This is an updated article. It previously did not include note that the move has been ‘faked’.

As reported by Macworld and others, The Pirate Bay has claimed it has moved to North Korea. The company’s press release states:

A week ago we could reveal that The Pirate Bay was accessed via Norway and Catalonya. The move was to ensure that these countries and regions will get attention to the issues at hand. Today we can reveal that we have been invited by the leader of the republic of Korea, to fight our battles from their network.

This is truly an ironic situation. We have been fighting for a free world, and our opponents are mostly huge corporations from the United States of America, a place where freedom and freedom of speech is said to be held high. At the same time, companies from that country is chasing a competitor from other countries, bribing police and lawmakers, threatening political parties and physically hunting people from our crew. And to our help comes a government famous in our part of the world for locking people up for their thoughts and forbidding access to information.

I’m not sure irony is the right word here. What the press release does showcase is The Pirate Bay’s ethics—or lack thereof. Sure, it’s crap that the media industry is playing hardball all of the time, but it’s also naïve to suggest The Pirate Bay is mostly used for anything other than spreading copies of copyrighted films, television, music and games. But this battle does not justify talking of moving the entire operation to a country with dire human rights records and practically zero freedoms and tolerance.

It’s a country opening up and one thing is sure, they do not care about threats like others do.

No, because those internally who make threats tend to end up here.

When someone is reaching out to make things better, it’s also ones duty to grab their hand.

You get the feeling if Stalin was still alive, The Pirate Bay would have talked of taking his hand, too, had he offered a chunk of bandwidth and some lovely terms for spreading films and TV on the internet. Still, what do human rights abuses, civil liberties, persecution and freedom of expression matter? What’s really important is ensuring people still have rapid and free access to the latest Game of Thrones, regardless of which network is enabling that.

(As it happens, it looks like The Pirate Bay is talking crap, but even the justification in its PR leaves a sour taste.)

I’ve had a bunch of people alert me to Stuart Campbell’s latest gaming piece, When games aren’t expensive enough. He presents a counterpoint to the negative reaction regarding Real Racing 3’s business model, which has irked many gamers.

That app is the latest in the well-regarded (although, in my opinion, somewhat dull) mobile ‘simulator’ racing series. Instead of being sold at a premium price point, it’s gone freemium. The app throws up relatively arbitrary doorslams, which you can get past by throwing money at the game. Reviews have so far been decidedly mixed, with Eurogamer being the most scathing.

Even broadly positive Real Racing 3 reviews (such as TouchArcade’s) grumble about the freemium structure, and so it’s surprising that Campbell argues of EA’s decision:

[It], contrary to what you might think, is a good thing.

His argument, though, doesn’t make a great deal of sense to me. He rightly notes EA’s financial model is essentially designed around gouging and that Real Racing 3 will make a lot of money. But the conclusion is flawed:

their existence is mana from Heaven for the rest of us, because they provide the long-term means by which the price of games can finally come down, at the sole expense of stupid people. By having braying cheats with too much money contribute most of the funding for big-budget “free-to-play” games, the likes of EA secure the funding which lets them make normal games cheaply.

The mistake is in thinking EA has any intention of continuing with making normal games, when the company’s CFO has explicitly stated all future EA games will feature microtransactions. Even the likes of Tetris aren’t safe. A year ago, I wrote about the new iOS Tetris and how it was wrecked by microtransactions, and the upcoming Tetris Blitz appears to be far more heavily in the freemium space. When these games make money, why will EA ‘risk’ making any ‘normal’ games that are released for a fixed price and that lack gouging? And when iOS device owners regularly baulk at a new game costing a few quid, why will other companies risk not following suit? Why wouldn’t they instead gradually chip away at gaming’s soul and replace the bits that fall off with components from a cynical, hateful business model?

Cambell argues:

[Every] penny they’ll happily hand over is a penny that the rest of us don’t have to pay in order to keep a stream of videogames that cost less than a bar of chocolate coming our way until the end of time. […]

So hurray for Real Racing 3. It’s a shit game that sucks money out of dimwits and to all intents and purposes gives it to you and me, so that we can spend it on vastly more enjoyable ones that cost literally pennies. Why would you be upset about that?

But in reality, we’ll just end up with loads of crappy games and nothing to spend money on, because everyone will be obsessed with gouge-oriented freemium garbage that’s a business model first and barely a game second.

A design exploration by Peter Zigich has been doing the rounds on tech blogs, exploring a possible future for the iPhone line. His aims were to improve on the iPhone 5, compete with cheap smartphones and also take on ‘phablets’—a very tall order. However, the ideas Zigich comes up with are often problematic.

His first thought is that the iPhone Home button takes up too much space, and so he repositions it on the side of the device. Presumably realising this causes problems for people who use their device with the hand that would cover the button, he then duplicates it on the other side of the device. From an ergonomic and usability perspective, this often-used button would become, at best, awkward in that position. Also, with Apple devices getting skinnier with each iteration, this design takes a discoverable, satisfyingly clickable, necessary button and makes it much smaller along with placing it in the realm of ‘secondary’ interaction. It’s no longer front-and-centre, but in a place where controls live that only occasionally need to be used. From an engineering perspective, you’re now also complicating matters with two identical buttons and also doubling the risk of failure through what was previously a single set of mechanical components. (On Twitter, @jseths also points out this would cause major problems regarding cases.)

The sole benefit from this change is a larger display, because the space originally taken by the Home button is now freed up. Again, though, this feels wrong from an ergonomic standpoint. I recently wrote about not being convinced by the iPhone 5’s form factor, but turning the area currently occupied by the Home button into a space for very regular interaction would require some spectacular thumb gymnastics. Zigich also complicates matters with ideas such as adding functions that combine the multiple home buttons, such as:

double click left Home button then single click right Home button

On this blog, I still get plenty of traffic for instructions on using AirPlay with the BBC iPlayer app, due to the AirPlay button’s poor discoverability. The thought of double-clicking one button and then single-clicking another is clearly a non-starter.

Zigich then expands the line-up. Along with his revised iPhone 6 (more or less the iPhone 5 minus its home button), he adds the iPhone 6 Mini (an iPhone 6 with two rows of icons hacked off) and an iPhone 6 XL (an iPhone 6 with a display that could accommodate five icons across and seven down, plus the Dock). This looks like a wet dream for anyone who wants the iOS device ecosystem to mirror Android, but some kind of nightmare for developers, who’d suddenly be faced with dealing with more resolutions and screen ratios. From a manufacturing standpoint, this would also be tricky; and from a user perspective, you’d have issues relating to buyer’s doubt and also basic usability with the larger model.

That said, the iPhone 6 Mini has some interesting ideas. The screen Zigich has used is identical to the one in the iPhone 4, it’s very pocketable, and it looks useful for people with small hands. That said, the lack of the existing Home button would, as already noted, be an issue. (My hope for another iPhone in the line-up remains a retooling of the iPhone 4 form factor, for the most part.) The iPhone 6 XL, on the other hand, just looks ridiculous. Zigich calls it “perfect for one-handed use”, although neglects to add “for giants”, and it strikes me as something Apple wouldn’t bother with, unless Cook went nuts and decided to fight for a relatively niche market (say, people who want to do a modern recreation of Dom Joly’s cell phone sketch).

Zigich’s final suggestion is to amend iOS. He complains finding apps on iOS is getting complicated, with the average user having 100–150 apps on their device. I’d personally like to yell “citation needed” at this point, given that I imagine the majority of iPhone users have significantly fewer apps than that. What’s odder, though, is his concept that he says could solve this:

In a few easy clicks users can, narrow the search for the right app on ther phone (even if you have 1000 applications installed). I call this process “Distill”

Maybe I’m going mad, but I’m pretty sure Apple already called that ‘Spotlight’.

Apple is doomed without Steve Jobs and its grip on tablets and smartphones has been weakened as Android sinks its teeth into corporate and consumer markets. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft.

Figures released today show Android’s share of the pie has grown from [SUB: PLEASE INSERT 2011’S PITIFULLY SMALL FIGURE HERE] to a whopping [SUB: PLEASE INSERT 2012’S SLIGHTLY LARGER FIGURE], showing how the iPad is struggling to compete against the robust, flexible, exciting Android ecosystem. [SUB: CHECK WITH ADS—SEE IF WE CAN MAKE OUR SPONSORS LESS OBVIOUS] Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft.

[SUB: ADD SOMETHING HERE ABOUT APPLE IPAD SHARE. TRY TO BURY IT. WE DON’T WANT DICKS LIKE GRUBER FIGURING OUT WHAT WE’RE DOING] Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft. Argle wargle bargle fargle. Blah blah blah blah. Wibble fweee. Burble burble burble pffft.

So, as you can see, 2013 is going to be a very tough year for Apple. It’s hard to see how Tim Cook will see out the year as CEO, and unless Apple reinvigorates a new market by the summer, I predict AAPL will be trading under $5.

I don’t read The Times and it’s been a long time since I messed around with its iOS app, but I heard earlier today that a new version recently appeared and immediately got slammed by just about everyone who used it. And, oh my, the ‘10 tips to help improve performance‘ on the iPad 1 are simply stunning, including the following:

• Turning off “as many options as possible” in iCloud.
• Keeping Location Services “to a minimum”.
• Disabling notifications “for apps that are not essential”.
• Disabling iMessage entirely.
• Turning off multitasking gestures.
• Disabling Spotlight indexing.
• Nuking all existing browser history and website data.

The page cheerfully adds:

If you are experiencing problems, or require further assistance, our customer services team are available to help.

I shudder to think what their next tip would be. Presumably:

• Factory reset your iPad and only install The Times. The Times is all you need. THE TIMES IS YOUR LORD AND MASTER NOW.

Note that I do realise that app development is tough, and supporting older devices isn’t easy, but then the App Store reviews I’ve been reading suggest these problems aren’t in fact isolated to the iPad 1, which suggests a much bigger problem. More importantly, the big reason to use a digital newspaper is convenience, but if you have to hobble your device in order to get it to work, you may as well just revert to paper.