The Turtle Speaks

MacWorld opines about the enhanced features of the iPhone and what that may mean for individual devices. I’ve switched my mind on this one, in no small part to using the iPhone itself. Formerly all-in-one devices had limited appeal to me (such as print/fax/scan options) because they didn’t seem to do any of those things exceptionally well. However the prospect of having one smart phone that replaces a Flip for video, a point-and-shoot for snapshots, a DS/Gameboy/etc for games, a TomTom for GPS and directions, a small tape recorder for memos, and paper copies of invoices/itineraries, etc is quite appealing.

A few thoughts from Apple’s announcements are underwhelming.

NOT EVEN Apple messiah Steve Jobs could be bothered to get out of bed for the fruit-themed company’s announcements at its World Wide Developers Conference yesterday.

Fruit-themed? You mean the company that was named for the Beatle’s record label? I’ve always personally thought that Microsoft sounds like a male-enhancement/impotence clinic. While Jobs may not have been there, a record number of developers were.

Perhaps it was not his hormones playing up but he has developed an allergy to hype and a healthy contempt for the Apple cheerleading press that prints it without question. We can but hope that Steve’s brush with death might have led him to see what is really important.

The fact that he did not show up is telling. All he needed to do was take the stage and sit there. It would have made Apple’s fanbois and shareholders happy. One would think that if there were anything really new, or even something of substance, something Jobs wanted to personally unveil to the Apple faithful and be associated with, then he would have been there.

He didn’t show up at MacWorld in January either. Nor the announcement on the iPhone 3.0 software. Perhaps he’s embarrassed about those? It might be possible that the company is bigger than an ailing CEO.

Nothing in the stories that have been printed so far reveals anything earthshaking. One would think that reporters were covering a Tory party conference, where a leader breaking wind will get a standing ovation.

That’s true. The press didn’t get nearly as excited about Microsoft’s latest phone release or Zune update. They’re taking what people like and making it better. It’s surprising the press showed up at all.

Going by the list, Apple has cut the prices of its Iphones and Macs, bought in a super-fast version of the Iphone OS and gewgawed it up with shedloads more functions. It claims that its Snow Leopard is better than Windows 7 will ever be and therefore Apple Mac OS X users should go home and prepare for the pastel company’s imminent takeover of the entire computer market.

But lets look closer at what has happened. Apple has dropped the price of its Iphone to $99. However the price cut only applies if you are signed up to AT&T’s two year contract. This means that if you bought it, say only six months ago, then you will be royally annoyed.

This is called a subsidy. You get the phone for 1/2 price in exchange for a built-in repayment over the life of the 2-year contract. If you haven’t paid off your 2008 Sedan, you can’t be upset when the dealership won’t give you the new model at sticker price.

Apple isn’t trying to take over the computer market. Their price point and product range suggest that. Anyone who worked with a PC and a Mac in the 80’s would wonder if Macs did take over the market, at least in interface, UI, and interaction. But that’s another debate.

Besides, we reckon that few punters will want the $99 phone. Most of them will pay for the new Iphone 3GS model which has double the storage space and better battery life. It will be sold for the same price as the old Iphone.

What you are seeing here is not a price cut, but an outfit releasing a new phone whilst still attempting to flog off its inventory of obsolescent models. The dark satanic rumour mill says that Apple will not actually pay much for price reductions on the old Iphones but instead will saddle its US telco partner AT&T with the bill.

And what of this new Iphone 3GS? Apple says that the S stands for “speed” yet everyone knows that speed on a phone has more often to do with the network connection. The only way Apple is actually going to get any real speed increase is if it dumps AT&T, which is something it cannot easily and will not want to do.

Is Apple selling off old inventory? Sure. Do they have more inventory because people were anticipating a new iPhone? Definitely. Will they sell anyways? No doubt. Why wouldn’t a lower-cost phone be appealing? This is, after all, the same iPhone that has had appeal with the lower-income market already: The most significant nugget to take away from comScore’s study, called All about iPhone, is that the iPhone has seen a very high rate of adoption among households with lower rates of disposable incomes. Since June 2008, iPhone adoption has risen 48 percent among those earning $25,000 to $50,000 per year, and 46 percent among those making $25,000 to $75,000 per year. These growth rates are three times the rates of households that make more than $100,000 per year. (artstechnica). Besides, some of these users may end up buying a 3GS, lured into the store by the $99 model. And the network the 3GS runs on has twice the data rate. It may not be Sprint/Verizon, but it is faster.

And what of the new features on the Iphone 3GS? Well, there is a slight problem with most of these - they will not work on AT&T’s network.

Most of them? Like the compass? Video camera? New camera features? Voice recognition? 7.2 3G network? Increased storage space, speed, and memory?

Technology like tethering is not on AT&T’s agenda, MMS which has been around for donkey’s years might be around later this summer. If you queue for your new 3GS you will not be able to send videos using the new 3GS technology.

You can send videos using the web, which is the more likely scenario anyway. AT&T is going to support these features later this summer. Is tethering going to cost an arm and a leg as it does with AT&T’s BlackBerry plans? Probably so. Does AT&T look bad, and, by extension, Apple to its US customers? Sure. Can they do anything about it? Not yet.

Not Apple’s fault? Yes it is. It locks in its users to oppressive contracts with suppliers who can’t really support it. Apple’s insistance [sic] that it must control every aspect of supply is entirely Apple’s fault.

Suppliers who can’t support it? Like the 20+ worldwide carriers who will support it? AT&T isn’t looking good here, but their issues aren’t Apples. Anyone watching the keynote saw the obvious jabs at AT&T. Apple made a poor choice, but has no choice until next year. Any they’re applying pressure.

Now to these price cuts. It generally looks as if they will be about $300 off a 15-inch Macbook and $100 off a lower price 13-inch unibody model. The Macbook Air dropped to $1,500. Trivial price cuts like these in the middle of a recession are not really going to do anyone any good.

Apple’s sales haven’t been hurting yet (one example). Stock doing ok this year, and not bad overall since recession. Should they take significant profit cuts because of the economy? They’ve never been for the budget-conscious, but it just might be worth it. Drastically decreased in-house repairs on our 2,000+ Macs compared to 8 years of data with IBM and Dell laptops.

Anyone who can afford $1,700 for a top of the range Macbook is still going to be a high-end market buyer and while the Air looks jolly nice it is still too expensive for what you get. Most people are going to be buying at the lower end of the market and they will probably walk away from just $100 worth of savings. That is nothing in today’s market and hardly qualify as the “drastic cuts” reported by Fox News.

Several hundred dollars of cuts are drastic. Whether the product is appropriately priced is another question.

Of course Apple and its tame press called this aggressive pricing. Most people would call it a token cut in the face of an overwhelmingly bad economic outlook.

Again, not concerned about that. Perhaps Apple should start selling $399 netbooks that people can afford and aren’t profitable. Maybe they should give their next laptops away, especially to the unemployed.

Likewise the claim that Apple was showing “no mercy” with its low price tag for Snow Leopard. Leopard users will only have to pay $30 for the upgrade.

This is good news given the price tag that Vista users will have to pay for their upgrade to Windows 7. But Snow Leopard offers few new features for most Apple users. The new version is being released mostly to cover up for the spotty performance Leopard brought on for its users - much like Windows 7 is to Vista. Most of the ‘improvements’ Snow Leopard is offering would be done for free by a Windows service pack.

Snow Leopard doesn’t claim to have any new features, except being re-tooled from the ground up, free Exchange support, 1/2 the disk footprint, increased 64-bit support, and performance enhancements. It’s also the 7th significant OS release in the last 9 years. And spotty performance? Evidence? More Mac users are running and are happy with Leopard than any prior release of the OS. Are there yet more Vista users than XP?

Perhaps Apple should call Snow Leopard Leopard SP1 and offer it in Home, Professional, Small Business, Medium Business, Self-employed, Corporate, and Ultimate editions. (My wife bought a copy of 7-year-old XP Home for $199 18 months ago after Vista came out. We could have bought a 5-pack for 6 month old Leopard for the same price.)

Apple chunked out its usual snide comment about Windows 7. It said that Windows 7 was just another version of Vista. One of the things about insulting people is you often reveal your own weaknesses, it’s called projection. Most people also recognize that Snow Leopard is just another version of Leopard, too.

Yep, there were a few snide remarks. Apple said several times Snow Leopard is not a new cat, but a better leopard. It’s not something people recognize, it’s Apple choosing to optimize for this OS release rather than create.

So why didn’t Jobs show up? He is supposed to be going back to work in about a week so he should have been there. Perhaps there was nothing going to be announced that he was proud of.

Why didn’t Jobs show up? Does he need to? Isn’t he still on medical leave? To prove the company/demos can be successful without him? What would he want announced to be proud of? If he’s embarrassed, he should just take his billions and go home. He’s coming back to the company, though, perhaps not ever to give a keynote again.

but the blog is back and alive. More info soon.

for this contribution to YouTube with some guy named Don singing in the background.

I think it’s timely and well done. You may have to watch it more than once to catch the subtleties.

I’m back in Canada at Nueltin with my father-in-law. Good Times™

For the interested, there are some Facebook photos.

How was N.T. Wright on the Colbert Report last week and I didn’t watch?

Definitely want to read the book…

I received the call tonight at 6:36. Moments early, my dad explained, Judy had passed away.

My aunt was, to say the least, a unique woman. Her fashion was, at best, her own. Mismatched earrings my uncle, the roadie, had found after concerts paired with a slightly over-sized black shirt and jeans. And that long hair.

I can remember, as a child, sitting in the living room of my Grannie’s house in Plano, at Christmas, brushing Judy’s hair.

I remember how she thought my favorite color should be purple because I looked good in purple. And how, when I was a child, she gave me a doll dressed in a satin-like purple dress. She was so proud to have found a doll decked out in my favorite color.

I remember how she called me, darlin’. And honey.

I remember how she came up for my wedding because she had promised me years before that she would be there.

I remember that she would remind me how I was born on her anniversary. She would tell me how people said she and my uncle would never make it and how every year they proved them wrong again.

And I remember when my senior year boyfriend broke up with me that she told me the most important thing in life is to hold your head up high like a lady and take pride in yourself.

She always believed in me.

Judy passed away tonight after a five year battle with cancer. And though a fighter to the last, my mom described the amazing peace that entered her Dallas hospital room- as her breaths become quieter … stilling … slowly… to all but a whisper … until they were gone. Then peace.

Her life wasn’t easy, but it was full of joy and faithfulness and spunk. And she will, in so many ways, be missed.

On my recent trip to Israel I wanted to buy a local souvenir to remind me of my trip and integrate with my faith. Among the gems hidden among the tourist traps were several antiquity shops. Some people purchased Widow’s Mites or Denarius or other such items (I purchased a bronze Roman ring that I lost when we moved a few months ago). I wanted something different. When I saw a coin from the second year (AD 133) of the Bar Kochba revolt, I knew that was the souvenir I wanted.

Who was bar Kochba and why did he revolt? Glad you asked. Simeon ben-Kosiba, renamed Simeon bar Kochba (’son of a star’ which is a Messianic allusion from Numbers), was a Jewish revolutionary. He was proclaimed by many as the Messiah and the populace rallied around him as they prepared to throw off pagan powers. In 132, new coins were minted with the year 1 on them, signifying the beginning of the new nation under the man who would would, in the tradition of the Maccabees, bring about God’s deliverance.

The revolt shook the Roman Empire to its core. Recent archaeological evidence shows how much the Jews rallied behind their leader and how the Romans initially faced some difficulty. After gathering themselves, the Romans crushed the Jews (hundreds of thousands were supposedly killed) in 135. Survivors were exiled from Jerusalem as it was rebuilt as a pagan city.

Why is this important, beyond the historical interest? Because it is the story of a man who was hailed as a Messiah, had a three-year reign, was killed by the Romans, and the movement died, never to be revived. One hundred years earlier another less-popular man had a similar mission, with a few modifications, and today his followers number in the billions. What’s the difference? The claims in what happened after they died.

I have the Bar Kochba coin to remind me, in contrast with the results of his rebellion, of the transformative power of the resurrection of Jesus and the billions that, after his death, claim him as their Lord. With Jesus, no one took up arms (save one or two misguided apostles), no one minted coins signifying rule, and no one lost their life in battle. Instead, people have put down their arms, given their coins and possessions to Caesar and the poor, and lost their lives in service to others.

As usual, a few quotes from N. T. Wright say it better that I could (emphasis mine):

In particular, we have no reason to suppose that after the crucifixion of a would-be messiah anyone would suppose that he had been exalted to a place either of world rulership or divine lordship. Nobody, so far as we know, ever suggested that this was the case after the deaths of Judas the Galilean, Simon bar-Giora, or Simeon ben-Kosiba. Actually, such a suggestion would most likely have been regarded as at best ridiculous and at worst scandalous. The failure of such men to lead a successful messianic movement debarred them from further consideration as candidates for such a position. Even if someone had made such a suggestion, however, they would not then have gone on to say that this person had been “raised from the dead.” Belief in exaltation alone would not lead, in the world of first-century Judaism, to belief in resurrection. If, by contrast, we suppose that the followers of a crucified would-be messiah first came to believe that he had been bodily raised from the dead, then we can trace a clear line by which they subsequently would have come to believe that he must be the Messiah. And if he was the Messiah, then he was also the world ruler promised in Psalm 89 and Daniel 7, and thus he was exalted over the world, and so on. All our texts suggest that this actually was the train of thought that the early Christians followed.

And again, challenging those who deny the literal physical resurrection of Jesus in favor of a metaphorical sense:

Once again, let us be clear. If, after the death of Simon bar-Giora in Titus’ triumph in Rome, or if, after the death of Simeon ben-Kosiba in 135, you had claimed that Simon, or Simeon, really was the Messiah, you would invite a fairly sharp response from the average first-century Jew. If, by way of explanation, you said that you had had a strong sense of Simon, or Simeon, as still being with you, still supporting and leading you, the kindest response you might expect would be that their angel or spirit was still communicating with you—not that he had been raised from the dead. So far as we know, the followers of the first-century messianic or quasi-messianic movements were fanatically committed to the cause. They, if anybody, might be expected to suffer from cognitive dissonance after the death of their great leader. In no other case, however, right across the century before Jesus and the century after him, do we hear of any Jewish group saying that their executed leader had been raised again from the dead.

The very fact that they are Christians today shows early on people were convinced God had worked mightily and powerfully through him and that he is the ruler of the world. That’s what I want to remember, and I’m glad I have the coin as a physical reminder.

To the person who came to this blog asking “should anyways be used in a sentence?” I hope you found your answer.

(It’s “no,” if you didn’t).

Coffee. It tastes ok. It’s perky. It carries a certain atmosphere about it. It also goes great with pie.

Now the BBC comes out and says that “daily caffeine ‘protects brain.’” Quotage:

Coffee may cut the risk of dementia by blocking the damage cholesterol can inflict on the body, research suggests. The drink has already been linked to a lower risk of Alzheimer’s Disease, and a study by a US team for the Journal of Neuroinflammation may explain why.

UK experts said it was the “best evidence yet” of coffee’s benefits.

“This is the best evidence yet that caffeine equivalent to one cup of coffee a day can help protect the brain against cholesterol.

Since my painful break-up, coffee has been a good friend. She continues to impress. She asks so little, but gives so much.