the fact not everyone thinks Maps is a disaster. From what I’m hearing, the experience isn’t globally awful, just massively inconsistent. So: a bit of positive spin, which you’d expect. What I’d never have expected is this:

While we’re improving Maps, you can try alternatives by downloading map apps from the App Store like Bing, MapQuest and Waze, or use Google or Nokia maps by going to their websites and creating an icon on your home screen to their web app.

Reread that paragraph. There’s Cook, in a public letter, providing information about five rivals. I cannot think of anything similar from other tech giants. (If you can, let me know in the comments.) On Twitter, a couple of people noted Waze is one of the companies providing Apple with data, but I don’t think that’s really relevant. Apple’s essentially saying that if Maps is screwing up your experience, try an alternative. Of course, this in itself is nuanced: “Our platform has such richness that if you don’t like our solution, you can try another.”

One thought: had Google actually had its own Maps app ready at this point, would it have been included in this statement that’s now big news worldwide?

Everything we do at Apple is aimed at making our products the best in the world. We know that you expect that from us, and we will keep working non-stop until Maps lives up to the same incredibly high standard.

Here’s hoping, but I feel a little more optimistic about Maps now. Time will tell if Apple can deliver on this promise

September 28, 2012. Read more in: Apple

4 Comments

Finding your way in iOS 5 Street View and iOS 6 Maps Flyover, with pictures!

I’ve twice written about iOS 6 Maps. Many people are finding them substandard, something Apple must now be very aware of; perhaps some people at the company even regret essentially saying on stage they were the best maps ever, versus showing a little humility, like the company did with Siri. (Jean-Louis Gassée has a great take on this in his most recent Monday Note.)

My thinking to date on all this has been to cut Apple a little slack, but only in the sense of Apple getting its shit together within the next few months. Maps are hard and they take time to improve, but certain things should be possible to update very quickly, if Apple throws enough people and money at the problem. For example, the UK’s regularly dreadful satellite photography surely isn’t an insurmountable problem that would take years to fix; similarly, cleaning up databases when it comes to POIs; also, sorting out whatever idiot algorithm determines priorities when your directions include a single name. (An oft-used example in the UK: directions to Luton helpfully sending you to Luton in Devon, a town that’s so prominent and important that it gets a two-line write-up in Wikipedia. For reasons unknown, Apple’s new Maps app doesn’t default to Luton in Bedforshire, a town with a population of 255,000, and and also home to an international airport that just a few people might need directions to.)

Shortly after Maps was released, I said we should maybe give it time, but Ian Betteridge argued that would be akin to the grading on a curve that Android often gets away with. He elaborated on his blog:

I’ve seen a few comments out there to the effect that actually people should remember this is the first release, that mapping is hard, that it’s not their fault Google wouldn’t give them maps, and therefore Apple should be cut some slack. To my mind, this is nonsense. It’s effectively grading Apple on a curve, giving them a pass to create something sub-standard because doing good maps is really tough.

His point was the customer doesn’t care about behind-the-scenes problems and Apple ultimately has no excuse for making the experience worse. At the time, I somewhat disagreed with the no-slack argument, but I’m now coming round to it, largely because some pundits and writers appear to have a level of cognitive dissonance that boggles the mind. The latest thing I’m seeing is that, hey, we don’t need Street View in iOS anyway. Why? Because we’ve got Flyover, which is much better.

This is clearly a ‘better’ I’m not familiar with. Flyover is without doubt fun. You can scoot about major cities, spin the map in 3D, and laugh when it all goes a bit wrong. Thing is, Street View wasn’t a gimmick—it was practical. You could use it to plan routes and check landmarks, making walking to or driving to a location easier. Maps are all about planning and directions, and Google Maps succeeds at both.

I decided to pluck a location at random, Forbidden Planet‘s Shaftesbury Avenue store in London. This, I figured, would be a fair test of the two systems, given that I already knew iOS 6 Maps had Flyover data for London. (Had I chosen my own home town, the test would have been a tad one-sided. There’s not—nor I imagine will there ever be—Flyover here. But at the time of writing, there also aren’t any remotely usable satellite maps—it appears to zoom in from a shot that’s not even detailed enough to show a nearby motorway.)

So, first up: Google Maps. My iPod’s still on iOS 5, and so I typed ‘179 Shaftesbury Avenue’ into the Maps app and fired up Street View. Helpfully, Google Maps immediately put me on the wrong street—Compton Street runs parallel to Shaftesbury Avenue. Oops. Google Maps isn’t perfect either.

Street View of Compton Street

I could have used the arrows to navigate around the corner, but I figured it’d be quicker to go back to the map and drop a pin on the road outside of the place I wanted to see. I could then fire up Street View from that location.

Newly Dropped pin in Google Maps

And here’s the view along Shaftesbury Avenue from where the pin was dropped. There’s plenty of detail just from this one shot that would enable me to figure out where I’m going. (Not standing right there in reality would be a good decision, however, unless the plan was to get run over by a taxi.)

View down Shaftesbury Avenue

Spin round and there it is: a little slice of geek heaven, with a handy crossing right next to it. When walking or driving, these visuals are hugely useful.

View towards Forbidden Planet

So, iOS 6. To the app’s credit, it at least got the location right, with more or less the same precision as Google Maps. I tapped Flyover and zoomed in as far as possible. The resulting view would be fine for planning some kind of invasion from the air of a comic-book store, but at this point I’d question its general usefulness.

iOS 6 Maps Flyover shot

Worse, the following image shows what Shaftesbury Avenue looks like. Clearly, the trees confuse Apple’s software, and the result is a street that has buildings with slowly melting roofs that’s infested with Triffids. And unless you own a helicopter and regularly parachute from it to locations in London when shopping, there’s no practicality to be had even if the trees weren’t there. The lack of detail means you simply cannot see landmarks from the point of view you have in a car or when walking.

iOS 6 Maps Flyover shot, showcasing rendering errors

To my mind, Flyover isn’t anywhere near a straight switch for Street View, and the worrying thing is that Apple probably won’t create something like Google’s solution. Right now, Flyover is merely an amusing toy for armchair tourism of select cities. It’s of little or no practical benefit, and it’s of no use whatsoever in finding your way to anywhere remotely obscure (unlike Google Maps, where you can see what a junction to a road in the middle of nowhere looks like, along with any helpfully odd-looking trees in the vicinity). Any pundits somehow suggesting otherwise either don’t use Maps that often for this kind of navigation or really need to share their helicopters with the rest of us.

September 27, 2012. Read more in: Apple, Technology

Comments Off on Finding your way in iOS 5 Street View and iOS 6 Maps Flyover, with pictures!

Instagram loses live filters and also loses mind

The Next Web reports for Instagram that times are a-changing. There are essentially two kinds of app in Instagram’s ‘add a pretty filter’ space:

  • Highly entertaining apps that evoke old-school instant camera charm by live-applying a filter, so you can see what you’re going to get. This is Instagram today.
  • Hum-drum apps where you take a photo in a normal, boring way and then spend several days arsing about with countless filters, before more or less choosing one at random, because the alternative is starving to death with a smartphone in your hand, which would be really dumb. This is Instagram tomorrow.

The m0st astonishing aspect of this story comes from Instagram itself, via the known issues site.

As of the current release (v3.1), Instagram does not support live filters on the iPhone 5. Going forward, live filters will be phased out as we work to improve the Instagram experience for all users.

That last sentence is very important and warrants breaking up into chunks:

as we work to improve the Instagram experience

What? How are you improving the Instagram experience by removing something that is core to the Instagram experience?

for all users.

Oh. So Instagram’s boarded the lowest-common denominator train. Next stop: Shitappsville.

UPDATE: Ha! So, on Twitter the response has been split between “Instagram are idiots” and “I never even knew live filters existed”, so perhaps this is also a case of Instagram stamping on a tricky engineering problem related to a feature not used by enough people for them to think it matters. (That said, Android users have responded, grumbling that they’d really like live filters.) Regardless, it’s still a pity to see an app that’s like a ton of point-and-clicks in your pocket get downgraded to one of a billion apply-a-filter-later apps welded to a social network.

September 26, 2012. Read more in: Design, Technology

4 Comments

« older postsnewer posts »