The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

I don't know that I completely agree with this article over at Business Week (technically, last year was our first Christmas with the App Store), but I think the concept is fascinating. Lauren Sherman and her interviewee Retails Systems Research managing partner Paula Rosenblum reason that this coming Christmas season -- surprise, we're only five days away from Black Friday 2009 -- will be the first where mobile shopping apps (and the smartphones that can run them) will be generally ubiquitous.

Not only will people have access to apps on their iPhone that help them find deals, stores, and prices, but they'll all have 'net-connected phones as well, which many of them actually got last Christmas. You'll see people sending texts to each other, playing games while in line, and even scanning coupons in at the register -- all with their phones.

As I said, this was all possible last Christmas, but since then, we've seen non-iPhones like the Pre and the Droid drop, and the iPhone itself has claimed a lot more customers than Black Friday 2008. These people won't be out buying smartphones, obviously, but they will be using them, and it'll be interesting to see how much this changes the experience. When I was a kid, you planned out your route ahead of time and hit what few stores you could, but between Twitter, apps, and all the other information available on a phone, shopping during the holiday season might be very different this year.

Although you can be sure there will still be lines, parking frustrations, and lots and lots of people buying junk just because it's cheap. Then again, maybe it's better to use that slightly older piece of technology, the desktop browser, and just do the shopping from home.

[via MacBytes]

If there's one thing I like better than pie, it's cake. And if there's a best kind of cake, it's definitely one that's shaped in the form of something geeky. Which means the video above, which shows what seems to be a tasty confection in the form of Apple's Finder icon, hits the spot perfectly. David B.'s wife made it for him for his birthday earlier this week, he says over on his Twitter account. He doesn't say what kind of cake it is, but given that it's Finder, I'm going to guess chocolate. An iTunes icon cake would give off a more "vanilla" vibe to me.

We've also, you'll remember, seen this Finder icon parading around on pillows as well. Which isn't too surprising -- who could pass up a face like that? Not only is he a handsome dude with a mischievous smile, but he's got access to all your files and passwords. That's the kind of guy you'd better get along with.

Thanks to Chris Pirillo for the tip!

The folks behind CrossOver Games sent us a note that version 8.1.0 of their software has come out, and it's got some nice upgrades for Mac and Linux folks who prefer to run their games in Windows almost-emulators (it's based on Wine, and as we all know, Wine Is Not an Emulator) rather than Boot Camping over to the real thing. We tried out CrossOver Games a while back, and found it lacking in almost everything but Steam games, but actually that's OK, because lately Steam has a lot of games going on. Accordingly, this new version has support built-in for the brand new Left 4 Dead 2, as well as fixes for Steam's voice chat, a few upgrades for WoW on Linux and Guild Wars, and a couple of changes to ensure compatibility with Snow Leopard. Sounds like a nice solid upgrade -- owners of the software can grab it for free, or you can try out the app for yourself from their website.

In case you don't have the app yet, CodeWeavers also let us know that they're giving away a Linux rig that's the "ultimate" in... wait for it... gaming. Yes, putting together a Linux rig for gaming is like putting a UFC fighter on a dance show, but we guess stranger things have happened. Anyway, CrossOver Games will definitely help you play at least a few games on the decked-out rig, if you want a shot at winning the thing, all you have to do is pick up the software before December 1st. They'll pick a name out of a hat, and if it's yours, there'll be an awesome 'nix box headed your way. Good luck with getting smooth fullscreen Flash video to work. We kid! You Linux guys make it so easy.

Oh wait, what's that? Flash on the iPhone? I have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't know if this was the right thing for Steve Jobs to say, but on the other hand, I do think it's the perfect thing for him to say. The story, as reported by our buddy Daniel Brusilovsky over at Crunchgear, goes like this: A company called The Little App Factory got a letter from Apple, who had a legal issue with one of their apps, formerly named iPodRip.

Apple didn't like the fact that "iPod" was clearly in the name, and so despite the fact that the software was meant to transfer songs back and forth specifically from an iPod, Apple wanted the name changed. The company's co-owner, John Devor, sent a very long and well-reasoned letter to Mr. Jobs himself explaining that their only wish was to extend Apple's hardware's capabilities, and that they were all Apple fans, and that they'd used the name for a long time and they were worried that a competitor might steal their customers and Jobs was an inspiration to the guy, who'd just dropped out of school, and could they please get a pass on this one?

Jobs' response -- yes, he wrote back personally -- was just three lines:

Change your apps name. Not that big of a deal.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

Kids, that's how you become the kind of guy who runs a brilliant computer company, is seen on the cover of Time multiple times, gets named CEO of the Decade and just generally rocks. I feel for The Little App Factory, I really do, but you gotta believe the Steve. It's not that big of a deal.

We'll do our part, though: the app formerly known as iPodRip is now known as iRip, and is available with a free trial period from the developer's site.

[via Techmeme]

This sounds an awful lot like sour grapes to me: Ray Ozzie, Microsoft's chief software engineer, told a Professional Developers' Conference earlier this week that it wasn't the apps that would make or break the smartphone platforms. Of course, that's what most press and blog outlets seem to be focusing on (maybe because we all already know what the hardware is like -- apps change every day if not every minute, and the hardware only changes occasionally), but Ozzie says customers won't buy a phone for the apps. The biggest apps, he says, will eventually be available on every platform. To put it in as few words as possible, you'll be able to tweet from everything in the future.

And he's got part of a good point there: it's true, the major functionality of "killer apps" will be available across platforms. But Ozzie forgets (or is just ignoring) that that's already the case on desktops. While yes, you could claim that porting to the various smartphones is easier than porting to the various PC platforms, that doesn't avoid the fact that I can tweet, IM, email, browse, edit photos and movies, and do whatever else I want on both platforms as well. And for some reason (ahem, the hardware and the way both software and hardware are designed), I'd rather do them on the Mac. People love their iPhones not just for the apps but for the way it fits in their hand, and how just plain slick it is.

That's not to say that the smartphone platform war is over -- no way, it's only beginning, and we consumers will take innovative ideas wherever we can get them. But Ozzie saying the apps don't count (and echoing his fellow Microsofters in trying to separate Apple from their software strategy) seems to mean that even he thinks he's already lost that race -- they certainly do play a large part in which platform consumers eventually choose.

We have a lot of apps coming through our tipline, but this one caught my eye, not only because it is called Zombies (the stumbling undead always catch my eye), but because it offers up a bit of good old-fashioned fun in the form of a Daleks!-style remake.

Gameplay is simple and straighforward -- you run, turn-by-turn in eight directions, from zombies, who pursue you at the same speed, and though the game runs at any pace you want (perfect for gameplay on the iPhone, in my opinion, since most of the time I'm just looking for a few seconds to a couple minutes of easy-to-pick-up action), the dread is real. Just like actual zombies, these guys shamble their way toward you with a hunger that only brains can satisfy.

The game is on the App Store now [iTunes link]. I will say that it is a touch pricey at $2.99 (a simple arcade game like this seems made for the 99-cent price point, and it will probably end up there eventually), but who am I to begrudge the developers a couple of bucks? I don't need to drink that cup of Starbucks anyway. If you're in the mood for a simple, zombified twist on an old classic, this is it.

While you're at it, check out the Zombies preview video we shot at WWDC last July.

OnLive is a company that has been claiming to do the seemingly impossible -- they plan to set up a sort of "cloud gaming" console, where instead of hardware in individual houses (like we have now; you buy a console for your home), they'll have hardware over the Internet, and stream your game to you like watching television. All of the processing and coding will be done on a remote server, but with signals flowing from your controller, it'll seem like you're just playing Xbox at home. It all works in theory, but in practice, Internet connections aren't solid or stable enough to send commands and full HD video back and forth without enough lag to make things unplayable.

Still, without actually releasing a product so far, OnLive claims they can do it, and now they're claiming to do it on the iPhone as well. AppleInsider reports that at a recent event in New York, OnLive showed off the same game service running on "2 iPhones, a tv, and a computer" simultaneously, with gamers on all the devices able to communicate and watch each others' gameplay. CEO Steve Perlman admits it's a "tech demo," but doesn't go into detail on what that means (it could simply be a demo running separately on the devices, to show what it would be like, or I've heard of OnLive events where the server is sitting in the room next door). And of course, there's no date or information on an actual release yet.

OnLive's service definitely sounds possible someday -- as Internet connections get faster and hardware gets even cheaper, it's not a stretch to think we'll eventually move the heavy processor lifting to another location, leaving much tinier consoles and PCs taking up space on our desks and TV stands at home. But so far all it seems they've got is an idea (and the money that excited financiers have put into the project). We'll have to believe it works when we see it.

People have had their chances to put their grubby hands on those "incredible" iMacs that got released a few weeks ago, and the results are in. And they're great, apparently. First up, MacRumors has a collection of a few sets of benchmarks on the new machines, and the Core i7 processor (a $200 upgrade from the still very powerful Core i5) especially kicks up the speed to a place where it's competing with even the Mac Pro. In fact, in the second comparison, when pitted up against the single CPU Mac Pro, the iMac is virtually identical. Not only is it slightly cheaper depending on options, but you get that nice monitor for free.

Electronista has a much more qualitative analysis, but they still love the new machine. Their "biggest" problem (aside from the usual complaints about the glossy screen and a lack of easy-to-reach ports) seems to be just the size of it. The 27" iMac is a big machine no matter how thin it gets. But they agree: with the i7 in there and all of the extra options, the iMac is a monster, matching up to the Mac Pros sitting in the lower atmosphere.

Good stuff. I'm not personally in the market for a new computer, but man -- if I was ready to spend $2000 on a quality machine, it's tough to consider anything else a better purchase than the new iMac.

UPDATE: Chart graphic is from Timon Royer, we regret the omission.

Touch Arcade has the news that the long-awaited Ravensword and a number of other games built on the Unity game engine have been rejected by Apple from the App Store. The problem appears to be a number of API calls in the engine (though not specifically the game themselves, as I understand it) that allow the games to access the iPhone's number and send it back to the developer's servers.

Apple considers these to be private APIs, and they also got games developer Storm8 in trouble earlier this week; their games were pulled from the store in response to a lawsuit alleging that they were collecting data from users without their knowledge.

Chillingo, publishers of Ravensword, contacted us about this story, and they said that while the Unity engine does allow developers to use these calls, they did not use them or collect any user information. We're also told that the problem APIs "have been removed," and Chillingo has resubmitted the game for App Store approval.

As I understand it, this is the same type of issue that came up with Google a while back. It's not the same APIs (Google was using the proximity sensor back then), but now as then, it's Apple's call whether they will allow developers to use these private and undocumented calls. Obviously some apps on the iPhone have to access the address book from time to time, but it's Apple's call whether they can use APIs like that or not. This time, it appears, they said no.

Update: Unity has also contacted us, and they say that the engine was updated to Apple's wishes as soon as they learned of the issue. They also would like to point out that while Storm8 did use the same private API calls, they don't use Unity to run their games. Storm8's update on the issue is here.

This is the kind of thing that probably should have been done a long time ago, but Macworld is reporting that Apple has launched iTunes Preview, a page that appears when you click an iTunes link (like this one) and your browser sends you over to iTunes. Previously, you just got that placeholder page that said "One Moment Please" and asked if you wanted to open the link in an external application, but with iTunes Preview, you get a nicely laid out page with information and reviews (and your browser still opens up the iTunes store).

Currently it only seems to work with music -- movies and television only get a small thumbnail, and applications get the same old gray page. But that'll probably change before long -- it's much smoother to see what you're clicking through to, and of course there's the added bonus for people who don't actually have iTunes installed. As MacWorld points out, there are actually no "preview" buttons on the page -- you can't listen to music there, only click through to the iTunes store. But like I said, it's better than a blank window and a browser popup asking for your permission. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this grow a lot more in the future.