“It turns out that Mobile Safari doesn’t support as many embeddable font formats as the desktop version, so Google sends an SVG font version to iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches, or anything pretending to be them. And it looks like Google’s SVG fonts contain only ASCII characters, while the other formats have full character sets.”
Derek Miller, “A weird Safari-Google bug”, June 21, 2010

I haven’t encountered anything like this, but I found it to be an interesting interplay of emerging technologies.

It reminds me of the headaches of different database encoding and WordPress.

I missed the news about the Apple-HTC Patent Lawsuit (Google Android) until tonight when I found out about it on Mark Jaquith’s blog.

I’m happy that these cards of Apple are finally on the table. I think Apple’s Multi-touch related patents have been hanging over the heads of other hardware and software developers.

I don’t think I’ve ever found myself agreeing with John Gruber more:

“No doubt some of you are nodding your heads and see this as justification for Apple’s suit. But life isn’t fair. Great ideas make the world better. Apple can rightly expect to benefit greatly from the ideas embodied by the iPhone, but they can’t expect to reap all of the benefits from those ideas.

That’s the nature of implementing insanely great ideas. The bar has been raised, and, yes, Apple did most of the lifting. That’s how it goes.”

John Gruber, “Daring Fireball: This Apple-HTC Patent Thing“, Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010

Right now people are in their venting phase. What comes next?

Is there an effective protest against the Apple-HTC patent lawsuit? Particularly something that Apple customers should do?

I can’t see enough people caring, particularly on the eve of the iPad.

May 5th quotes from the comments:

Ian wrote “I think Apple customers should use one finger at a time in protest.”

Mark wrote “Apple has to operate in the system as it exists.”

Terry — how can I just choose one of his tasty insights — wrote “I do think that holders of software patents should be forced to do some sort of licensing because of the chilling effect they’re having on innovation.”

“The easy single-handed operation of the iPhone [] is not one of its obvious selling points but is one of those little features that grows on you and becomes nearly indispensable. A portable networked computing and gaming device that can be easily operated with one hand can be used in a surprising variety of situations.”

By Spitzgogo_CHEN. Titled "Niece & My Nokia 6230i (by Nikon D70)". CC by-nc. Flickr Hosted.

Jason goes on to describe some of the activities you can do at the same time as using iPhone applications, and the advantages one hand operation has — go read it and come right back.

The article reminds me of a concept that mobile computing buffs Boris Mann and Roland Tanglao suggested to me a few years ago, which really clicked for me.

You hold a phone with one hand.

Seems wicked obvious doesn’t it! It’s sorta what Jason is talking about though. If you use old school phones and dumb mobile phones with one hand, wouldn’t a “smartphone” need to be usable one-handed (or less)?

If I recall, at the time Boris and Roland were educating me about the death of PDAs and stylus based “smart phones”, but it’s just is relevant to the current generation of devices, particularly as Jason describes, these smartphones taking on more roles — camera, gaming, etc.

It doesn’t seem Boris, Roland and my discussions translated into online artifacts, but I did find one silly comment I made early 2007 , “One hand holding and navigation will be interesting, but it is important that it does it well, because I read somewhere that defines a smart phone ”. The iPhone does it well.

I’ve always gotten a kick out out of see people go from talking on a SideKick to typing with a flick of a wrist, or sidetalking Nokia N-Gage style, but why haven’t these hip tools caught on?

Should we be surprised that easy one handed operation feels good?

I suspect cognitive processes and social norms particularly in public settings play big roles:

• You use a phone with one hand and you always have.
• There is a casualness to using a phone.
• You often don’t give it your full attention.
• You need a hand free to interact with your environment.
• You require alertness in a public setting. One hand free in case a predator strikes.

• It’s embarrassing to give a device your full attention, particularly  in a public setting. Particularly if you are an adult playing a game or otherwise not being productive.
• It’s rude to not pay attention to the people around you.
• We are social creatures.

It seems to me that it’s only natural.

"Sync Alert" Adding 1 Contact with iPhone OS 3.0 with Mac iTunes 8.2.1 (6)

Makes me laugh and cry a little.

This alert is likely meant to warn that a whole lot of data is being added, modified or deleted as part of a sync. It’s an “oh crap, likely either you are doing some wrong or the software is”.

I’m intrigued that UI Expert Aza Raskin (Humanized & Mozilla Lab) finds this alert the “The first good use of a warning I’ve seen!”

I’m not confident that it is generally helpful. Reading online, it does seem that Mac Sync has been quite buggy historically, so this would likely have been very helpful, but does make me nervous that this alert is a bandaid instead of the needed medicine. I would be interested to find out the use cases, and the scenarios where this has been needed.

Synchronization of data between two (or more) sources is a really hard problem. Well the hard problem is mostly related to conflicts when something is changed in two or more places. Daniel Jalkut once wrote, ‘Every developer faces the decision: “Do I want to be known as the jerk who won’t implement sync, or the jerk who can’t.”‘

I’m not actually syncing, because I don’t use Notes on the Mac (does it exist?). It’s really just doing a backup.

In this case, that is the “Sync Alert” of syncing an iPhone running iPhone OS 3.0 with my Mac over ethernet to iTunes 8.2.1 (6). I’m syncing 1 note.

Assuming that this behavior is generally useful, that I’m receiving a warning when 1 note is being added brings up the most obvious issue. There should be a minimum threshold before this exception behavior is triggered. It shouldn’t be 5% of nothing.

When you’re just starting to sync with your Mac, this could be a fairly high frequency alert. It depends on how quickly you add items; how quickly you get to more than 20 items in a category. You’ll also see this alert again when you start using a new feature (new type of item). This leads to the 2nd issue, the alert and warning language — I’m not seeing any yellow, but I’m sure feeling it. Because it is potentially high frequency, it should be presented and worded as a friendly confirmation.

The 3rd issue isn’t obvious from this screen shot. Another clue that it should be a confirmation is that sync does not continue until you have cleared this alert. This is actually problematic, because the alert is non-modal, meaning you can hide it or bury it under other windows. The worst part is iTunes with it’s animated progress bar makes it look like the sync is still progressing. This alert should at least stay on top of iTunes.

The 4th is I don’t think add, modify, and delete are equal. Adding an item is an easier event to undo then a modify or delete. I can just delete it. If something is modified or deleted, it may be hard to recover the lost information. The different events should have different weights. Adding an item should only trigger an alert if a lot are added.

How many is a lot? That brings me to the 5th and final issue that readily comes to mind. It likely shouldn’t be a percentage at all. How long would it take before 5% is a really big number? Probably not long at all. If I have 1000 business contacts, a sync would have to delete 50 of them for me to be notified. Again assuming this alert offers some protection, by using a percentage, even as low as 5% percentage you are penalizing your most passionate customers. Possibly, it could be a percentage that also factors in things like amount of time since last sync or what operations resulted in the changes, but that would likely get complex quick and I suspect the developers would more quickly find the sweet spot by using a constant number (possibly variable on a curve. I hesitate to recommend user defined variable).

Later in that discussion by Aza linked above, he does add “It could be laid out better, but I like the idea of “uhhhhh, that’s dangerous”. Of course, undo is always better ”. I don’t think undo would be the silver bullet. I definitely think there is value in confirming changing a large amount of data particularly when the change is destructive, and the need to undo might be overlooked. I just don’t think Apple has polished this implementation.

I feel a bit like I’m playing dirty writing this article now when the next version of Mac OS X, Snow Leopard is only a couple of months away. Still, I was hoping this would be resolved with the new iTunes for iPhone OS 3.0. I’m still hopeful that Snow Leopard with it’s attention to polish might surprise me here.

I’ve tried it on my iPod Touch. They’ve done a great job! And are urgently working on fixing the worse bugs.

It’s already in the top 50 free apps.

Development has been managed by Raanan Bar-Cohen and the app is designed by Matt Thomas.

WordPress for iPhone has the clean Matt aesthetic, though I expect the iPhone SDK probably doesn’t allow much deviation from clean simplicity.

There is quite some stink up about whether or not we are breaking Apple’s iPhone development NDA by our application being open source, and speculation that Apple will sue us.

John Brownlee of BoingBoing Gadgets writes:

I was curious about the “Open Source” proclamation at the top of its non-App-Store webpage.

WordPress for iPhone is in the App Store. WordPress for iPhone’s Application Description has always stated it’s open source. Someone at Apple approved “WordPress for iPhone Open Source”.

Although it makes for a great story and gives us freetards reason to bang our chests, my thought is Apple has it’s anti-open source clause in the agreement to cover their butts from their code being “poisoned” by a viral license. Butt covered, let the open source applications flow, but no squirting.